--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody. Today we will be hearing the application of Messrs Mhlambo and others. Before we start, I would like to introduce the Committee to you. We are all three of us, members of the Amnesty Committee of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee.

On my right is Mr Ilan Lax. He is an attorney from Pietermaritzburg. On my left is Mr Jonas Sibanyoni, he is an attorney from Pretoria, and I am Selwyn Miller, I am a Judge from the Eastern Cape, attached to the Transkei Division of the court there.

I would ask the legal representatives please to place themselves on record. Sorry, Mr Sipho, you must push the button so that the red light shines.

MR SIPHO: My name is Vasist Sipho and I represent the applicants in this matter.

MS THABETE: I am Ms Thabela Thabete, I am the Evidence Leader in this matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Thabete. For those people who are attending, the proceedings will be simultaneously recorded and in order to benefit from the proceedings, you have to be in possession of one of these devices.

You've just got to choose the channel for the languages. English I believe is on number 2, Zulu will be on number 3. These devices are available from the front, from the sound technician. Mr Sipho?

MR SIPHO: Mr Chairman and Honourable members of the Committee, there are certain matters to draw to your attention at this stage.

It has come to our knowledge, that two of the applicants do not appear to have completed forms which are in the possession of the TRC. They actually say that they did complete forms and were left with the prison authorities, but which didn't seem to have arrived at the TRC.

They are present here today, and they feel that something must have gone wrong, because they have done what they were supposed to do and they have in fact received letters to say that they should in fact be present here today.

CHAIRPERSON: Those letters, I don't know what they say, but usually letters are sent off, not only to applicants, but also to implicated people, in other words if his name has been mentioned by other applicants, they would have got a letter in their capacity as an implicated person.

MR SIPHO: I wonder whether some explanation could perhaps be given to them by the Committee so that they would understand the position better?

CHAIRPERSON: What is the position Mr Sipho, do they say that they had filled in forms?

MR SIPHO: Yes, they do say that they had filled in forms, and they left them with the prison authorities and as far as they were aware, they should have been heard today as well, and that view of theirs was confirmed by the fact that they received these letters.

That is as far as I wish to take that matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Thabete, do you know anything about forms of those two persons? Sorry, who are they?

MR SIPHO: Perhaps I should just read out their names Fano Patrick Tsotetsi and Bongani Sacharia Gwala. They are listed as accused 1 and 5 when they appeared in court.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabete, do you have any knowledge about any applications relating to these two people?

MS THABETE: If I may explain Mr Chair, we received the applications of all the others, except Bongani Sacharia Gwala and Fano Patrick Tsotetsi. Before I came to you, members of the Committee, I went to speak to them in the presence of Mr Sipho.

Mr Mandla Mhlambo explained to me that he completed application forms for all the other people. I then asked him why didn't he complete the forms for Fano Patrick Tsotetsi and Bongani Sacharia Gwala. He told me that it is because they were not in the same prison as them.

Thereafter I asked from Bongani Sacharia Gwala and Fano Patrick Tsotetsi, as to why they didn't make application forms. One of them said I think it is Mr Tsotetsi, said he didn't know anything about the fact that there were application forms that needed to be completed. The other one, Mr Gwala said to me he was not in the same prison as the others, that is why he did not complete the forms.

The letters that they are referring to, it is the Section 19(4) notices, that were sent out to the implicated persons or interested persons, applicants and victims.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sipho, we as a Committee are a statutory body. We are therefore confined to act within the parameters of the enabling statute, namely the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, 34 of 1995.

We as a Committee do not have a discretion to condone the failure to submit an application. We just don't have that power or authority to do that.

What I would suggest at the moment, because of this, that the two persons Messrs Tsotetsi and Gwala, we can cause further investigations perhaps to be done as to whether or not they have completed application forms, because we have got, from what you said, they said that they did complete and from what they told Ms Thabete, they said that they didn't complete.

The fact is we don't have the application forms and there is, to say the least, a doubt that it has ever been received, because even on what you have told us, they may well not have been received by the Commission, even though they were completed, they might have got stuck in the prison.

We can make further enquiries and if it is found that there are, in fact there were forms that did reach the Commission, which is unlikely, but if it did happen, and for some reason or other, those forms were not registered or numbered, etc, then a hearing can be held at a later stage in regard to those two persons.

But without there being application forms before us, we are just not able to hear them as applicants, as much as we would like to, it would be far more efficient if we could deal with them all together, it is after all the same incident. The evidence of the various applicants, I can imagine will be pretty much the same.

We cannot be dictated to by convenience in a matter of this nature, we are just bound, not to be able to hear them as applicants without the application form.

MR SIPHO: As the Court pleases. I have just one other matter to raise before we get on with the applications, and that is there is one applicant who is not present here today.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, if you could push the button.

MR SIPHO: Sorry, there is one applicant who is not present here today. His name is Gendor Hector Sipho Sikakane, he appeared as accused 3 in the court and I believe that he is not here because of some mental illness that he is suffering from and that the other applicants are able to say whether he will ever recover from it and whether he may ever be in a position to bring his own application at any later point.

In those circumstances, perhaps his application might be removed from the role at this stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I will agree with you there Mr Sipho that if he is unable to be present for health reasons, what we can do at this stage is just merely remove his application from the roll without depriving him of his right to be heard later.

We will remove it from the roll with a view that if his health improves and he is able to attend, the matter will be set down on the roll at a later stage for hearing then, as a separate hearing.

MR SIPHO: Thank you. I now wish to proceed with the leading of evidence. I think I am ready at this stage, to start with the leading of evidence in regard to the support of the application for amnesty.

The first witness that I want to call is Mr Mandla Mhlambo, who was accused 8 in the court.

CHAIRPERSON: What page number is he in the document? The top page?

MS THABETE: 84.

CHAIRPERSON: 84?

MR SIPHO: 184.

MS THABETE: Oh 184?

CHAIRPERSON: 184? Yes, thank you.

ALFRED MANDLA MHLAMBO: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Sipho?

EXAMINATION BY MR SIPHO: As the Court pleases. Could I perhaps also direct the Committee to page 183.1, up to 183.5 which is a letter written by Mr Mhlambo to the TRC which contains to a large extent the evidence that he will actually lead this morning.

Mr Mhlambo, where did you live during 1991?

MR MHLAMBO: At Nhlalagahle, a township in Greytown.

MR SIPHO: Were you born in that area?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Did you belong to any political party at that time?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Which political party was this?

MR MHLAMBO: The ANC.

MR SIPHO: And for how long had you been associated with the ANC up to 1991?

MR MHLAMBO: Ever since I was born, I grew up the area being an ANC stronghold.

MR SIPHO: Okay, what were the majority of the residents of that area, which party did they belong to?

MR MHLAMBO: They belonged to the ANC.

MR SIPHO: Okay, was there a compound in that vicinity known as the HLH compound?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, there was.

MR SIPHO: Who occupied the HLH compound? Was it members of the ANC or was it members of other political parties?

MR MHLAMBO: Members of the IFP resided at that compound.

MR SIPHO: Was it common for people from the ANC and the IFP to mix with each other at the compound or at the township?

MR MHLAMBO: No.

MR SIPHO: What was the relationship between peoples of these two different parties at that time?

MR MHLAMBO: There were very poor relations between the two groups, because at that time, there was political conflict between this two which caused the death of members from these two groups.

MR SIPHO: I see. Do you know the deceased in this case?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, I know him.

MR SIPHO: What was her name?

MR MHLAMBO: Thembi Victoria Mxquso Mthembu.

MR SIPHO: Okay, now it is common cause that the deceased died on the 28th of September 1991 when she was killed by certain people. Are you aware of that?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, I do.

MR SIPHO: Were you involved in the death of the deceased?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, I was.

MR SIPHO: Now, I want you to tell us very carefully and in some detail, how it came about that you were involved in the death of the deceased on that day.

Do you understand that?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes. In the afternoon of that day I was with a friend, Tsogosani Mgadi and Siabonga Khumalo.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, if you could just repeat those names, you were with who?

MR MHLAMBO: Tsogosani Mgadi and Siabonga Khumalo. We went down Ghona Road and we saw Siphilo Khanyile. He was assaulting a certain lady and I asked him why he was assaulting this lady.

He said he has seen this woman at HLH compound which was an IFP stronghold. Because we were aware of the political situation, we also started assaulting this woman. She fled and ran into somebody's house. We followed and we caught up with her, and we continued assaulting her.

Somebody suggested that we should take her to our leader, Mr Msolo. We agreed and therefore we took her to Mr Msolo. When we arrived at his home ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, before you proceed Mr Mhlambo, you say that Mr Msolo was your leader. What was his capacity in that area?

MR MHLAMBO: He was the ANC Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: ANC Chairperson of Nhlalagahle area?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes.

MR LAX: Sorry, was he Chairperson of Nhlalagahle or was he Chairperson of the whole Greytown area?

MR MHLAMBO: He was the Nhlalagahle Chairperson.

MR SIPHO: Did you in fact take her to his place?

MR LAX: Sorry, your microphone Mr Sipho.

MR SIPHO: Sorry, did you in fact take her to Mr Msolo's house?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, we did. We took her to Mr Msolo's house and when I arrived there, Spelo explained to Mr Msolo that he had seen the deceased at HLH compound.

It was at night. After he finished explaining, the Chairperson said we should leave the deceased, and we would continue with her case the following day.

When we left and we were about at the gate, Mr Msolo made a sign, he moved his hand across his neck and we wondered what he meant by that sign.

Some people amongst us said they had heard him saying that the deceased should be killed because there had been numerous reports about her.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know who said that?

MR MHLAMBO: The people who said this was Spelo, Tutugo and Xolani Pungula.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you just repeat those names?

MR MHLAMBO: Spelo, Tutugo and Xolani Pungula.

MR LAX: Just before you go on, the Mr Msolo that you are referring to is the late Solomon Msolo, is that correct?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, that is correct.

MR SIPHO: Did you perhaps have any idea why this person should be killed or why it was that Mr Msolo suggested that he should be killed?

MR MHLAMBO: What happened was, when we were assaulting the deceased, we asked her why in the face of this political conflict, she should be found at this compound and she explained that she had two membership cards, one belonging to the ANC and the other to the IFP.

That is why she could move freely in that compound. Some of our members are being killed, because she had sent their names, people who were prominent activists in the ANC, she had sent their names to the other camp so that they could be killed.

Some were arrested by the police.

MR SIPHO: How do you know that she had sent these names?

MR MHLAMBO: We got the assurance from herself and also when we were arrested for this crime, the police explained that the deceased was indeed the informer and she was the best informer, because she supplied them with all the information.

MR SIPHO: Okay.

MR SIBANYONI: I am sorry Mr Sipho, did she volunteer the information that she sent names or she admitted after she was confronted, about that information?

MR MHLAMBO: When we were assaulting her, we continually asked her what she was doing at the compound and that is how she was compelled to tell us the truth.

She even said herself that even if we were to kill her, it would be suitable for a person in her position, because had been responsible for the death of many of our comrades.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you.

MR SIPHO: Did you yourself feel at that stage, that she should in fact be killed as well?

MR MHLAMBO: Because of the situation in the area, the youth in that township were being killed in such numbers that they were dying every day.

In that way I also realised that indeed the deceased should be killed.

MR SIPHO: Did you think that her death might stop further killings in the area?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, I did think that. Such that after her death, the violence in Nhlalagahle abated. There is now peace in the area, ever since her death.

MR SIPHO: Would you say that this killing was in any way politically motivated?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, it did have political objectives. As I have explained before, we had initially known the deceased as one of our members, but it later transpired that she communicated or was in contact with IFP members. It also transpired later from the police that she was indeed an informer. That is why I feel that our crime had political objectives.

MR SIPHO: Okay, do you think that this killing would still have taken place, had the government of the day at that stage, been the present government?

MR MHLAMBO: No, I don't think that her death would have happened because we do not have discrimination on the basis of race or colour at the present time.

We were also driven by the political situation at that time, which was apartheid.

MR SIPHO: How do you feel now about the fact that this person lost her life at that stage?

MR MHLAMBO: It is painful that somebody had to be killed for this reasons. I do not feel good about it. What I can say to her family is I am sorry for what happened. I did not mean to kill her.

I did not have a grudge against her, but it was because of the political situation at that time. If I could, if it was possible, I would pray that they indeed rise from the dead.

MR SIPHO: What precise role did you yourself play in the killing of the deceased?

MR MHLAMBO: When we left Mr Msolo's home, we hit at nearby cottages. When the deceased emerged from the house, we chased her when she turned into Jabula Road and we caught up with her, and we started stabbing her.

MR SIPHO: Okay. In the trial where you appeared as an accused, you said that you did not have any knowledge that the township was predominantly occupied by members of the ANC.

And you also denied that you were a member of the ANC. Do you agree that you have made those denials in the court?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes.

MR SIPHO: I do not know whether it is necessary Mr Chairman, but I am referring to the record at page 276. Can you tell us why you denied knowledge of the fact that the township was predominantly ANC?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, I can explain. When we were in court, it was during the time when there was differing of political opinions between different organisations, I had a belief that the Court was prejudiced against the ANC.

Therefore I found it difficult to admit that the area that I came from, was an ANC stronghold and that I was also an ANC member. That would maybe have led to the death of my family if they knew that my family were ANC members.

MR SIPHO: Okay. Will that also be the reason why you denied having participated in the killing itself, as well?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes.

MR SIPHO: And in the trial, at page 266 of the record, the Judge said that according to your evidence, you could neither agree nor disagree that the compound is predominantly occupied by Inkatha supporters.

Is that what you said in the court, that you couldn't agree or disagree with the fact that the compound was predominantly occupied by Inkatha supporters?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, that is what I said.

MR SIPHO: Okay, and did you give that evidence basically for the reasons that you set out earlier as well?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Is there anything else that you want to add to the evidence that you have given thus far?

MR MHLAMBO: What I would like to emphasise is I wish to pass my regrets to the family of the deceased. I would, I am asking for their forgiveness, that is what I would like to say.

MR SIPHO: Okay. At the stage when this killing took place, were you still at school?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, I was still at school.

MR SIPHO: Was your education then interrupted during the period that you were in jail?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, it was interrupted.

MR SIPHO: Have you now resumed your education?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, I have resumed my education.

MR SIPHO: What are you studying at the moment?

MR MHLAMBO: I am an apprentice.

CHAIRPERSON: What are you studying towards, an apprentice in which trade?

MR MHLAMBO: An apprentice in electricity.

MR SIPHO: When were you released from jail?

MR MHLAMBO: In August of this year.

MR SIPHO: That is the evidence that I wish to lead of this witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Sipho. Ms Thabete, do you have any questions to put to the witness?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETE; Yes Mr Chairman. Mr Mhlambo, can you tell us what your relationship was with Spelo?

MR MHLAMBO: You mean Spelo Khanyile?

MS THABETE: Yes.

MR MHLAMBO: I say uncle to his father because I am born by, my mother is a Khanyile.

MS THABETE: Were you in good terms with Spelo?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, there was a relationship.

MS THABETE: What was the relationship between Spelo and the victim, Thembi Mthembu?

MR MHLAMBO: None that I know of.

MS THABETE: So the reference in the court record on page 245 and 251 that they were lovers, is not true?

MR MHLAMBO: Well, I wouldn't know that. What I think is that people who can really answer that, are the people who were most of the time with them. Although he was the relative to me, I was never most of the time with him.

It is his friends who can actually talk about that, and they are present at the moment.

MS THABETE: Okay. Coming to the issue of IFP area being a no-go zone for ANC members, can you explain for the Committee members what was wrong with an ANC person going to an IFP area?

MR MHLAMBO: What would happen, IFP members if they were at their stronghold where we couldn't enter it, would meet and plan to attack the township. Mostly at night when we are sleeping, we would actually wake up in the morning and then refer to the gunshots and then we will be told that so and so was shot or maybe a particular family was killed. That is the reason there was no good relationship between the two organisations.

We knew that whoever is going there, will die or will be killed. They were also not regularly coming to our place.

MS THABETE: I am not sure, I don't think you have understood my question, but maybe to make it a bit clearer, let's take for example if an ANC member right, had a relative or a friend in an IFP area, what would be wrong with that person going to visit the other person in the IFP area? In your opinion as an ANC person?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, there wouldn't be a problem according to them, but if we refer back to that particular time, when you were an ANC member and going to an IFP stronghold, you would be killed. But now there is no problem, you can actually visit anyone in an IFP area, and that person may actually also visit you as a relative, as it is happening right now.

MS THABETE: So it would be correct for me to say it didn't matter what the reason was for an ANC member or supporter to go to an IFP area, it wouldn't matter what the reason was.

If you saw an ANC member going to an IFP area, you would kill that person? Would it be correct for me to say that?

MR MHLAMBO: The way the things were at that particular point in time, you are telling the truth.

MS THABETE: So, can you briefly tell us again what was the reason for you to kill Thembi Mthembu specifically?

MR MHLAMBO: What happened there, there was some youth that were killed, shot by the ZP's and by IFP members, like Fiso Manyangi and Msai Fani Nqobo and a certain boy of Mkhize.

Truly speaking, we wouldn't actually understand who would follow after their death. If a person is in such a fright, and you realise that if you see people in the situation, or you see such people, you should do something about that, because you might be next to be killed.

MS THABETE: When you took the victim to Mr Msolo's house, did you question her as to what she was doing in the IFP area?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, are you saying was she questioned at Mr Msolo's house?

MS THABETE: Yes?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, she was asked.

MS THABETE: And what did she say?

MR MHLAMBO: She said she went there because of her job that she was doing, that she would actually send names of the people who are activists, ANC activists. Therefore a person would actually be frightened and thinking and wondering whose names are there.

MS THABETE: I want your response on this statement I am just going to say now. Isn't it strange though that the victim was assaulted on the way to Mr Msolo's house and then when you questioned her, she would just give such information what she was doing in the IFP area, was to sell you out, so to say? Isn't that strange especially when her life was in danger, and her life was threatened?

MR MHLAMBO: What happened there, the deceased was asked and thereafter explaining, then thereafter she was assaulted. Not that she was forced. She didn't answer because she was forced.

Even herself, she admitted that in all the things that she had done, she realised that she had done the faults.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, just on that Mr Mhlambo, if she hadn't admitted, if she kept her mouth closed and didn't answer any questions, do you think she would have been killed?

MR MHLAMBO: No.

MS THABETE: I must say Mr Mhlambo, that is strange, because earlier on you said to me it didn't matter what the reason was for someone to go to an IFP area, she or he would be killed. I find it strange that now, if she had maybe given you a reason or denied the fact that she was a sell-out, she would not have been killed. But anyway, let's move on.

MR LAX: Maybe let him comment to the point you are putting to him.

MS THABETE: Respond, okay.

MR MHLAMBO: What I was trying to explain is that due to the fact that people who were ANC members, were actually resented in the IFP area, such that any one going there, would be killed.

It wasn't easy at all for me to go there, it wasn't easy for me to leave such a person who was from that area, and actually implicitly indicating to me, that there are others as well that are on the death row.

She realised that such people were ANC activists.

MS THABETE: Can you tell us how actually saw the deceased going to an IFP area?

MR MHLAMBO: People who saw her, it was Spelo Khanyile and Hector Sikakane and Xolani Tsotetsi who were in the car at that particular time, and Thami Zondi. He was also in the car on that particular night.

MS THABETE: What time was it?

MR MHLAMBO: According to their explanation it was late in the afternoon, at about half past to two to quarter to three.

MS THABETE: I want your comment on this as well, which is my last question.

Don't you think that it is also strange for someone who is a sell-out to go at broad daylight to an IFP area, to take the names of the ANC people or to so to say, to go and be impimpi or a sell-out as they call it, in broad daylight? Don't you think that is strange?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, it should be strange in a way you explain it, however, the way I see it from my point of view, if you are used to a thing, you actually know that you usually do it without any problems. Then you would actually do it even during the day and not actually realising that you are actually putting yourself in danger.

MS THABETE: No further questions Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Thabete. Mr Sipho, do you have any re-examination?

FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR SIPHO: Perhaps there is just one question, which may not really be re-examination, but which I omitted to put earlier, perhaps.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR SIPHO: It might just help to clarify something. Were you aware of any function being held on the date of the murder, by either one of the political parties in the area?

MR MHLAMBO: On that day ... (tape ends) ... IFP rally, the IFP leader, Mr Buthelezi was there.

MR SIPHO: Nothing further Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR LAX: Sorry, where was the rally?

MR MHLAMBO: They actually wanted to hold the rally inside the township, and fortunately there was a stadium, that is a bit far away from the township, and then they decided, the councillors decided that they should go there instead of having the rally inside the township, as they realised that there was this political opposition amongst the two.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lax, have you got any questions to put to the witness?

MR LAX: Just one question Chairperson. Mr Mhlambo, you have, maybe I just gained the wrong impression, but you seemed to give the impression that Nhlalagahle was primarily and ANC area. Is it not in fact correct that there were IFP people who lived in Nhlalagahle, but due to the violence, most of them left and ultimately there was peace in the area, because there were only ANC people left there? Is that not the correct impression?

MR MHLAMBO: What happened there, everyone who was originally from there, were ANC members, and thereafter some people from the rural areas actually got houses inside the township by communicating with the people in the hostels, then they started becoming IFP activists, who are outsiders, but now have become residents.

Not that it is a person originally who was born there, who actually became an IFP member and actually instigated that people should be IFP members. That is why I am explaining that the IFP stronghold is the hostel. I don't deny it that there are people who actually left the area, because they were IFP members.

But yes indeed, there were people who actually moved away from the township.

MR LAX: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sibanyoni, do you have any questions?

MR SIBANYONI: Yes thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Mhlambo, did you ever see that the deceased had in fact two cards, one ANC and the other IFP?

MR MHLAMBO: What I knew from her is the ANC card. However, my other brother, comrade said he actually knew her card, the IFP card.

MR SIBANYONI: When you say people at Nhlalagahle did not have a relation with relatives at the hostel, are you saying also there was no possibility that a person will have a love affair with a man staying at the compound, like in the case of the deceased? Was that totally excluded?

MR MHLAMBO: That will be possible that there is somebody who would have lover who resides in the hostel, however, due to the fact that the situation was as it was, it wasn't easy to find somebody from the township who would actually just directly go to the hostel, referring to the situation at that particular time.

The situation was such that even though you had such a relationship, you would actually meet in town or somewhere else, or phone each other, and arrange where you can meet.

MR SIBANYONI: If I understood you correctly, when you people saw the deceased, you started assaulting her and then thereafter, she started admitting the allegations that she was a member of the ANC and the IFP at the same time, am I correct? Did I understand you correctly?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, she admitted after being assaulted, but what happened is that before she was questioned, and asked what was she doing in the hostel.

By the explanation we received from Spelo because we found him hitting, assaulting her, he indicated to us that the deceased indicated that she went there because of the job that she is doing.

MR SIBANYONI: Which job?

MR MHLAMBO: Giving them names of ANC activists.

MR SIBANYONI: You said the police confirmed that she was their informer. To whom did the police confirm or who are those police who said so?

MR MHLAMBO: We can actually, if we start by saying who those police were, I remember Vusi Skosana and when he was saying that, he was actually saying that to us, as he was actually telling us that we deserved to be hanged because we stopped them, or we prevented them from doing their job by actually killing the person who was being helpful to them, for them to continue their work as police.

MR SIBANYONI: Is it only Vusi Skosana who confirmed that she was their informer?

MR MHLAMBO: The person who actually uttered, it was Vusi Skosana. I wouldn't know then the other police, because they were not in the same room. We would actually meet when we were in court.

It is possible that there some of my colleagues, comrades can actually tell you more about that.

MR SIBANYONI: You said Msolo made a sign, an indication that she should be killed by putting his arm on the neck. Can you demonstrate to us how did Msolo do it?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, I can. What he did is that he moved his finger across the neck and uttered the words to those who were nearby him, that we should see what we could do about the deceased.

CHAIRPERSON: Just for purposes of the record, the sign or the sign indicated by the witness is the typical cut throat sign by stretching the forefinger from the right ear across the throat, to the left ear.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, no further questions Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mhlambo, did you actually plunge a knife into the deceased?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, I did.

CHAIRPERSON: What sort of knife did you have?

MR MHLAMBO: It was the okapi.

CHAIRPERSON: Where about on her body, did you stab her?

MR MHLAMBO: On the stomach and at the back.

CHAIRPERSON: How many times, can you recall?

MR MHLAMBO: It is not easy, because it has been a long time.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying a number of times or just twice?

MR MHLAMBO: More than twice.

CHAIRPERSON: Did any other person stab her?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Who did you see actually stabbing her?

MR MHLAMBO: Because not all of us had knives, we were exchanging with the one. I actually took the knife that I had and gave it to Spelo Khanyile.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you say that all of you stabbed the deceased?

MR MHLAMBO: It should be like that that all of us, because of the wounds that she had.

CHAIRPERSON: At that stage, 1991, how old were you then?

MR MHLAMBO: I was 19 years old.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sipho, do you have any questions arising out of questions that have been put? Sorry, Mr Lax indicates that he wants to ask a further question.

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson, just one thing. You didn't really answer the Chairperson's question about who you saw stabbing her. Why are you unable to answer that question?

MR MHLAMBO: I did not understand it quite clearly, whether I should give names or explain as I did about that exchanging the knife. That is what I had in my mind.

But if you want the name, I can actually gives names, it is not a problem.

MR LAX: Well, that is what he was asking you, he wanted to know which of your other applicants, did what to the deceased, and whether you can help us with that information. If you can and if you do remember it, what you are being asked to do is to expand and give us that information.

MR MHLAMBO: Those that are here with us, all of us did stab the deceased.

MR LAX: Can you say who did what?

MR MHLAMBO: As I have explained, I stabbed her and then I gave the knife to Spelo because they were actually, (indistinct) was holding the deceased down and they were exchanging the knife, the knives that we had.

What I remember, I actually stood and watched, watching everyone stabbing and I realised that Tulani is stabbing, Xolani is stabbing, Fano Tsotetsi was stabbing, Hector Sikakane was also stabbing. And Bongani Gwala, and Mzwandile Magula.

MR LAX: Why was it necessary for everybody to stab her? Why was it necessary to hand the knife to someone else so that they should also participate?

MR MHLAMBO: What happened there, because of the shortage of knives, we agreed amongst ourselves that it shouldn't, there shouldn't be anyone who would say you did this, you did that, those did that, we actually saw it fit that all of us must partake in doing this because we started this, we should all of us, finish it.

MR LAX: Okay, that is fine.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sipho, do you have any questions arising out of questions that had been put by members of the panel?

FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR SIPHO: Just one question. Can you tell us how it came about that some of you had knives in your possession on that day?

MR MHLAMBO: Yes, what happened, I explained initially that there was an IFP rally and that the person didn't know what to expect as there were people approaching.

After the rally, what would these people do. Therefore some of us realised that they should arm themselves so as to protect themselves using those weapons.

MR SIPHO: Thank you, I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabete, do you have any questions arising out of questions that have been put?

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETE: Just one Mr Chair. How old was Thembi, or approximately how old?

MR MHLAMBO: Approximately, I wouldn't say above 24. It should have been below that.

MS THABETE: No further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mhlambo, that concludes your evidence, you may stand down, thank you.

WITNESS EXCUSED.

CHAIRPERSON: I see now that it is quarter past eleven, I think this would be a convenient time to take the short tea adjournment. We will then have a short adjournment now.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------MR SIPHO: Mr Chairman, Xolani Tsotetsi, his application is on page 160 of the papers. His evidence was dealt with on page 241 of the trial record, of the judgement rather.

XOLANI BRAVEMAN TSOTETSI: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Sipho?

EXAMINATION BY MR SIPHO: Thank you. Mr Tsotetsi, how old are you?

MR TSOTETSI: 28.

MR SIPHO: During 1991, where did you live?

MR TSOTETSI: At Nhlalagahle township in Greytown.

MR SIPHO: Okay, do you know the deceased in this case?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I know her.

MR SIPHO: What was her name?

MR TSOTETSI: Mxquso Victoria Mthembu.

MR SIPHO: Okay, now you are aware that she was killed on the 28th of September 1991.

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I am aware.

MR SIPHO: Did you take part in the killing of the deceased?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I did.

MR SIPHO: Okay, now on that day, were you travelling along in a kombi in the vicinity of the HLH compound?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Okay, at about what time was this on that day?

MR TSOTETSI: About quarter to three in the afternoon.

MR SIPHO: What did you see as you drove passed the HLH compound?

MR TSOTETSI: As we drove near there, we saw the deceased inside the compound.

MR SIPHO: Now, you have heard the evidence of the witness who gave evidence before you.

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I did.

MR SIPHO: Do you agree with the evidence that he gave?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I do.

MR SIPHO: And you would agree then that the HLH compound was inhabited by members of Inkatha Freedom Party?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I agree.

MR SIPHO: The members, the people of the township where you lived, were members of the ANC?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Okay. Was it normal for people from the township to go and visit people at the compound?

MR TSOTETSI: No, it was not because of the situation in the township.

MR SIPHO: Okay, how did you feel about having seen the deceased at the compound?

MR TSOTETSI: I did not feel good about it because I knew her to be one of our members.

MR SIPHO: Okay. As far as you were concerned, her presence at that compound, what did it mean to you?

MR TSOTETSI: We were in one organisation. Her presence being there, did not feel good to me, I wondered what she was doing there, it actually gave me a different picture.

MR SIPHO: Okay. Did you then confront the deceased at some later point that day?

MR TSOTETSI: No, I did not approach her.

MR SIPHO: Okay, were you in the company of certain other people at the time when the deceased was assaulted?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I was.

MR SIPHO: Who were the other people?

MR TSOTETSI: The people who are here, as well as (indistinct) and Khanyile.

MR SIPHO: When you refer to people who are here, do you mean all the other applicants?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Okay. What did you do to the deceased, if anything at all?

MR TSOTETSI: I also partook in assaulting her and we then took her to Mr Msolo's home.

MR SIPHO: Okay. Is it true that the deceased made a certain confession to you and to the other people that were present there?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, she did.

MR SIPHO: What was the gist of that confession?

MR TSOTETSI: She confessed that she was an informer. She would actually take whatever we were doing, and report it to the IFP and also was in contact with the police.

MR SIPHO: Okay. Were you also present at the home of Mr Msolo?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I was there.

MR SIPHO: Who is Mr Msolo?

MR TSOTETSI: He was the Chairperson of the ANC in the township.

MR SIPHO: Did you also take part in stabbing the deceased later that evening?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I did.

MR SIPHO: What exactly did you do?

MR TSOTETSI: I stabbed her.

MR SIPHO: Do you know how many times you stabbed her?

MR TSOTETSI: I do not remember.

MR SIPHO: Okay. Is it true that each and every one of the applicants here, took turns in stabbing her?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, that is the truth, we were all there.

MR SIPHO: Okay, why was it necessary for everyone to stab her?

MR TSOTETSI: We had started this all together, and we had to finish it together.

MR SIPHO: During that time, well, you have always been a member of the ANC, is that so?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Okay, do you know for how long you had been a member of the ANC at the time of the commission of this offence?

MR TSOTETSI: I wouldn't be able to remember quite well, but from the time that I was born and grew up in the township, I have always been an ANC member.

MR SIPHO: Now, when you gave your evidence in the trial court, did you readily concede that you were a member of the ANC?

MR TSOTETSI: No, I did not.

MR SIPHO: Is it true that the Judge found that you were very evasive when it came to giving information about the ANC?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, that is correct.

MR SIPHO: For the record, I refer to page 242 of the judgement.

Why were you evasive about it, why didn't you simply say that you were a member of the ANC?

MR TSOTETSI: At that time, I believed that white people were prejudiced against the ANC. That is why I did not admit it at court.

MR SIPHO: Okay, do you know how members of the IFP would have reacted had you made an admission that you in fact killed the deceased, whilst you were a member of the ANC?

MR TSOTETSI: No.

MR SIPHO: Okay, in all other respects, do you confirm the evidence that was given by Mr Mhlambo?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I do.

MR SIPHO: Mr Chairman and Committee members, I don't intend to get into repeating everything that was said by the other witnesses, I have just covered certain specific areas. I intend to leave his evidence at that.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Sipho. Ms Thabete, do you have any questions to ask the witness?

MS THABETE: No Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lax? Sorry, there is no re-examination obviously. Mr Lax?

MR LAX: Chairperson, if you will just give me a moment, maybe Mr Sibanyoni can carry on. There is one thing I just want to check up with my notes.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sibanyoni, do you have any questions?

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I do not have any questions for this applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Tsotetsi, are you still serving your term of imprisonment or have you been released?

MR TSOTETSI: No, I have been released.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that also during August of this year?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you have a Self Defence Unit there in that township?

MR TSOTETSI: No. We were just the people responsible for protecting the community, but there was no unit.

CHAIRPERSON: Is Mr Msolo still alive?

MR TSOTETSI: No, he is deceased.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lax?

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson, you alluded to the one area that was worrying me, I just wanted to check the form. If you look at page 160, which is the translation of your application form, perhaps to be fair to you, one would also look at page 149, which is the Zulu version of your form, at the answer to paragraph 6(b), you say that then I was in the Self Defence Unit.

You have just told us there was no Self Defence Unit. Why did you write that in your form, or why did you give that answer in your form? What did you mean by that answer?

MR TSOTETSI: I meant that I was a member of the ANC who was acting under the guidelines of the ANC.

MR LAX: But you know what an SDU is, you have heard of the term before?

MR TSOTETSI: I am not very conversant about what they are.

MR LAX: Why is it written in your form then?

MR TSOTETSI: I thought that as people who were protecting the community, that was part of what the SDU was.

MR LAX: You see in September 1991, there would have been SDU's in Greytown, in Nhlalagahle and all sorts of places. The call to form the SDU's happened in the middle of 1990.

There would have been an organised SDU in that area, but you don't know anything about that?

MR TSOTETSI: I would not disagree with that. I was a member of the ANC.

MR LAX: What structures were you a member of before the ANC was unbanned?

MR TSOTETSI: I was a member of the ANC because in the township, it was an ANC area, but I did not have much knowledge about other organisations.

MR LAX: You see until February 1990, the ANC did not operate above ground in this country. There were other structures that were there in place of the ANC. You don't know what structures those were? You weren't a member of them?

MR TSOTETSI: It was the UDF.

MR LAX: Yes, so what structure of the UDF were you part of?

MR TSOTETSI: I was a member or follower of the organisation that existed in the township at the time.

MR LAX: Yes, I am asking you what was that structure?

MR TSOTETSI: At the time that I acquired political knowledge, it was the ANC that was prominent. So that is the organisation that I joined.

MR LAX: You see there would have been a Nhlalagahle Youth Congress that was formed. Youth Congresses were formed in the 1980's in all the townships, and I know for a fact that there was one in Nhlalagahle. You weren't part of that?

MR TSOTETSI: I will say that I was because whatever happened or took place in the township, I was in line with. I did not dispute whatever was happening, I always cooperated.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you attend meetings, gatherings of the Youth Congress?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes.

MR LAX: You see, lots of people will say they were members of this or that structure, but in reality they simply lived in a place where the predominant value was that of UDF or Inkatha or AZAPO or whatever.

Because that was the dominant culture, they simply subscribed to that. They didn't actually joined structures per se, do you understand what I am saying?

As opposed to that, there were people who definitely joined structures, who were part of youth movements, were part of civics, who were part of church organisations, that were all affiliated to the UDF.

From your evidence, it is clear to me you weren't part of any one of those structures? That doesn't mean you didn't support the UDF or the ANC for that matter. Do you see what I am saying to you?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes.

MR LAX: Now you are here to be frank with us.

MR TSOTETSI: Yes.

MR LAX: So when we ask you questions about your political affiliation, you must be honest with us. If you weren't a member of a structure, it is better that you tell us that. Do you understand?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, I do.

MR LAX: No further questions Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Sipho, any questions arising out of questions put by the panel?

FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR SIPHO: Yes, thank you. Although you may not have been part of any specific structure of the ANC, do you know what the attitude of members of the ANC would have been to members of the Inkatha Freedom Party?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: What was it, a close friendly relationship or was it a hostile one?

MR TSOTETSI: There was no friendship between the two.

MR SIPHO: And as such, would it have been acceptable for ANC members to be seen in the company of IFP members?

MR TSOTETSI: No.

MR SIPHO: And the deceased in this case, was an ANC member who had been seen in the IFP camp, is that not so?

MR TSOTETSI: Yes, that is correct.

MR SIPHO: And it is this that motivated the events of that day? Is that right?

MR TSOTETSI: That is correct.

MR SIPHO: I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabete, any questions arising?

MS THABETE: No questions Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Tsotetsi, that concludes your testimony, you may stand down. Thank you.

WITNESS EXCUSED.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------MR SIPHO: I now call Thami Tulani Zondi. His application form doesn't form part of my bundle, I have it separately, thank you.

THAMI TULANI ZONDI: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Sipho?

EXAMINATION BY MR SIPHO: Thank you. Mr Zondi, how old are you?

MR ZONDI: I am 29.

MR SIPHO: During 1991, in what area did you reside?

MR ZONDI: At Nhlalagahle, Greytown.

MR SIPHO: You have heard the evidence of the last two witnesses that testified here this morning. Do you agree with their evidence?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Do you associate yourself with what they have said?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Okay, you were also convicted of having participated in the murder of the deceased, weren't you?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: And what time of imprisonment were you sentenced to?

MR ZONDI: Ten years.

MR SIPHO: Okay, have you now been released?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: When were you released?

MR ZONDI: On the 11th of August.

MR SIPHO: Okay, now were you also a person who was travelling in a kombi that went passed the compound that day?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Did you see the deceased?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Okay, after you saw the deceased, where did you go to?

MR ZONDI: I went home with my brothers.

MR SIPHO: Okay, and is it true that later that afternoon, you were part of a group of people that accosted the deceased and began assaulting her?

MR ZONDI: Yes, I did partake.

MR SIPHO: And did you also end up going to the home of Mr Msolo?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Did you also take part in stabbing the deceased?

MR ZONDI: Yes, I did.

MR SIPHO: Do you know how many times you stabbed her?

MR ZONDI: No, I can't quite remember.

MR SIPHO: Did you belong to any particular structures of the ANC at that time?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Which structure?

MR ZONDI: I was an ANC member.

MR SIPHO: Okay, but as far as you were concerned, what was the relationship between members of the ANC and the IFP, was it a close, friendly one, or was it a hostile one?

MR ZONDI: Hostile one.

MR SIPHO: Okay. And is the fact that an ANC member had been seen in the IFP stronghold, that gave rise to the events of that day?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

MR SIPHO: How do you feel about the fact that this person lost her life?

MR ZONDI: It is hurting that a person had died in that particular way, actually it is hurtful, anybody's death.

MR SIPHO: Here again, members of the Committee, I don't wish to take this witness through every other aspect of the matter, and I leave him in your hands.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Thabete, do you have any questions to put to the witness?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETE: Just one question Mr Chairman. Was it the norm that if an ANC person was seen in an IFP area, he or she would be attacked?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

MS THABETE: Do you have an example of an incident that had occurred before where a person was attacked, how that person was attacked?

MR ZONDI: Yes, a person would be killed when an IFP member entered the township.

MS THABETE: No further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?

MR SIPHO: None.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lax? Mr Sibanyoni?

MR SIBANYONI: No questions, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Zondi, did you have your own knife?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you stab the deceased more than once?

MR ZONDI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: When you stabbed her, was she standing up or laying down?

MR ZONDI: She was standing.

CHAIRPERSON: And when you - after the stabbing when you left the deceased, was she in your view, dead?

MR ZONDI: Well, I wouldn't be accurate in that sense, but due to the fact that there was plenty of us, it was evident to us that she would die.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Sipho, any questions arising?

MR SIPHO: I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabete?

MS THABETE: No further questions, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Zondi, you may stand down.

WITNESS EXCUSED.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------MR SIPHO: I call Xolani Pungula.

XOLANI PUNGULA: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sipho?

EXAMINATION BY MR SIPHO: Thank you. This witness' evidence is dealt with at page 262 of the judgement.

Mr Pungula, how old are you?

MR PUNGULA: I am 26 years old.

MR SIPHO: Okay, during 1991, where did you live?

MR PUNGULA: At Nhlalagahle.

MR SIPHO: You heard the evidence given by the other witnesses in this case.

MR PUNGULA: Yes, I have heard.

MR SIPHO: Do you associate yourself fully with what was said by them?

MR PUNGULA: Indeed.

MR SIPHO: Did you also take part in the killing of the deceased?

MR PUNGULA: Yes, I did.

MR SIPHO: What did you do to the deceased?

MR PUNGULA: I stabbed.

MR SIPHO: Do you know how many times you stabbed her?

MR PUNGULA: If I am not mistaken, twice.

MR SIPHO: Did you have your own knife?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Were you also sentenced to ten years' imprisonment?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Have you now been released?

MR PUNGULA: Yes, it is suspended.

MR SIPHO: Were you also released in August this year?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Sipho, just for the record, is it correct that they had been released on correctional supervision, not on release as such?

MR SIPHO: Sorry, I think they have actually been released on parole. That is what I have been told.

MR LAX: Thank you, it is just worthwhile us - so they haven't had remission of sentence per se?

MR SIPHO: No, it is not remission of sentence. Thank you for that.

Here again, members of the Committee, I don't wish to burden the rest of the day with evidence, going through every other aspect of the matter.

CHAIRPERSON: I think if you could just ask him his political affiliation, I see it is not the same as the others according to the form.

MR SIPHO: Okay. Did you belong to any political organisation at the time? At the time of the killing?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR SIPHO: What organisation did you belong to?

MR PUNGULA: AZAPO.

MR SIPHO: And do you know what the attitude of AZAPO was to the IFP?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR SIPHO: What was it?

MR PUNGULA: They were not in good terms.

MR SIPHO: How did you as an AZAPO person feel about the fact that the deceased was seen at an IFP stronghold?

MR PUNGULA: We as AZAPO, we were people who were working in hand with the ANC, even myself, I wasn't feeling good to hear and see that the deceased was actually seen at the IFP's place.

MR SIPHO: And was it the fact that she had been seen at an IFP place, that had caused her to be killed later that day?

MR PUNGULA: Yes, among other things, and the rest that was actually explained by my comrades, that she has actually done other evil things and actually not talking good about the ANC.

MR SIPHO: Thank you, I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabete, do you have any questions?

MS THABETE: No questions, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lax?

MR LAX: Thank you Mr Chairperson, just one question. Mr Pungula, with regard to other AZAPO members from that area, were any of them arrested by the police or killed by IFP people that you can recall?

MR PUNGULA: Yes, there were some who were killed, and some were arrested, and some were detained. Others were killed by IFP members.

MR LAX: Were they amongst any of the people whose names were mentioned by the deceased?

MR PUNGULA: Will you repeat your question?

MR LAX: Were any of these AZAPO people that you have referred to, mentioned by name by the deceased in her so-called confession?

MR PUNGULA: What I can say, some of them were killed to her communication, like Msai Fani who was actually killed because of her.

MR LAX: Msai Fani who?

MR PUNGULA: Msai Fani Nqobo.

MR LAX: Thank you. Where did you actually stab the deceased, you said you stabbed her twice, where did you stab her on her body?

MR PUNGULA: Because I was a bit drunk, I wouldn't say where, but she was facing my direction. She wasn't turning her back on me, she was facing me.

MR LAX: What did you do with your knife afterwards? Did you keep it to yourself, did you hand it to someone else to use, or can't you remember?

MR PUNGULA: There I can't quite remember what did I do, or I took it with me ultimately and the police took it when they came to my place.

MR LAX: So the police found your knife?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sibanyoni, do you have any questions?

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Mr Chairperson. You seem not to be remembering everything you did and you said you were a bit drunk, how much liquor had you consumed on the day?

MR PUNGULA: Well, I wouldn't elaborate much. When I left Maritzburg to check the situation, to check if my family would be safe as the IFP leader would be there, and realised that there was no elderly boy at home, so I decided to go home to safeguard them.

I did drink before I reached home in Greytown, about half of liquor, and when I arrived there, I drank some beers.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry when you say half of liquor, do you mean half a bottle or half a nip of liquor, what do you mean, of spirits, vodka, what was it?

MR PUNGULA: Vodka.

CHAIRPERSON: Half of what? A big bottle, a small bottle?

MR PUNGULA: The big bottle.

MR SIBANYONI: By the big bottle do you mean a straight?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR SIBANYONI: You took half of it?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR SIBANYONI: Were you - and then the other liquor, how much did you take of the other liquor?

MR PUNGULA: When I reached home, I just drank - I wasn't aware and I wasn't counting. What I am sure of is the half that I drank, but at home, I didn't count how much liquor I took.

MR SIBANYONI: At home you were sitting, just drinking and the like, but rough estimation, how many bottles of liquor, of beer, I mean?

MR PUNGULA: I could estimate it was more than three.

MR SIBANYONI: This incident seems to be the ANC taking action against an ANC member who was an informer and it seems there was no decision on the part of AZAPO, your organisation, to act against the deceased.

What would you say about that?

MR PUNGULA: AZAPO was there, it was a handful of them, but they were in good terms with the ANC. They would do things together. If there was an enemy, like an IFP as it was the opponent, we were not in good terms with it and we actually chased them out of the township.

AZAPO would actually be in good terms with the ANC.

MR SIBANYONI: But we were told that the deceased admitted taking the names to the police, names of ANC members and we didn't hear whether did she also admit of taking Nqobo's name to the police. What is your comment about that?

MR PUNGULA: Well, I wouldn't comment about that because I don't know.

MR SIBANYONI: Did you not just join the group when you saw them attacking the deceased, without having made any (indistinct) about it?

MR PUNGULA: Well, I wasn't around when she was assaulted. I was actually partaking in killing her. When she was assaulted, I wasn't around.

MR SIBANYONI: You partook after she had been to Msolo's house?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, no further questions Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you go to Mr Msolo's house when the deceased was there with the other applicants?

MR PUNGULA: Yes, I did.

CHAIRPERSON: You said that you went from Maritzburg to Nhlalagahle because the IFP leader was going to be there, that is referring to the rally that was to be held in that vicinity and you went there to guard your family home.

What good could you be when you had drunk half a bottle of Vodka and a number of beers that you can't count, in guarding your home? Why go on a mission like that and before you reach your destination, proceed to get drunk?

MR PUNGULA: By that time, the youth used to take actions after drinking, and we would actually attempt fighting. I was also going to attempt fighting because I was actually making me to be brave, that was our way of taking bravery, (indistinct) things like that.

CHAIRPERSON: At the time of stabbing the deceased, would you say you were in a position, taking into account your state of insobriety, to form a specific intention, to know what you were doing?

MR PUNGULA: I wouldn't really say I wasn't sure or not really, because of the drunkenness.

MR LAX: Sorry, just repeat the translation for us. I couldn't hear you very clearly.

MR PUNGULA: I wouldn't say really I wasn't aware, because I was drunk.

MR LAX: Ms Interpreter, what I am trying to understand is, is he saying that he is agreeing that he wasn't that aware because he was drunk, or is he saying he wouldn't say that he was so drunk that he wasn't aware what was going on?

INTERPRETER: The former.

MR LAX: So you confirm - just to pick it up and confirm it properly, Mr Pungula, you are saying that you weren't that sure of what you were doing, because you were drunk? Am I right?

MR PUNGULA: Yes, it is the truth.

CHAIRPERSON: We have heard from the other applicants who have given evidence, they said that they stabbed the deceased because they had started that thing together and then they had to end it together.

My understanding was that they were all involved in the initial assault of the deceased, they were the ones who initially confronted the deceased and then took her to Msolo's house which led ultimately to the stabbing.

It seems that you weren't there at the start, because you say you weren't there when she was initially assaulted. Why then did you stab the deceased yourself?

MR PUNGULA: What I can say is that when we were at Solomon Msolo, the Chairperson, I was listening, I was around and actually realised what actually prompted this, and I actually realised that it was wrong what she did and actually felt it was fit for me to partake against the action that she has done.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR LAX: Just one question Chairperson, I am still a little bit puzzled, what made you to go to Msolo's house? Why did you go there in the first place?

You weren't involved initially, why did you go there?

MR PUNGULA: I am actually a bit confused when you say I wasn't partaking. That is the question.

CHAIRPERSON: The question was why were you at Msolo's house?

MR LAX: And what I said when you weren't partaking, I said you didn't participate initially in the assaults and so on, so you wouldn't have been part of the original group that took the deceased to Msolo's house. What made you to go to Msolo's house, that is what we are trying to understand?

MR PUNGULA: At Msolo, I was taken by some of the accused, one of them is here, one of them is Bongani Sacharia Gwala and the other one is one who is not here. Those are the people who took me on the way and then we went there to listen to the case of this girl.

That is where, that is how I actually arrived and continued to be part of it.

MR LAX: Did they come to your house and fetched you or were they with you or how did you even know there was a case going on?

MR PUNGULA: They took me, I was standing outside, not inside the house, outside on the yard, inside the yard.

MR LAX: So were they passing and they just said come with us?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Sipho any questions arising?

FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR SIPHO: As the Court pleases. Although you were not initially a part of the group that assaulted the deceased, when you got to Mr Msolo's house and you got to know what the deceased had actually done, how did you feel about it?

MR PUNGULA: It wasn't good, I didn't feel good because they were AZAPO members and ANC members who were late, because of such situation, of a situation similar to that one at Msolo's place, that this girl is involved in.

MR SIPHO: Was it this feeling that made you associate yourself with what the other people were doing to the deceased on that day?

MR PUNGULA: Will you repeat your question?

MR PUNGULA: Was it the feelings that you were having at the time that you were at Msolo's house, as you were listening to what the deceased had done, that made you want to join the other applicants in doing what they did to the deceased?

MR PUNGULA: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Thank you, I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions arising Ms Thabete?

MS THABETE: No questions Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Pungula, that concludes your testimony. You may stand down.

WITNESS EXCUSED.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------MR SIPHO: The next applicant that I am calling is Mr Magula, whose application form is on page 141 and his evidence was dealt with on page 255 of the judgement.

MZWANDILE JUSTICE MAGULA: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Sipho?

EXAMINATION BY MR SIPHO: Thank you. Mr Magula, how old are you?

MR MAGULA: I am 27.

MR SIPHO: Where did you live during 1991?

MR MAGULA: At Nhlalagahle township in Greytown.

MR SIPHO: Did you belong to any political organisation?

MR MAGULA: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Which one?

MR MAGULA: The ANC.

MR SIPHO: Okay. Do you know the deceased in this case?

MR MAGULA: yes.

MR SIPHO: What organisation did she belong to?

MR MAGULA: I knew her as an ANC member.

MR SIPHO: You have heard all the evidence that has been led in this case thus far. Do you associate yourself with the evidence that has been led?

MR MAGULA: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Have you also been released on parole as a result of having been convicted in this case?

MR MAGULA: Yes.

MR SIPHO: What exactly did you do in relation to the assaults upon the deceased?

MR MAGULA: I was present when she was stabbed.

MR SIPHO: Did you also stab the deceased?

MR MAGULA: Yes.

MR SIPHO: How many times?

MR MAGULA: Although I cannot remember well, it was more than once.

MR SIPHO: Okay. Did you do this with your own knife or with somebody else's knife?

MR MAGULA: It was my knife.

MR SIPHO: Were you also part of the crowd that assaulted the deceased earlier that day, before she was taken to Msolo's house?

MR MAGULA: Yes.

MR SIPHO: Okay. How did you assault her there?

MR MAGULA: I assaulted her using my hands and feet.

MR SIPHO: Here again members of the Committee, I intend to leave the evidence at this stage. We will take it up if there is any cross-examination that requires re-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabete, do you have any questions to ask the witness?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETE: In your opinion, Mr Magula, why was the victim, why did you kill the victim?

MR MAGULA: In my opinion, that time, the situation at that time was turbulent and I found the deceased to be at fault.

MS THABETE: Why was she at fault?

MR MAGULA: She was found at a wrong place, where she was not supposed to be.

MS THABETE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sipho, any re-examination?

MR SIPHO: I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lax?

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson. In your form you say you were a member of the SDU. Were you a member of the SDU?

MR MAGULA: No, as far as I know I found our role to be similar to that of the SDU, because we were protecting the community.

MR LAX: Why did you write SDU in your form?

MR MAGULA: I regarded our job and the SDU's to be the same.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, just while you are dealing with this, Mr Magula, at the time, was there in fact a Self Defence Unit of the ANC or the UDF in place in Nhlalagahle township?

MR MAGULA: As far as I knew, there was none, but from what I heard about how they operate, I understood how they work.

CHAIRPERSON: But were you, would you, although you were a young man at the time, would you have classified yourself as being reasonably politically aware?

MR MAGULA: I was in line, or I supported whatever the ANC did in my area.

CHAIRPERSON: So if there was an SDU, would you have known of it, a properly established SDU?

MR MAGULA: Yes, I would have known if it was under the organisation that I belonged to.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Lax?

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson. Just one other aspect. At page 145 of the papers, this is a translation at 11(a) "even though the Chairman of the ANC at Nhlalagahle denied it", what are you referring to there?

CHAIRPERSON: Have you got page 145 in front of you Mr Magula. Perhaps you should take a look at it, it is page 145 and there is a question there, numbered 11(a). If you take a look at the answer that has been written there, that is a translation of what you wrote in the Zulu.

I don't know personally whether it is an accurate translation, but if it is not, then you can dispute it.

MS THABETE: Can I interfere Mr Chair. It is not a proper translation.

CHAIRPERSON: What do you say it should be Ms Thabete?

MS THABETE: Reading from his application in Zulu, it says even though the Chairperson of the ANC at Nhlalagahle gave the order, the aim ...

CHAIRPERSON: It is gave the order, instead of denied it?

MS THABETE: Yes, I apologise to the Committee for that.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words we should delete denied it, and say and substitute it with gave the order?

MS THABETE: Yes.

MR LAX: Can you just do this, can you just read the whole thing in Zulu and let the translator just tell us what it says.

INTERPRETER: Even though the ANC Chairperson in Nhlalagahle gave the order, but the objective was to keep the community safe.

We were also fighting for the liberation and also seeking peace in the area.

MR LAX: Thank you very much. Let me say, I am not for one second doubting your ability Ms Thabete, it is just better that the people who are professionals, do it.

MS THABETE: I understand.

CHAIRPERSON: That takes care of that?

MR LAX: That takes care of that issue, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Magula, had you been indulging in drinking liquor that day?

MR MAGULA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: And your other comrades?

MR MAGULA: Some of them had been drinking.

CHAIRPERSON: Who do you know had been drinking of the people that you were with?

MR MAGULA: Xolani Pungula.

CHAIRPERSON: Anyone else?

MR MAGULA: As well as Xolani Tsotetsi.

CHAIRPERSON: How would you describe the condition at the time of the stabbing, of Xolani Tsotetsi?

MR MAGULA: He was not very drunk.

CHAIRPERSON: And Pungula?

MR MAGULA: He was drunk, you could see it on his face.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions arising - sorry.

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Chairperson, just one other aspect. Including all the people that were involved in this killing, not just these applicants, who else was drinking or had been drinking?

MR MAGULA: The one that I remember is Spelo Khanyile and Tutugo, those are the two people that I remember.

MR LAX: And any other of thee applicants?

MR MAGULA: Just the people that I have already mentioned.

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions arising Mr Sipho?

MR SIPHO: No, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabete?

MS THABETE: No questions, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Magula, thank you. That concludes your evidence, you may stand down.

WITNESS EXCUSED.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sipho?

MR SIPHO: Thank you, I think I have actually concluded the evidence of all the people whose applications can be heard today. There are three other persons we dealt with earlier, whose applications can't be heard any further.

I am not leading any further evidence at this stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Sipho. Ms Thabete, any further evidence?

MS THABETE: No further evidence Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Sipho, are you in a position or will you be in a position to argue or make submissions after the lunch adjournment, I see it is nearly five to one now?

MR SIPHO: Yes, that will be all right.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. This would then be a convenient time to take the lunch adjournment and then when we resume after lunch, Mr Sipho and if she so desires, Ms Thabete will make submissions to the Committee. Thank you, we will take the lunch adjournment.

MR SIPHO: Thank you.

MS THABETE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sipho, are you in a position to make submissions?

MR SIPHO IN ARGUMENT: Yes, I am, thank you. I submit that the killing of the deceased in this matter, was politically motivated and I seek support for that submission from the judgement which is before you at this stage.

You will note from the summary of substantial facts, which is set out at page 190, that this actually begins with an introduction of the accused as members of amakubani, that is the comrades, which was aligned to the African National Congress in the Greytown area.

I know that some of the accused, when they gave, or some of the applicants, when they gave evidence this morning, didn't seem to know very much about different structures and so on, but I think what was common through out in respect of each and every one of them, was that they had in fact aligned themselves with the ANC.

They all regarded the IFP as an enemy. If anybody had gone along onto the other side, they were regarded as somebody that should be dealt with. I think that was fairly common knowledge amongst all South Africans during the period when this incident took place.

The statement goes on to of course describe the deceased as a member also of the ANC, and it also describes the compound at which the deceased was seen, as a place frequented by the members. It was also - the State also sought to prove that the deceased's name was on a list of persons supporting the IFP.

All of that suggests very strongly that what the State had set out to do, was to prove that there was a political motive for the killing. It led evidence to establish this motive, and also led evidence to align the applicants with that motive, and having established that motive, it then found that all the accused were guilty of this offence on the basis of a common purpose.

The common purpose being the political motive to kill this person.

That prevailed, even though the Judge at page 281 found that there was no evidence that actually, that accused 5 actually participated. He found them guilty on the basis of this common purpose, which was a political motive.

I also then want to refer the Committee to various parts of the judgement from which I also seek to draw support for this submission that it was a political motive, which inspired this killing.

If one looks at the record, from page 202 at line 20, the Judge sets out facts which he said were either common cause or were not seriously disputed. If I could just turn to page 202, you will find that at line 20, the facts which he said were common cause, where a township is largely inhabited by members and supporters of the African National Congress, Mr Msolo is an influential member of the township and he is charge of the youth movement of the ANC in the township, that the HLH compound is inhabited by members and supporters of Inkatha Freedom Party, and the deceased lived in the township. On the 28th of September 1991, was seen in the compound. He then sets out the two witnesses there who were members or supporters of the ANC.

And that it was their duty to fight, duty of the ANC to fight the enemy that is Inkatha. That was either common cause or it was not in dispute. That was basically the basis upon which this whole case was founded.

I submit that the Judge throughout was very much alive to these facts. So much so that they have all been enumerated here. I submit that it will be artificial for us now to look at other extraneous factors to find that maybe it wasn't politically motivated.

I submit that even though some accused appeared as if they might have been too drunk to have known what they were doing, this, the evidence that was before the trial Judge, took place shortly after the offence itself was committed, and in regard to the question of the intoxication, at page 290, the Judge said that accused - page 290 - the Judge said that accused 5, 6 and 8, don't consume liquor. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7, he said that liquor had some effect on them.

I submit that that evidence was led before him, some time, possibly in 1992 and a lot of things might have been a lot clearer at that time, than they were now to the accused, who is basically thinking back and there were certain questions about how much he drank and so on, on that day, without him realising where this was getting to, obviously.

It looked as if he may not have been aware of what he was doing at the time, but I submit that the overall impression was that they knew one thing, and that was that they were ANC members and the other side was Inkatha, and somebody had gone across and they were also aware of the fact that information was being passed on to the other side, which resulted in the death of a number of people belonging to the ANC.

In those circumstances, it would seem that they believed that a killing in those circumstances, would be justified because not only had people on their side been killed, by that by killing this person, they might put a stop to further killings in the area.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, there doesn't seem to be much other motive for the killing. It has been alluded to that maybe there was a romantic link between the deceased and one of her assailants, but that hasn't really come out?

MR SIPHO: Sorry, yes, I think that was actually put to try to dispute the version of I think it was, accused 2 in the trial, because he was being called upon to give some explanation of what he thought the assault on the deceased was about.

At some point he said he thought it was a lover's quarrel. And I think that is where that idea came from. I don't think there is much support for it anywhere else.

CHAIRPERSON: It has just been mentioned, it hasn't been grasped at all at any stage. Besides that, there doesn't seem to be any other motive, such as personal gain, robbery or there wasn't any indecent assault or anything like that at all, either.

MR SIPHO: No, there was no suggestion of that, whatsoever.

I think that romantic link was just there to try to, it was possibly put up by one of the applicants and the Judge didn't believe that, I think. Throughout, I could of course take the Court through each and every notation that I have made, but that is going to run into a number of pages, but in almost every page, and I can tell you that without exception, each and every one of the accused, was questioned in a manner that was going to reveal a political motive.

For example, accused 1 at page 237, some question was put to him where he was made to concede that it would be an offence for a township dweller to be at the compound, and of course in terms of the summary of facts, a township person was an ANC person, and the person who lived at the compound, was Inkatha.

Of course you could see that the Judge made quite a lot out of the fact that he found that almost every accused, or a large number of them, actually were shying away from making any admissions about the fact that they were in any way aligned or associated with the ANC, some of them even went to far as to say that they were not quite aware of the difference I think, between the ANC and Inkatha.

So basically their whole purpose was to try and keep that out, and of course they can't quite be criticised for not aligning themselves to the ANC, because the ANC as we know, had been banned for a very long time, and it was actually an offence to have anything to do with the ANC.

In fact, I think we all remember the days when indictments in the High Court for treason always started off by saying that so and so was a member of the ANC, whose purpose it was to violently overthrow the government by making the country ungovernable.

I mean, if they said that they were members of the ANC, and what they had done, that could well have been construed as an attempt to make the country ungovernable and they might well have been guilty of treason.

In that court, I think all the accused had to basically go through a kind of balancing act and I know the situation of people who were members of the ANC at that time, because they were all faced with a dilemma, how do you go and give evidence in court, and deny I am a member of the ANC.

We all wanted to say yes, I am a member of the ANC. But to say so, would mean a conviction and a sentence of a far worse order.

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Sipho, except to say that this happened in 1991, the ANC was unbanned in February 1990. I can accept the reasons given by the applicants themselves, but I think perhaps your argument is taking it a bit further than they themselves intended.

Their submission essentially was to the effect that they perceived the Court as a government structure, and they perceived the danger to themselves in admitting that they were ANC, as possibly bringing retribution on their families and on themselves.

I think, let's not traverse that, what I would really like you to just check is, when I read the judgement and when I read the passage you referred us to, it specifically states there that accused 6, who is Xolani Pungula, in fact indicated in the trial that he hadn't been drinking at all, and he is referred to as one of the people who, no finding that he was drunk, was made in respect of at the trial.

To rely on that in respect of him, here at this stage, I find it rather strange. Maybe you can just address us on that aspect specifically.

MR SIPHO: Sorry, could you just refer me to which judgement I spoke of?

MR LAX: You referred us to page 202, line 20 and then to 290, paragraph 6. It says the evidence establishes that accused 5, 6 and 8, do not consume liquor. Accused 6 was the person whose evidence today is that he was pretty drunk, so drunk that he didn't really have an appreciation of what was happening.

MR SIPHO: In response to that, I hadn't been presented to the evidence that was actually led in respect of that.

I seem to recall that there was talk of being drunk in respect of a few of the accused and I am not sure whether accused 6 was actually included in that lot.

I do now know that it was accused 6 who said that he had actually been drinking. I am not sure if that actually destroys the argument that I was trying to suggest that whatever the position was in regard to the alcohol at that stage, it may be that the accused when he is talking about how drunk he was now, could well be overstating the position which existed at that time.

Because he is now casting his mind back to a period during which he had actually served eight years of imprisonment and then going back and talking about something which happened at that time.

MR LAX: All I am seeking to request you to perhaps address us on is the contradiction between the finding of the Court, in respect of the evidence led at the trial, that he didn't consume liquor at all and his evidence today, that he was quite drunk, and at least in respect of the answers he gave to the Chairperson's questions, didn't really, wasn't aware of what he was doing. That is how he put it.

Because if he wasn't aware of what he was doing, the question then becomes how did he form a political objective. That is really the issue I am trying to canvass. You quoted us that paragraph as indication of the fact that he had been drinking.

That was (indistinct) to be.

MR SIPHO: Sorry the point that I was trying to make there, was that although people had been drinking, and that there was evidence that drinking had taken place, it would seem that the Judge didn't find that anybody was so drunk that they would not have been able to form an intention.

He said that for those people where he found that alcohol had been consumed, they could have been effected to some extent by it, and he found that as a mitigating factor, but obviously if he found it to be a factor where they were not capable of forming an intention, then perhaps they may not have been convicted at that stage.

MR LAX: I think the Judge would have referred to that in the light of the decisions in Kretty & Others which in those days, would have indicated that alcohol was an aggravating factor in some instances.

Obviously it wasn't so much so that it took away their intention. So maybe I see your point that you are making.

MR SIPHO: Thank you. Could I proceed from here onwards? There was also evidence before the Court, that it was a high ranking member of the ANC, the Chairman at the time, Mr Msolo, who had given an indication to the applicants that this person should in fact be killed. Basically it seems as if they were carrying out a political instruction, even though they possibly had the same fate for this person, in mind.

Now, I don't intend, unless the Court wishes me to do so, but I have references here to just about all parts of the judgement, which basically brings out the link between the killing, Inkatha and the ANC.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think it will be necessary to refer us to all of them. We have read the judgement.

MR SIPHO: Sorry, the only other point that I think I wish to make is that as the applicants saw it, they were in a situation where people on their side were being killed, and it would be the only safe way to stop this happening, was basically to kill off that person.

I submit that the Court a quo did find that there was a political motive, which gave rise to this killing, and I submit that this Committee should not make any different finding in that regard.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps, if you could just address us on one point that you have just alluded to now. You have said that in the applicants' minds, the only way to stop the killing of their people, people and supporters of the ANC, was to kill the deceased, who was an informer, a member of both the ANC and the IFP.

On that question, that then raises the point of proportionality. Could they not have expelled her from the community, got rid of her that way, rather than take it upon themselves, although I did take it into, we are aware that they didn't only take it upon themselves to kill her, there was this order from Msolo, but if you could just briefly address us on the question of proportionality as that is one of the criteria we have to take into account, in terms of Section 20(3).

MR SIPHO: I think we have to take into account the factors and the circumstances which existed at that particular time. I think it was something that was being done all the time, where if somebody belonged to a different faction, they were a danger to you, it seemed that the only way in which that could have been put an end to, was by actually killing them.

I am not saying that that was the right thing to do. That was the thinking at the time to a very large extent and that is why there was a lot of deaths during that period.

As far as they were concerned as well, if one had to expel her from the community, they would never be sure what further harm would befall them, because they would be letting a person loose to which ever other party she may want to go to, knowing everything about them.

That might in itself have created a further danger, it wouldn't have put an end to the problem, as far as they were concerned.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any further submissions Mr Sipho?

MR SIPHO: I simply wish to submit that it was a political killing and (indistinct) amnesty which we have applied for in this matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Thabete, do you have any submissions to make?

MS THABETE IN ARGUMENT: Yes Mr Chair. Clearly what the applicants did, could not be perceived as a criminal act so to say, nor ...

CHAIRPERSON: A purely criminal act? When you say a criminal act, you mean a criminal act without ...

MS THABETE: Purely yes.

CHAIRPERSON: A political motive?

MS THABETE: Yes, without a political motive. And also it doesn't look like they committed the act for any personal gain per se.

However, I think there are weaknesses in the whole scenario of their actions and other factors that I would like the Committee to consider.

For example, the issue of proportionality that is the way and the extent of violence used to kill the deceased. Why I am saying this, it is because it appears from the judgement or the indictment that the deceased was 20 years old, she was very young. The applicants as well, were very young.

What they did, that is the applicants, it is true, it can't be said to have been right or wrong, but they attacked a 20 year old, who was naive like them, who was defenceless and the extent of violence that they used, maybe the Committee members can consider that, or maybe my colleague can explain.

CHAIRPERSON: I think they have explained the violence, we know that the deceased, well, she died of multiple stab wounds, and we know that there were eight or more than eight attackers, about 10 and that they all agreed that each and every one of them, would have to actually stab her because they all started it, they must all end it and they didn't want anyone to say well, why did you do it, I didn't?

MS THABETE: That is exactly my point, I think it could have been done in another way. I am not questioning whether it is wrong or right, but I am just looking it as a short sightedness on their part, that I mean, this person was young, she was defenceless. It was not like she was armed or anything.

It wasn't necessary really for them to attack her, all of them, to stab her. I mean there were eight of them. She was the only one, and she was the same age as them really, so to say. That is exactly my point.

However, I do not object or question their political beliefs or the political climate of the day at that time. Even the judgement, as my colleague has said, refers in a number of pages, refers to the political climate at that time, more especially the rivalry between the IFP and the ANC.

Also what I wanted the Committee to think about, and maybe my colleague to respond on, is the fact that it would seem that the applicants decided to assault and eventually kill the deceased, long before she even responded to their questioning, as to what she was doing in the compound. It looks like by just going there, they had decided that they are going to kill her.

Such that it didn't matter whether she would have admitted to the fact that she was a spy or she would have denied it. It looked like they had already decided that they were going to deal with her and probably kill her.

Maybe you can respond on that as well. I also - but the Judge has raised that, maybe I should leave it.

CHAIRPERSON: You can address us on any point, whether I have raised it or not.

MR LAX: Just on that point, maybe you can in the light of your remarks, if they had already decided to kill her, just address this issue, why then didn't they kill her there and then, instead they took her to Msolo's place, they went through a trial, Msolo then gave an instruction. Doesn't that mitigate against the thrust of the point that you are making?

MS THABETE: My point was the assault happened even before the questioning that took place, so maybe the decision to kill her, was taken after she had been questioned, but it looks like to me, by the time they went there, they had already decided that she was - I don't want to say guilty - but she had you know, the relationship, or she was working in collaboration with the IFP and the police.

Another matter I wanted to raise, even though it was raised by the Honourable Judge partly, is the fact that it is interesting that considering the age of the victim as well, and the fact that she was naive and probably politically ignorant to the implications of what she was doing, or rather the consequences of her actions, just like the applicants appeared to have been ignorant and naive.

It is interesting that a warning wasn't considered or another punishment, short of death wasn't considered, which also brings the issue of proportionality.

However, like I have stated before, in the judgement it refers to the political climate of the day. In my opinion really, and as the judgement has put it clearly, there was political violence between IFP and ANC, and I wouldn't object as such to the Amnesty Committee granting amnesty on the applicants.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Thabete. Mr Sipho, do you have any reply?

MR SIPHO IN FURTHER ARGUMENT: Just on the point at which I was invited to respond, and that was whether there was any intention that was formed at the point which the deceased was first accosted by the applicants, and I agree with the learned Committee member, that if that had been so, why would they have taken her to Msolo, they would probably have done what they had to do there and then.

And it also seems as if that when they got to Msolo's place, Msolo's initial instruction was to leave her there overnight, and I think the enquiry was to take place the following morning, except that he thereafter gave some sort of signal as to what should be done.

I seems as if the applicants would have been quite prepared to comply with his initial requirement that she be left there that night, and if he hadn't given that signal, possibly nothing further would have happened that night. I think that we are speculating a little bit too much to say that they had already formed the intention to kill her at the time they first accosted her.

CHAIRPERSON: I think, well this is all speculation, but if they went to Msolo as they went and Msolo said she shall not be killed, then she probably wouldn't have been killed?

MR SIPHO: Yes, I agree with that, she probably wouldn't have been killed, and I think that also goes against the idea that they probably already had the intention to kill.

I don't think that view can be supported.

MR LAX: They may have wanted to kill her. If Msolo had said don't kill her, it is highly unlikely that they would have gone against his wishes and that much is evident from the judgement and in that respect, the learned Judge in the matter found mitigating circumstances in their favour with the fact that they were sort of under his command so to speak.

I think we can rest assured on that one.

MS THABETE: Accepting.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you very much, we will reserve our decision in this matter. We will hand down a written decision in the near future, hopefully in the very near future.

I would like to thank Mr Sipho and Ms Thabete for the assistance they have given to us during this hearing and Ms Thabete is that the end of the roll for today?

MS THABETE: That is the end of the roll for today.

CHAIRPERSON: And tomorrow we have two matters set down. Have you managed to arrange with any of them to be able to start at nine o'clock or not?

MS THABETE: I have phoned the prison that they must try and bring them by nine o'clock, they said they would do their best.

CHAIRPERSON: And the legal representative?

MS THABETE: I phoned him during lunch, but he was consulting. I left a message for him to call me back. I will make a follow up.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what we will do then, we will then adjourn now until nine o'clock tomorrow morning.

MS THABETE: Certainly.

CHAIRPERSON: And hopefully we will be able to start at that time.

MS THABETE: I will ensure that we start at nine o'clock.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS THABETE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: We will then adjourn now.