DECISION
These are applications for amnesty in terms of the provisions of Section 18 of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act No. 34 of 1995 ("the Act"). The matter relates to an incident which occurred at the Ga Mantlhanyane Village in the district of Nebo in the Northern Province on or about 11 April 1994 in which Mphalele Monica Makua, Malope Maphanga and her daughter Dudu Maphanga were set alight and killed and a number of huts belonging to the Makua family were destroyed in an arson attack. Pursuant to the incident the Applicants and 9 other inhabitants of Ga Mantlhanyane were charged in the Northern Transvaal Division of the Regional Court with three counts of murder and five counts of arson. Only the two Applicants were convicted as charged and sentenced on 30 September 1996 to an effective period of imprisonment of 35 years each. The Applicants together with one witness testified in support of the applications which were opposed by the next-of-kin of the deceased who presented the evidence of two witnesses in support of their opposition. It is necessary to set out the various versions presented at the hearing in more detail.
The Applicant, Mr Mafete, was the first person to testify. According to his version the inhabitants of their village were upset by the deaths of six young male residents of the village over a period of some months prior to April 1994. All of the deceased were related and like the two Applicants, were supporters of the African National Congress ("ANC"). The deaths were regarded as mysterious by the community who had suspicions that witchcraft could have been involved. The village is situated in a rural area where agriculture is the main source of subsistence. The members of the community, like many other similar communities, held a deep rooted belief in witchcraft. After the funeral of the last of these victims on 9 April 1994, a community meeting was convened to consider the situation concerning the deaths. The meeting was attended by the ANC leadership in the village. The Applicant, like the other persons who attended the meeting, was convinced that the deaths of the youths related to their political activities and their support for the ANC as well as the pending first national democratic elections in the country. They believed that witchcraft and the deaths of the youths were used to discourage other inhabitants of the village from supporting the ANC. During the course of the meeting a decision was taken to consult a traditional African doctor or sangoma in regard to the deaths. A group of people at the meeting, including the Applicant, Mr Malaka, were delegated to approach the sangoma. It was furthermore agreed that whoever is found to be responsible for the deaths would also be killed. Voluntary contributions were collected from each family in the village to cover the costs of transport and fees of the sangoma. The group left and eventually returned the following evening. They joined the meeting which was in progress in the local church hall. The delegation was accompanied by the sangoma. After having briefly reported back to the meeting and having introduced the sangoma, the delegation indicated that they had obtained the identity of those responsible for the deaths and that they would lead the meeting to the houses of those concerned. The specific identity of those involved was not disclosed at the meeting. The group was then led from the church hall to the house of the Makua family where they searched for the deceased, Mrs Makua, who was not present at home. After having discovered certain muti and bones on the premises, the group proceeded to burn down all of the huts belonging to the Makua family. A group of people was delegated to continue the search for Mrs Makua. The group was then led by the delegation to the home of the Maphanga family where Mrs Maphanga and her daughter Dudu were collected and taken to a nearby mountain. Petrol was poured over both of them and they were set alight and killed. Mrs Maphanga was in fact set alight by her son Mashifane. The crowd then returned to the church hall. Mrs Makua was later found and brought to the meeting whereafter she was also taken to the same spot in the mountain where the earlier killings had occurred. She was likewise doused with petrol and set alight and killed. Her daughter was forced to set her alight. The group then retired home. The three deceased were killed because they were identified as the persons responsible for the deaths of the six youths by means of witchcraft.
The Applicant, Mr Malaka, then testified. His version basically confirms that of Mr Mafete. In addition, his testimony also contains an account of the visit by the delegation to the sangoma. This basically amounts to the fact that after they eventually managed to see the sangoma on the morning following the day on which they left the meeting, the eligible members of the delegation were assisted by the sangoma to identify those responsible for the deaths. The procedure followed by the sangoma basically amounted to those members of the delegation being given some muti to drink whereafter they were told to identify the perpetrators of the witchcraft in a mirror that was immersed in water inside a secluded room. According to the Applicant he identified the three deceased after having looked into the mirror. The delegation then left with the sangoma for the meeting and the events followed as testified to by Mr Mafete. The Applicant was also convinced that the deaths of the youths related to politics and in particular to their participation in and support for the activities of the Mantlhanyane Civic Association and the ANC in the village. Like his co-Applicant Mr Mafete, he was surprised to discover that the deceased were in fact involved in witchcraft, but he believed that it was possible to cause the deaths of the youths by means of witchcraft. He had no animosity towards any of the deceased and had no reason to prejudice them. He confirmed that one would not under normal circumstances see the faces of other persons when looking into a mirror, but indicated that after having taken the muti he felt "different". He indicated that the other members of the delegation who also participated in the identification ceremony appeared to be no longer "normal" after they had left the home of the sangoma. When the delegation arrived at the meeting they were welcomed with slogans such as "kill the witch, kill the impimpi". According to his understanding, witches like impimpis, were seen as enemies of the liberation struggle and as supporters of the oppressive apartheid regime. He was part of all of the activities of the group except that he was not present when Mrs Makua was killed. At that stage he had gone home to get something to eat with the intention of rejoining the group after he had eaten.
The Applicants presented the testimony of a witness, Nelson Mafete, in support of the applications. His version briefly is that he was an accused in the criminal trial with the Applicants but was acquitted of all of the charges. He indicated that he was a supporter of the ANC and a member of the ANC Youth League in the village at the relevant time. He was one of the comrades in the village and was actively involved in the political activity in the village at the time. He indicated that Colin Maphanga, the witness called by the next-of-kin, was also a member of the youth and one of the ANC comrades at the time. The witness was a member of the delegation that approached the sangoma. He basically confirmed the testimony of both Applicants, except that the sangoma indicated that he was too young to be able to participate in the process of identifying the witches. He was, otherwise, present throughout the later activities of the group in the village when the three deceased were killed. We should point out that this witness made an extremely favourable impression upon us and has given a clear and persuasive account of the events in question as well as the political activities in the village at the time.
The first witness called by the next-of-kin was Colin Maphanga whose mother and sister were killed during the incident. He confirmed that he was also present at the meeting in the church hall and had accompanied the group to his family home after the delegation returned from the sangoma. After his mother and sister were removed, he remained behind at home and was not present during the actual killings. He purported to deny that the incident had anything to do with politics and emphatically denied that there was any political activity or political organisations or civic organisations in the village at the time. Although he admitted that he was a friend of Nelson Mafete and one of the youths in the village, he emphatically denied that he was an ANC comrade or that he was ever involved in any political activities. He intimated that the youth in the village only participated in sports and in no political activities although the first democratic elections were a few weeks away at the time. According to his testimony the Mantlhanyane Civic Association was only formed subsequent to the incident during 1995 or 1996. At a later stage he indicated that he was in fact an ANC supporter at the time although the ANC was non-existent in the village. Although he confirmed that political songs were being sung at the meeting at the church hall, he indicated that the Applicants' attempt to politicise the incident was simply a ploy on their part. Suffice it to say that the testimony of this witness is peppered with improbabilities and that he has failed to make a favourable impression upon us. We are accordingly satisfied that no credence can be attached to the version of this witness where it conflicts with the testimony presented on behalf of the Applicants. We find in particular that his denial of any political activities in the village at the time, is untruthful. The testimony of Mashifane Maphanga, the brother of the witness Colin Maphanga, was then presented. This witness has made an even less favourable impression upon us than his brother Colin. Although he emphatically denied having set his mother alight, his bizarre and intimidating demeanour in the witness box cast grave doubts upon this denial. He was charged at the criminal trial together with the Applicants but was also acquitted. It should be pointed out in this regard that the version that this witness set his mother alight, was consistently presented throughout the trial. We have no doubt, that no reliance can be placed upon the evidence of this witness at all and that it can safely be disregarded where it conflicts with any aspect of the case of the Applicants.
Having carefully considered the matter, we are satisfied that the version of the Applicants as supported by their witness, Nelson Mafete, can be accepted as the truth. In the circumstances we are accordingly satisfied that the incident, as gruesome as it may be, constitutes an act associated with a political objective as envisaged in the Act. The incident happened at the height of the political activities in preparation for the first democratic elections in the history of the country. We are satisfied that the Applicants and other members of the community in question held the bona fide belief that the deceased were applying witchcraft to prejudice the position of the ANC in the pending elections. In this regard it should be pointed out that the Committee have been furnished with a letter, forming part of the papers before us, dated 12 August 1997 written on behalf of the Mantlhanyane Civic Association which confirms the political nature of the incident. Given the totality of the evidence, there is no reason to doubt the veracity of the contents of the letter in question.
In the circumstances we are satisfied that the applications comply with all of the requirements of the Act and amnesty is accordingly GRANTED to the Applicants in respect of the following offences committed on or about 11 April 1994 at or near Ga Mantlhanyane Village, Nebo District, Northern Province:
1. The murder of Mphalele Monica Makua, Malope Maphanga and Dudu Maphanga;
2. Arson in respect of the immovable property of Moses Makua.
In our opinion, the next-of-kin of the deceased are victims in respect of the killings in relation whereto amnesty is hereby granted, and they are accordingly referred for consideration in terms of the provisions of Section 22 of the Act.
DATED AT CAPE TOWN THIS 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2001
JUDGE DENZIL POTGIETER
ADV F BOSMAN
ADV N SANDI
