<?xml version="1.0" encoding="windows-1252"?>
<hearing xmlns="http://trc.saha.org.za/hearing/xml" schemaLocation="https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/export/hearingxml.xsd">
	<systype>decisions</systype>
	<type>AMNESTY DECISIONS</type>
				<names>EUGENE ALEXANDER DE KOCK,CHRISTO PETRO DEETLEFS,FREDERICK JACOBUS PIENAAR,EUGENE FOURIE,PAUL JACOBUS VAN DYK,CORNELIUS JOHANNES BOTHA,ISAK DANIEL BOSCH,BUTANA ALMOND NOFOMELA,DOUW GERBRANDT WILLEMSE</names>
		<matter>AM0066/96,AM5001/97,AM5014/97,AM3767/96,AM5013/97,AM5015/97,AM3765/96,AM0064/96,AM3721/96</matter>
				<decision>GRANTED/REFUSED</decision>
	<url>https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/hearing.php?id=59430&amp;t=&amp;tab=hearings</url>
	<originalhtml>https://sabctrc.saha.org.za/originals/decisions/2001/ac21148.htm</originalhtml>
		<lines count="50">
		<line number="1">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>DECISION</text>
		</line>
		<line number="2">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>___________________________________________________________</text>
		</line>
		<line number="3">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>These are applications for amnesty   in terms of Section 18 of Act 34 of 1995 (&quot;the Act&quot;).</text>
		</line>
		<line number="4">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>The Applicants, who will be referred   to by their surnames in the interests of brevity, applied for amnesty in relation   to their respective roles on 14 August 1986, in the vicinity of the South Africa   - Swaziland border near the T-junction between the Lothair -Nerston road and   the Nerston/Amsterdam road and/or at a place along the Nerston - Amsterdam road,   in the then Transvaal:</text>
		</line>
		<line number="5">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="6">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="7">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="8">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="9">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="10">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>The evidence of the Applicants   is briefly the following:</text>
		</line>
		<line number="11">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="12">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="13">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="14">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="15">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="16">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="17">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="18">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="19">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="20">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>This then in brief were the relevant   aspects of evidence on behalf of the Applicants.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="21">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="22">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="23">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="24">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="25">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>It remains to be decided whether   the Applicants meet the requirements of Section 20(1) of the Act as to whether   &quot;the act, omission or offence to which the application relates is an act   associated with a political objective committed in the course of the conflicts   of the past in accordance with the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3).&quot;</text>
		</line>
		<line number="26">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="27">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="28">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>The Committee is satisfied that   the offences were committed in the course of the conflicts of the past and that   all the Applicants fall within the provisions of Section 20(2).</text>
		</line>
		<line number="29">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="30">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>The Committee, after considering   the guidelines set out in Section 20(3) is thus satisfied that except in relation   to De Kock, Pienaar and Deetlefs in relation to the driver&#039;s death, the offences   committed were associated with a political objective.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="31">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>In the result, amnesty is GRANTED   to all the Applicants in relation to their respective roles on 14 August - November   1986, in the vicinity of the South Africa - Swaziland border near the T-junction   between the Lothair - Nerston road and the Nerston - Amsterdam road and/or at   a place along the Nerston -Amsterdam road, in the then Transvaal:</text>
		</line>
		<line number="32">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="33">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="34">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="35">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>Amnesty is also GRANTED to Botha,   Fourie, Greyling, Bosch and Labuschagne with regard to the killing of Shadrack   Maphumulo on the same date and place referred to above and defeating the ends   of justice, perjury and other related acts, omissions or offences in respect   of the cover-up of their actions in connection with this killing.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="36">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>De Kock, Pienaar and Deetlefs   are REFUSED amnesty in respect of the killing of Shadrack Maphumulo and the   related cover-up of his death.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="37">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>The Committee is of the opinion   that Vusimusi Lawrence Sindane and the relatives and dependants of Mbongeni   Kone (MK Bernard), Shadrack Msolwa Sithole, Assen Jeremia Thimula (MK Tallman),   Mzwandile Hadebe (MK Zandile) and Shadrack Maphumulo are victims and they are   referred to the Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation in terms of Section   22 of the Act for its consideration in terms of Section 26 of the Act.</text>
		</line>
		<line number="38">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text></text>
		</line>
		<line number="39">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>______________________</text>
		</line>
		<line number="40">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>JUDGE A. B. M. WILSON</text>
		</line>
		<line number="41">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>______________________</text>
		</line>
		<line number="42">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>MR I LAX</text>
		</line>
		<line number="43">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>______________________</text>
		</line>
		<line number="44">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>MR J B SIBANYONI</text>
		</line>
		<line number="45">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>??</text>
		</line>
		<line number="46">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>2</text>
		</line>
		<line number="47">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>2</text>
		</line>
		<line number="48">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>/...</text>
		</line>
		<line number="49">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>11</text>
		</line>
		<line number="50">
			<speaker></speaker>
			<text>12</text>
		</line>
	</lines>
</hearing>