DECISION
The above applicants are
GRANTED AMNESTY: in respect of the following charges
Applicant 1: The murder of Mr Arnold Lolo Lombo on 31 October 1990; and escaping from custody on 24 March 1991.
Applicant 2: The murder of Mr Arnold Lolo Lombo on 31 October 1990; and escaping from custody on 28 March 1991.
Applicant 3: The murder of Mr Arnold Lolo Lombo on 31 October 1990.
Applicant 4: The murder of Mr Arnold Lolo Lombo on 31 October 1990.
The reasons for arriving at this decision are to be found in the attached portion of the transcript of the oral reasons given at the hearing.
SIGNED AT PIETERMARITZBURG ON THE 1st DAY OF AUGUST 1997.
(Signed)
WILSON, J
MS S. KHAMPEPE
MR D. POTGIETER SC
AC/97/0040
TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION
AMNESTY COMMITTEE
APPLICATION IN TERMS OF SECTION 18 OF THE PROMOTION OF NATIONAL UNITY AND RECONCILIATION ACT, NO. 34 OF 1995.
S.W. MOTAUNG 1ST APPLICANT
(AM 3902/96)
N.J. SIBISI 2ND APPLICANT
(AM 3903/96)
J.M. SITHOLE 3RD APPLICANT
(AM 3904/96)
B.P. DLAMINI 4TH APPLICANT
(AM 3905/96)
DECISION
WILSON J: Mr Mpshe, I understand that all three of the applicants and the fourth applicant are out on bail but there is a trial pending against them?
MR MPSHE: That is correct Mr Chairman.
WILSON J: It is has been adjourned from time to time and it would be desirable to make the position as clear as we can to the Attorney-General.
It is not the normal practice of this Committee to give ex tempore findings and it is not out intention to do that today. The method of granting amnesty is as prescribed in the Act, that is publication in the Government Gazette and due notification. We feel, however, that in the light of what has happened here today it would be of assistance if we were to place on record our views.
The three applicants have applied for amnesty in respect of the killing of the late Mr Arnold Lolo Lombo and the first and second applicants in respect of escaping from custody, consequent upon their arrest in respect of that killing. The late Mr Lombo's family were represented here today by Mr C. Miranda, who expressed the views of the widow and I would like to repeat some of what he said - that the family leave the decision in the hands of the Committee and have not sought in any way to influence that decision, but that the widow has placed on record the fact that she herself cannot forgive what has been done but that is something that only God can do; that is something that the applicants and others should bear in mind at all times. Forgiveness is something that they must earn and can only do so if they are truly contrite. She has also explained, understandably, that she cannot forget the loss of her husband and for this we sympathise with her deeply.
Turning to the facts of the case and the evidence that was led, it is another example of the tragic bloodshed caused in this province by the constant fighting between various political parties, in particular the Inkatha Freedom Party and the UDF as it then was, and the ANC as it now is. This has been particularly evident in the Edendale and Richmond areas and as we all know, I think, a different aspect of it sprung up again last week. It seems clear, and it was not challenged, that the first two applicants, as well as being members of the UDF, were also members of the organisation known as Umkhonto weSizwe and had received training of a military nature. It is clear from the evidence they gave and from the evidence of the third applicant, that they believed that the deceased was what has come to be known as a "War Lord". This was their belief. There was no evidence as this is we think, it is in the interests of the victims and other interested parties who have taken the trouble to come and listen to our hearings, that they should be made aware of the result of the application and not merely read of it in a Government Gazette three weeks later.
I would also like to advise that the R & R Committee will henceforth handle the widow's application and we are of the opinion that the widow and the children of the deceased are victims as defined in the Act.
MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I would like to enquire as to whether the decision of the Committee includes the applicant who is not present - Mr Dlamini.
WILSON J: Mr Mpshe has now raised the question of the applicant who is not present, that is Mr Dlamini. It seems to us that it would be an unnecessary waste of time and would cause further emotional stress to have another hearing where the information before us would clearly fall into the same category as that we have heard from the other applicants. He in fact played a minor role - he was there to assist in the getaway vehicle but took no part in the killing itself. In those circumstances we are of the view that his
APPLICATION: should also
SUCCEED: and we propose to make a similar recommendation in that regard.
