MR NDOU: I now call the last applicant in this matter.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mammburu, what language would you like to talk?
MR MAMMBURU: Venda.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you any objections to the taking of the oath?
ASAPH MAMMBURU: No. (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR NDOU: Thank you.
Mr Mammburu, you've made an application for amnesty. When were you born?
MR MAMMBURU: I was born on 14 September 1972.
MR NDOU: Now you filed an affidavit. Have you read the affidavit?
MR MAMMBURU: Yes I have.
MR NDOU: Do you confirm that that affidavit is your evidence or is there anything in the affidavit which you don't agree with?
MR MAMMBURU: I do with everything there.
MR NDOU: Now we've heard from your previous co-applicants that the deceased was killed on the 4 March. Now what I want you to explain to the Committee is the role that you played on the day in question, as to how it came about that you killed the deceased?
MR MAMMBURU: On the 6th March 1990, there was a meeting at the dam.
CHAIRPERSON: Is this applicant making application in respect of the murder of Mr Mavhandu?
MR NDOU: That is so.
CHAIRPERSON: His affidavit starts at 6(a), is that not so? This applicant's affidavit commences on page 6(a) of the bundle.
MR NDOU: That is so, that is so.
CHAIRPERSON: Where in this affidavit does he explain the issue or the event leading to the death of Mr Mavhandu?
MR NDOU: It's on paragraph 23, the names Kopi Ndwedo to read Mavhandu.
CHAIRPERSON: You know Mr Ndou, I've not entitled, I don't think anyone is entitled to change an affidavit. How do we do this? He has now applied for what occurred at Kopi Ndwedo's kraal?
MR NDOU: If one looks from page 24, the event that he relates or related to what happened - the event that he relates to are the events that occurred at Mavhandu's kraal. Apparently it's just the mistake of the name, Kopi Ndwedo.
CHAIRPERSON: No.
ADV SIGODI: Are there not two incidents here? One, Kopi Ndwedo's kraal where they left and then he goes onto paragraph 28, one gets the impression that he is referring to another incident and says
"another meeting was called on the morning of the 6th"
because the incident referred to in Kopi Ndwedo's kraal occurred on the 4th March. It's definitely not Kopi Ndwedo's - I mean the incident we are referring to now. Then he goes on to mention the incident on the 6th March but he doesn't mention the deceased by name?
MR NDOU: Yes, I now see what the problem is. What happened was there was a prior incident whereat the group proceeded to one of the suspect's kraals. The didn't find the suspect and burnt the kraal and then the incident at Mavhandu's happened on a different day.
CHAIRPERSON: The point I'm making, that in his affidavit he doesn't say he killed Mr Mavhandu?
MR NDOU: Yes I agree Chairperson.
Now in respect of who are you applying for amnesty and in respect of which incidents?
MR MAMMBURU: In respect of the March incident, the evening when we burnt Mavhando's house or kraal.
CHAIRPERSON: You're saying you're applying for the incident where Ndwedo's kraal was burnt?
MR MAMMBURU: What we damaged at Mavhando's place. In as far as Ndwedo's case was concerned, we were not reported.
CHAIRPERSON: Now for which incident are you applying for amnesty then? Why are you here today?
MR MAMMBURU: It's about Mavhandu's case, that's why I was arrested.
CHAIRPERSON: Carry on Mr Ndou.
MR NDOU: Now what did you do at Mavhandu's kraal?
MR MAMMBURU: On arriving there, we met Mr Mavhandu on his way out with another man. When he saw us coming he ran back to his house and came back with a big panga and he went via the other back door and he approached we tried to really defend ourselves because he was running towards us and then he also ran because we wanted to defend ourselves and we were trying to stone him until he fell down. After falling we poured petrol on him and Dambani lit and as he was burning Justice Ramabulana came with a big stick and hit him on his head.
JUDGE DE JAGER: ...(inaudible) axe.
MR MAMMBURU: I suspect it's a pick.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Not a big stick, okay. Thank you.
MR MAMMBURU: Well what did you do? What did you yourself do?
MR MAMMBURU: I was throwing stones to the deceased.
MR NDOU: Throwing stones? Did you do anything else?
MR MAMMBURU: When he had fallen, I just stood there watching, then I left. I left for home. Nothing else that I did.
MR NDOU: In your application on paragraph 9(a) you indicate that you threw stones at the deceased and chased him, is that so?
MR MAMMBURU: Yes it is true.
MR NDOU: Did the house of - was the house of the deceased set alight?
MR MAMMBURU: I was arrested on the same day. The van took us to the deceased's kraal and we saw a big truck, there were other people on top of the roof who were just removing the zinc and stuff like that.
MR NDOU: Was the deceased doused and set alight?
MR MAMMBURU: He had already been burnt down. We went to the deceased's place at around two, the van took us there.
MR NDOU: Are you saying that you did not see who doused the deceased with petrol and set him alight?
MR MAMMBURU: I saw Albert doing that.
MR NDOU: My previous question now is, was the house of the deceased set alight?
MR MAMMBURU: No, the house was not set alight.
MR NDOU: Why did you kill the deceased?
MR MAMMBURU: The community was associating the deceased with witchcraft.
MR NDOU: I'm talking about you, why did you decide to kill the deceased?
MR MAMMBURU: We heard that he was a witch.
MR NDOU: And if he was a wizard, what did that have, according to you, to do with the political situation of the day?
MR MAMMBURU: He was used to the government officials who were in cabinet posts or ministries.
MR NDOU: And then what about that, what was wrong in that?
MR MAMMBURU: He used to give the higher officials medicines associated with witchcraft.
MR NDOU: Didn't you want the deceased to be driven away from the area instead of killing him?
MR MAMMBURU: Yes he was told that he should go to the other area. Well other people moved but he could not relocate. When we went to kill him we told him the same but then he came out with the pangas instead.
MR NDOU: Now how do you now feel about what you have done on the deceased?
MR MAMMBURU: I know I'm wrong on having done that, I was not supposed to have done that.
MR NDOU: I've no further questions, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR NDOU
CHAIRPERSON: Why do you feel it was wrong at the time?
MR MAMMBURU: It is wrong to kill somebody, it's a problematic situation.
CHAIRPERSON: You felt it right that time?
MR MAMMBURU: At the time during the '90s it was conducive because the whole country was in that spirit.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Mapoma?
MR MAPOMA: I have no questions, thank you.
MR MUSHASHA: None Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. You are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Is that all Mr Ndou?
MR NDOU: That is so, Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any witnesses?
MR MUSHASHA: Yes, yes Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: How many?
MR MUSHASHA: I've got one, one witness. May I call Marindela Chichi Flora Mavhandu, the deceased's wife?
CHAIRPERSON: Mrs Mavhandu, what language would you wish to use?
MRS MAVHANDU: Venda.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you objections to the taking of the oath?
MARINDELA CHICHI FLORA MAVHANDU: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR MUSHASHA: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Mrs Mavhandu, is it true that you are the deceased's wife?
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes.
MR MUSHASHA: Do you know the applicants in this matter who are, to start with ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: She's seen all the applicants.
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes, I've seen all the applicants
MR MUSHASHA: You have also heard what they've testified about before this Committee?
MRS MAVHANDU: I believe they didn't say it all.
MR MUSHASHA: Were you present when the deceased was killed?
MRS MAVHANDU: When they arrived I was seated with my deceased husband and other members of the family who were three, on their arrival. Just when they arrived Chiko, that was the first person to start working on that.
MR MUSHASHA: Just slow down please? Let's start with the first applicant in this matter and that is Kudzingana. You heard what he said? He says what he did was only to throw stones at the deceased. Is that the only deed according to you? Is that all he did unto the deceased according to you?
CHAIRPERSON: Did she not say yes?
MR MUSHASHA: I did not get the answer, Mr Chairperson.
INTERPRETER: I'm sorry, we are trying to relate to one another that she shall wait for you to finish.
JUDGE DE JAGER: The first person who gave evidence was Mr Kudzingana. He gave evidence at the previous hearing.
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes we believe that he didn't say it all.
JUDGE DE JAGER: What didn't he say?
MRS MAVHANDU: He didn't mention that he chopped him with the big panga and the fact that the deceased was using this medicine, it seemed to be very much untrue.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you know Mr Ramabulana? He is also an applicant?
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes I know Mr Ramabulana.
CHAIRPERSON: He admits to hitting the deceased with this pick.
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes it is true that he hit him with a pick.
CHAIRPERSON: No, isn't it him rather than Mr Kudzingana that did that?
MRS MAVHANDU: Mr Kudzingana did not mention anything about the big panga that was used on the deceased.
MR MUSHASHA: Right, let's come now to Mudzwiri. Mudzwiri told this Committee that what he did was only to throw stones at the deceased. Is that all he did according to you?
MRS MAVHANDU: He also used petrol, he poured petrol on the deceased.
MR MUSHASHA: Did you see him do it?
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes I was present during the time I saw that.
MR MUSHASHA: Ramabulana testified before us that he used a pick to chop the deceased. Was that all he did at your husband's ...(indistinct).
MRS MAVHANDU: He also went to the house and burnt it.
MR MUSHASHA: Did you see him do it?
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes, I was just behind the house, I saw that happen.
MR MUSHASHA: Matshisevhe told this Committee that what he did was only to throw stones at the deceased. Was that all he did according to you?
MRS MAVHANDU: No, that is not all because he even went to the house and took the school books and used those in bedding the house and the deceased.
JUDGE DE JAGER: He took the school books and the bedding? He took the school books and what else?
MRS MAVHANDU: The bed and everything that was in the room, there was nothing left in the room.
MR MUSHASHA: And Mammburu, the last applicant?
JUDGE DE JAGER: Let's finish this please? What did he do with those things?
MRS MAVHANDU: Mammburu, hit ...(intervention)
JUDGE DE JAGER: No, sorry, sorry. Could we get back to Mr Matshisevhe. You said he took the school books and the other things in the house. Now what did he do with the school books and the other things?
MRS MAVHANDU: They all got burnt. He burnt them down.
MR MUSHASHA: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Mr Mammburu, did he disclose all that which he did according to you?
MRS MAVHANDU: Now because he says that he left the room, he went back to my room. Yes they were about to burn my room or my house.
MR MUSHASHA: Did you see him do that?
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes I was present, I saw everything.
MR MUSHASHA: Is there any other thing which all these applicants did not disclose to the Committee?
MRS MAVHANDU: You mean what they omitted?
MR MUSHASHA: Yes.
MRS MAVHANDU: They are saying they didn't burn the house, the kraal or the room. That's something that is a serious omission.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mushasha, during cross-examination of one of the applicants, it seems that the victim assumed that that particular applicant was the cause of the fire of the house. Which applicant was that?
MR MUSHASHA: It was Ramabulana.
MRS MAVHANDU: Are you referring to Mr Ramabulana?
CHAIRPERSON: I'm asking. I think it was Ramabulana, yes.
I want to ask the lady, do you recall that when Mr Ramabulana was giving evidence, I asked you why do you say that he caused the fire and you said you saw him go in and therefore you assumed he went into the house and therefore you ...(intervention)
MRS MAVHANDU: He killed him thinking that he was the - the deceased was a wizard.
CHAIRPERSON: No, no, listen to me. You're talking too fast. I'm not trying to trap you out, nothing of the sort, I'm trying to get the truth. I've just been corrected, it's Matshisevhe. When he was testifying it was put to him that he caused the fire of the house. Upon further questioning it seemed that your advocate's instructions from you was based on an assumption because you saw him enter the house and therefore you concluded that he started the fire. Do you recall that?
MRS MAVHANDU: Chiko though is the one who started the fire, he is the one who used the match box.
MR MUSHASHA: That's not what your counsel put to you. Do you follow what I'm saying? Now you're coming to tell us all these people started the fire?
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Now did you see that all of them started this fire?
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes because Matshisevhe went to the other side and they were burning. I was just next to the window and this young lady came and she had enquiries as to why I was crying.
CHAIRPERSON: I see. Can I get some clarity from you. Are you saying they all caused the fire because they attacked the house? I can understand that that is a acceptable conclusion?
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes, they were destroying in the house.
CHAIRPERSON: Carry on Mr Mushasha.
MR MUSHASHA: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Is it true that your husband was a wizard?
MRS MAVHANDU: He could not have been a wizard, I even have seven children with him and nobody ever said he was a wizard.
CHAIRPERSON: Was he ever asked to your knowledge to leave the vicinity?
MRS MAVHANDU: Nobody asked him to leave or relocate.
MR MUSHASHA: Was he member of the local council, local tribal council?
MRS MAVHANDU: No, he was just workaholic person, painting, welding and that's exactly what he used to do. He did not have go to any other place except doing his job.
MR MUSHASHA: Was he the supporter of the family?
CHAIRPERSON: Did you tell your advocate that he was never a member of this council?
MRS MAVHANDU: No, he was not a member.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you tell your advocate that? You heard everybody say that he was a member of this council, in some way connected to the government.
MRS MAVHANDU: No, that is not true at all.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you tell your advocate that?
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes I did.
CHAIRPERSON: I see. Yes, carry on?
MR MUSHASHA: Was he a supporter of the then government?
MRS MAVHANDU: No, he didn't used to support the government of the time.
MR MUSHASHA: Why do you think the applicants killed him?
MRS MAVHANDU: There were much jealous because he used to do welding, ...(indistinct) and so many other things that contributed to the community. It was pure jealousy.
MR MUSHASHA: What happened to the house belonging to the deceased which was set alight?
MRS MAVHANDU: They burnt the house including all the goods, the contents in the house.
MR MUSHASHA: What I want to get from you is whether the house was burnt down or not?
MRS MAVHANDU: No, it was just partly burnt and after I had gone to the place I relocated to, there was a car or a truck which was sent to remove some of the remnants of the house.
MR MUSHASHA: Are you still living that house at the ...(intervention)
JUDGE DE JAGER: Was it the same day that this truck came?
MRS MAVHANDU: No, it didn't come the same day. Well it lasted for so long and that was before we removed anything including that the windows that the deceased was working on. After the burial and that was then that the remaining contents were taken away.
MR MUSHASHA: Are you still living in that same house?
MRS MAVHANDU: No, I'm homeless. I'm just staying with my child in Biaba, I'm just ...(indistinct) up to now.
MR MUSHASHA: How far is this Biaba from your home?
MRS MAVHANDU: Yes I used to be at Sintamule Inturi, it's quite a distance.
MR MUSHASHA: What is your attitude towards the application by all the applicants, are you prepared to forgive them?
MRS MAVHANDU: Never shall I forgive these people. Nor the relatives and the children will do that because up to now it contributed to my being homeless. There's nothing that I can do to forgive them.
MR MUSHASHA: Do you have any other thing to inform the Committee about?
MRS MAVHANDU: No, I'm just repeating that I don't have any preparedness for forgiveness at all.
MR MUSHASHA: No further questions Mr Chairperson, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MUSHASHA
MRS MAVHANDU: I'm repeating again that I do not want to forgive anybody because I'm homeless.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you have any children from the deceased?
MRS MAVHANDU: Seven children I had with the deceased.
CHAIRPERSON: How old are - well, Mr Mushasha, have you got a list of those children?
MR MUSHASHA: May it please the court, yes I have the list.
CHAIRPERSON: And their names and ages and addresses?
MR MUSHASHA: Yes, I'll submit the list hereafter.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Mapoma, have you got any questions?
MR MAPOMA: Chairperson, I thought perhaps after.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ndou, have you got any?
NO QUESTIONS BY MR NDOU
MR MAPOMA: I have no questions, Chairperson.
NO QUESTOINS BY MR MAPOMA
CHAIRPERSON: You're excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Have you got that list Mr Mushasha?
MR MUSHASHA: Not with me now, my attorney has the list.
CHAIRPERSON: Where is he?
MR MUSHASHA: He should be outside. I'll find out.
CHAIRPERSON: I need that list today. Now.
MR MUSHASHA: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Shall we take the tea break?
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mushasha, is that all?
MR MUSHASHA: That is so, Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: And Mr Mapoma, have you got any witnesses to call?
MR MAPOMA: I've no witnesses to call.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that the end of the evidence?
MR MAPOMA: That's the end of the matter yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mushasha, are there any submissions you want to make?
MR MUSHASHA IN ARGUMENT: Just in brief, Mr Chairperson, it is my submission that all the applicants from the point of view of my instructions has not made a full disclosure.
Secondly, it is my submission that all the applicants did not establish any link between their actions and the political situation of the day and in view of all that deficiencies in their applications, I wish to persuade this Committee not to grant them the amnesty applied for. That is all.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ndou, we don't need to hear you. Mr Mapoma, we don't need to hear you.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mushasha, tell me, who is your attorney?
MR MUSHASHA: Initially the brief in the last hearing came from Matotsi, that's Fanele Matotsi, my attorney and as for now I think we were both briefed by - I'm not so sure about Mr Matotsi, but I was briefed by the legal aid but he is also in the list as representative of the victims.
CHAIRPERSON: The last time he was not present as well, isn't it?
MR MUSHASHA: Last time he came and sat for a short time and left and I remained during the business.
CHAIRPERSON: And he hasn't returned since?
MR MUSHASHA: I saw him the day before yesterday, he was speaking to Mr Mapoma.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, but as far as you're concerned he never came to assist you since that first appearing?
MR MUSHASHA: As far as I'm concerned with regard to this appearance on legal aid he's not to assist me.
CHAIRPERSON: But he wasn't here?
MR MUSHASHA: I saw him in this room.
CHAIRPERSON: Today?
MR MUSHASHA: No, no, not today.
CHAIRPERSON: Yesterday?
MR MUSHASHA: No, the day before yesterday.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma, what is the position?
MR MAPOMA: Chairperson, from the point of view of the TRC, administered legal aid to the person who was instructed to be appointed to act for the victims is Advocate Mushasha, we do not have any attorney on the record of the TRC. But I understand he was here on Monday and pointed out to me that the victims are his clients and the person who was acting was Advocate Mushasha but as I know the TRC instructs one legal representative per incident.
CHAIRPERSON: What was he doing here Monday, he never appeared here, did he?
MR MAPOMA: No, he did not appear Chairperson, it was before the hearings could start on that Monday when he ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: He just came to inform you that these victims were his clients?
MR MAPOMA: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes well except for the short period in which he appeared, I'm not too sure for whom, during an earlier appearance I wish to point out that he never attended the hearing since.
MR MAPOMA: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: He was on record, he was not before us and consequently, if and to the extent that he should claims fees for attendance, he's not entitled to do so for those periods for which he was not here.
MR MAPOMA: I agree Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma, will you keep an eye on that please?
MR MAPOMA: Yes certainly I will do that, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: That's the end of the hearing in respect of that application.
MR MUSHASHA: Maybe I can take this opportunity to mention that I have the list which I've just compiled now. The other list which was initially compiled is with the attorney. Now I've just compiled another list quickly and then also in respect of the other matter which we dealt with on Monday, the list was not properly done but I'm finalising it, submit it as soon as possible.
CHAIRPERSON: You know Mr Mushasha, I don't know why there is a delay in these things. It takes you two days to submit the list and it's not completed yet? I can't understand it? I'm not going to tolerate that in future. Once there's an undertaking to do it, in fact it should be done before you start the hearing because that, the question of victims, is an integral part of the Act, that is one of the main reasons that you're appointed, to see to the interests of the victims. But be that as it may, when can I have that list?
MR MUSHASHA: I undertake to submit the list before 1 o'clock, before lunch hour.
CHAIRPERSON: The other one that you mention, completed already?
MR MUSHASHA: It's ready, it's ready but it's not typed, it's simply handwritten.
CHAIRPERSON: So will you hand in both lists by 1 o'clock?
MR MUSHASHA: May it please the Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Today?
MR MUSHASHA: Today. Thank you.
