1. This is an application for amnesty brought by the applicants in relation to the Kathlehong Massacre which occurred on or about 7 December 1993. All the applicants were members of the Defence Unit ["SDU"] at the time and they were operating in Moleleki section in the Kathlehong Township. The applicants are all members of the African National Congress. 2. Originally there were fifteen applicants. At the hearing it emerged that the application in respect of Julian Eseu Ndlebe had been wrongly included amongst the applicants for this hearing and was accordingly struck off the roll. Siviwe Malcomes Ngam withdrew his application as it turned out that he denied having taken part in any of the acts or omission relation to the Kathlehong Massacre. This left thirteen applicants. All the applicants testified in support of their respective applications and they were legally represented by Mr Madasa. 3. The applications were opposed by families of the victims on two grounds, namely, that the applicants had not made full disclosure and that the acts or omission in respect of which they are seeking amnesty had no political objective within the meaning of The Protection of Natural Unity and Reconciliation Act, No,34 of 1995, as amended, ["the Act"]. 4. It is common cause that eleven persons were killed in Moleleki section between the night of 6 December and 7 December 1993. The applicants are seeking amnesty in respect of the death of Alfred Philemon Buthelezi ["Buthelezi"], Thokozani Buthelezi, Itumeleng Edward Mootsi, Lucas Buti Hlatswayo, Isaac Mogadi, Ditaba Joseph Mthembu, Peter Mavuso Modishwa, Miles Simon Simelane and Isaacs Mbijana Motloung. They are not seeking amnesty in respect of the death of Theodora Bulelwa Zwane ["Bulelwa"] and Julia Maitse-Buthelezi. 5. The background events which led to the massacre may be summarised as follows. The conflict between the Inkatha Freedom party ["IFP"] and hostel dwellers on the one hand, and members of the ANC and township residents on the other hand, had led to the cause and formation of the SDU to protect the township residents. Members of the Internal Stability Unit, ["ISU"] were perceived by the community as taking sides with the IFP. Hence, together with the IFP, the ISU were regarded as the enemy by the township residents. In 1991 the Self Defence Unit was formed in Kathlehong Township. It was to patrol the township and prevent attacks by the enemy. Membership of the SDU was not limited to the supporters of the ANC nut was open to all parties but the IFP. Hence the members of the ANC Youth League were also members of the SDU. Members of the ANC youth League and SDU patrolled the Township side by side. 6. In due course, the SDU in Moleleki section became embroiled in internal conflict. The conflict was between the members of the ANC Youth League and the other members of the SDU. On the evidence before us there is a dispute as to what was the cause of the conflict. However, what emerged form the evidence is that these two groups accused one another of failing to protect the community and of engaging in criminal activities instead. This conflict led the ANC Youth League to break away from the SDU and to patrol separately. The evidence suggests that the Anc Youth League patrolled blocks A - E of Moleleki section while the SDU patrolled block F. Although this arrangement was not acceptable to the SDU, it appears to have been accepted with reluctancy. Later the residents of block F decided to form a new SDU which was to patrol block F. the meeting at which this was decided was called by Buthelezi. the decision to form a new SDU in block F was probably prompted by the dissatisfaction with the patrols by the SDU. The effect of the formation of the new SDU in block F would have been that the SDU had no area patrol. This exacerbated the conflict between the SDU and ANC Youth League. 7. On the evening of 6 December 1993 Bulelwe was found murdered in block F. She was an ANC member and a member of the Street Committee in block F. Both the ANC Youth League and the SDU claimed that she was very supportive of each of them. Each sought to suggest that she was not close to either side. The Youth League suspected that she had been killed by members of the SDU. Later in the evening, a number of persons gathered at block C in connection with her death. Those who had gathered included members of the community and ANC Youth League. At this gathering, a decision was taken to round up all members of the SDU, disarm them and take them to "KBA", this being the place where the community meetings were held. 8. Those who had attended the gathering split into smaller groups for the purposes of apprehending members of the SDU. The group in which Tusanang Likabe was, proceeded to the house of one Malusi Jackson Kiyane, also known as "Blanco", the chairman of the SDU in Moleleki section. Blanco resisted being taken away, whereupon he was shot and killed. his house was set on fire. Members of the Youth League who were present, included Tusanang Lekabe,shot Blanco. He died as a result. thereafter, this group left Blanco's house. 9. Oscar Mtlokwa, one of the applicants, witnessed the attack at Blanco's house. Amongst the persons he saw was Tusanang Lekaba and isaac Mbijana Motloung ["Wips"]. He raised alarm with other members of the SDU as a result of which they proceeded to Blanco's house. upon arrival there, the members of the Youth League had fled. "Sugar" Ramabele, one of the commanders within the SDU, issued an instruction that members of the Youth League be hunted down. For this purpose members of the SDU split into various groups. They were armed with an assortment of weapons including AK-47's, firearms, spears, axes and knives. By dawn, they had rounded up a number of Youth League members including Alfred Buthelezi, Thokozani Buthelezi, Itumeleng Edward Mootsi, Lucas Buti Hlatswayo, Isaac Mogadi, Ditaba Joseph Mthembu, Peter Mavuso Modishwa, Miles Simo Simelane and Isaac Mbijana Motloung. Although Tusanang Lekabe and Wips were also apprehended, Lekaba managed to get away while Wips was taken by one Manyala and Nkosi. 10. The deceased were first put in one shack and were later transferred to a shack at the edge of block F. 11. Later Ntshebe Ndondolo, the commander of the SDU, ordered that the deceased be killed. They were marched by some of the applicants to a nearby veld in moleleki section. They were tied by a rope. Once at the veld, they were ordered to sit down. Once they had sat down, Ndondolo shot at them, execution style. Thereafter he ordered those of the applicants who had firearms to shoot at the deceased. After the deceased had been shot some of them were still moving, showing signs of being alive. Ndondolo ordered the rest of the applicants who had knives, axes and spears then stabbed and hacked the deceased. 12. From there, some applicants returned to their respective homes while another group remained with Ndondolo and Sugar. This group returned to the township and proceeded towards the house of Buthelezi. Ndondolo and Sugar went into the house after which gunshots were heard. It is probable that they killed Julia Maitse- Buthelezi, Buthelezi's wife. Thereafter the applicants returned to their respective homes. 13. It was not clear from the evidence at what stage Wips was killed. Some of the applicants testified that he was taken in a kombi by Manuala and Nkosi. They alleged that these two killed him. His body, however, was found tied with a wire near the Komati River. Although the cause of death, as recorded in the post-mortem examination report, indicates that he died by drowning, his body had numerous injuries. 14. All the applicants gave evidence in support of the respective application. Each described the role each played in the abduction and the killings of the deceased. Having regard to the evidence given on behalf of the victims, it is very probable that some of the applicants, it is not necessary to make any findings as to who of the applicants did not fully disclose the role he played in the killing. 15. All the applicants testified that they regarded the members if the ANC Youth League as criminals who were harassing the community in Moleleki section. They also testified that the deceased were killed because they were a gang of criminals who had killed Bulelwe and Blanco. It is significant that, although the ANC Youth League was perceived as a gang of criminals, the were not attacked prior to the death of Blanco. The decision to round them up and kill them was only taken after they had killed Blanco. 16. On the applicants' version, therefore, the deceased were killed, not because of their membership in political organisation, but because they were a gang of criminals who had killed Blanco in particular. 17. On the evidence as a whole, we are satisfied that members of the SDU and the ANC Youth League, who both belonged to the ANC, were embroiled in a conflict over control of Moleleki section. They accused one another of being involved in criminal activities under the pretext of protecting the community. The death of Bulelwa on 6 December 1993 triggered the killing of Blanco. The ANC Youth League held the SDU responsible for the death of Bulelwa. The ANC youth League decided to retaliate by killing Blanco, a high-ranking member of the SDU in Moleleki section. Once Blanco had been killed, the SDU decided to retaliate against those members of the ANC Youth League who were responsible for the death of Blanco, by rounding them up and killing them. Only those who were implicated in the killing of Blanco were killed; those who were not implicated were released.
18. The deceased were killed primarily because they had killed Blanco. All applicants said so. When the applicants killed the deceased they knew that the deceased were members of the ANC Youth League and that Buthelezi was a member of the ANC who were in conflict with the SDU. The motive of the killing was to kill persons who had killed Blanco. 19. Having regard to the motive for the massacre, the context in which it occurred, in particular, the fact that the attack was not directed at a political opponent, we are satisfied that the killing of the deceased was not an act associated with a political objective as contemplated in the Act. 20. Accordingly, all the applicants are NOT ENTITLED to the amnesty.