--------------------------------------------------------------------------

ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody. This morning we will be starting with a new application. Mr Motepe, is this the application of Mr Sithole?

MS LOCKHAT: It is the application of Foreman Mngomezulu Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mngomezulu?

MS LOCKHAT: That is right.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. We will be doing then the application of Mr Mngomezulu, which is number 7 on our roll. Mr Motepe, you are appearing for Mr Mngomezulu, is that right?

MR MOTEPE: That is correct, Jabu Motepe from the Pretoria

Bar, appearing for the applicant.

MS LOCKHAT: Lynn Lockhat, appearing on behalf of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Motepe?

MR MOTEPE: Chairperson, I thought the Chair would swear the applicant in.

CHAIRPERSON: I will swear him in.

FOREMAN MNGOMEZULU: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Motepe?

EXAMINATION BY MR MOTEPE: Mr Mngomezulu, you are the applicant in this matter and you have made your application for amnesty, can you kindly explain to this Committee what your application is about, what are you applying for?

MR MNGOMEZULU: It is for murdering certain people. These people had murdered the Secretary of the Youth League, and we went to fetch them and on arriving at their home, we discovered that there were weapons and knives. The murdered comrade had parts of his body removed.

MR MOTEPE: Mr Mngomezulu, do you still remember the date when this thing happened, when they killed this comrade of yours?

MR MNGOMEZULU: It was on the 20th and we killed them on the 21st.

CHAIRPERSON: Of what month and year?

MR MNGOMEZULU: 21st of March 1992.

MR MOTEPE: The month?

INTERPRETER: March.

MR MOTEPE: You say on the 21st of March you took them to the sports ground, where did you take them from?

MR MNGOMEZULU: We picked them up from their houses.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Motepe, Mr Mngomezulu, whereabout was this, which town was it in? You say you fetched them from their houses?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Daveyton, Mandela Section.

CHAIRPERSON: And you took them from their houses to the sports ground?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, that is correct. We assaulted them with sjamboks while we were at the sports ground, and that is where we burnt their bodies.

MR MOTEPE: Who were you with at that particular time?

MR MNGOMEZULU: It was a large crowd of comrades and the community.

MR MOTEPE: But I see at your trial there were only four of you appearing, why is that?

MR MNGOMEZULU: When we were arrested, there were 29 of us. The others were given bail and they were never recalled.

MR MOTEPE: Mr Mngomezulu, can you explain the particular role that you took from the time that you removed them from their homes, to the sports ground, what were you doing?

CHAIRPERSON: That is you yourself, not you the crowd? You yourself personally?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I assaulted them with a sjambok and we then went to the sports ground.

MR MOTEPE: When you say we burnt them, are you saying you also partook in burning them, and can you explain ...

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, I did personally take part in that.

CHAIRPERSON: What ...

MR MOTEPE: Was there anything that you ...

MR MNGOMEZULU: I was present all the time when they were being burnt.

MR MOTEPE: But who burnt them, was it yourself or was it somebody else in your company?

MR MNGOMEZULU: The person who burnt them was Samuel Nigene, one other comrade.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Motepe, just before you proceed, if I could just get a bit more information. You keep talking Mr Mngomezulu that you took them from the houses and burnt them. How many people were abducted, were taken from their houses and taken to the sports ground and sjamboked and burnt?

MR MNGOMEZULU: There were two who we killed and burnt and there were some other girls that we just assaulted and left. The people whom we did not kill were those who were innocent of the crime of killing the other comrade.

CHAIRPERSON: And sorry who were these people? Do you know their names and if not ...

MR MNGOMEZULU: I do not recall their names.

CHAIRPERSON: Did they belong to any group or movement or did they have any particular political affiliation?

MR MNGOMEZULU: They were the people who collaborated with the police, such that each time that we had meetings, the police would be after us all the time, and they also admitted that they collaborated with the police. That was one of the reasons that prompted us to carry out this action.

CHAIRPERSON: What was your particular political affiliation, if any, at the time?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, I was a member of the ANC.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Motepe.

MR MOTEPE: Mr Mngomezulu, as the elder in the community, what position were you holding in the ANC?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I was just responsible for protecting the community, I was in the Self Defence Unit.

MR MOTEPE: I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Before I hand over to Ms Lockhat, the burning of these two people who died, how was that done? Was petrol used or was it the so-called necklacing with rubber tires? How were they burnt?

MR MNGOMEZULU: They were doused with petrol.

CHAIRPERSON: And the size of the crowd that had gathered at the sports stadium when this happened, can you give some indication? You said 29 people were arrested, but was that the total amount of the crowd or was there more, were there more people there?

MR MNGOMEZULU: It was a large crowd, I cannot estimate, but it was just the whole community.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know how it came about that those particular people, the two that were killed as well as the others that you said some girls were just assaulted, how those particular people were identified by the group or persons in the group as being collaborators? Why were they particularly chosen as victims?

MR MNGOMEZULU: We approached them in the morning and on arrival at their homes, we discovered firearms and knives that were smeared with blood. On discovering that the comrade's body had some parts missing, we enquired from them or questioned them, and they admitted that they were responsible for his death.

CHAIRPERSON: What was the name of the dead comrade ...

MR MNGOMEZULU: His name was Mzibinzi and he was from Umtata.

CHAIRPERSON: Umtata, where I come from, the same place?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I think so.

CHAIRPERSON: You mean Umtata, Transkei?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, sorry what did you say his name was?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Mzibinzi.

CHAIRPERSON: Mzibinzi? Ms Lockhat, do you have any questions you would like to ask?

MR MOTEPE: Chairperson, before Ms Lockhat comes in, may I ask just a last question?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly Mr Motepe.

MR MOTEPE: Mr Mngomezulu, during your court trial, you testified that you were in Pietersburg when this whole thing happened, that you never took part in burning the people. Why now are you giving a different version?

CHAIRPERSON: Also Mr Motepe, before he answers, he also said that in a statement submitted to the TRC, after he made application.

MR MOTEPE: About the Pietersburg?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MOTEPE: That is correct. Mr Mngomezulu, during your court trial and in some of your papers, your application papers, you mention that you were in Pietersburg when this incident took place. Now you have just explained to us that you were present, you actually took part, why is there a difference in explanation?

MR MNGOMEZULU: At that time we were trying to free ourselves from being in prison and at the time, we were being assaulted by the police as well, that is why I did not tell the truth.

CHAIRPERSON: But - I understand that, but when you made some submissions to the Truth Commission in one of the statements you made, you - in a letter in 1997 I think - you said the same thing?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I have realised that this Commission is where I should tell the truth.

CHAIRPERSON: Because you see on page 6, at the bottom, this is in a letter addressed to the Amnesty Committee, you say -

Why would you want to tell that to the Amnesty Committee?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I wrote so, but I was prepared to come up here before the Committee and tell the truth as it happened, because this is where we must tell the truth and reconcile.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe, do you have any ...

MR MOTEPE: I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

JUDGE DE JAGER: Sorry, could I just, also on page 10 you made an affidavit stating under oath -

MS LOCKHAT: That is the affidavit of Samuel Nkosi.

CHAIRPERSON: Samuel Nkosi.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Oh, is that Samuel, oh, it is Samuel Nkosi, the other one, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

JUDGE DE JAGER: It is okay, you need not comment on the statement that I made to you, because that is a statement by Mr Nkosi, not by you.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Tell me, who assisted you in drawing up these letters to the Commission and your amnesty application form?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Somebody, an inmate wrote the letters for me.

CHAIRPERSON: When you say an inmate, a prisoner?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes.

MS LOCKHAT: In your application form you said your were the Commander of the Self Defence Unit in 1992, is that correct?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I was not a Commander. The Commander was shot and killed.

MS LOCKHAT: So why did you put this in your amnesty application form, that you were the Commander, it is on page 1 of the Bundle?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is not true, the Commander was murdered whilst he was still on bail.

CHAIRPERSON: I know, you have said that, but what Ms Lockhat is asking you is why did you describe yourself in your application form as being the Commander of the SDU?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I think it was the mistake of the person who wrote on my behalf, I was his deputy. In his absence I would take up the role.

MS LOCKHAT: Tell me, did you as his deputy, did you call for any meetings in the area in Daveyton area, when he was not there?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is correct. We would call meetings if there was a need.

MS LOCKHAT: Just regarding these victims, who identified them, who informed you that they were collaborating with the police, how did you get that information?

MR MNGOMEZULU: After we discovered the death of our comrade, and his body had been taken to the mortuary, we approached these people because on the Friday, the day that he was killed, he was in their company, so on Saturday morning, we went to their houses and the evidence that confirmed that they had indeed killed him, was the weapons, the firearms and the knives that were stained with blood and they also themselves admitted that they had killed him.

MS LOCKHAT: Did they admit to you as well, were you in the presence of the victims when they admitted to you that they had killed this comrade of yours?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, I was present.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, who admitted it, the two people who were killed? Who admitted?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: So how many other people were taken to the sports ground, besides those two who eventually were killed? Who else was taken to the sports ground for punishment?

MR MNGOMEZULU: There were two others persons, so in total there would be four that were taken to the sports ground.

CHAIRPERSON: Those two other persons, were they the girls you referred to?

MR MNGOMEZULU: It was one girl and one boy, his name is Mongezi and the girl's name is Brenda.

CHAIRPERSON: And they were just assaulted there?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, they were just assaulted.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS LOCKHAT: Why did you take Brenda and Mongezi along if they didn't admit to committing that crime against your comrade?

MR MNGOMEZULU: They were the persons, they were the family that had hosted these two individuals.

MS LOCKHAT: And whose decision was it to burn the two victims?

MR MNGOMEZULU: All the comrades took that decision.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry to interpose Ms Lockhat, Mr Mngomezulu, I see from your application form, page 1, that you are applying for amnesty in respect of two murders, assault and also two robberies. What is the situation relating to the robberies?

MR MOTEPE: Perhaps I can come in. I believe it was a mistake, it was supposed to be kidnapping, not robbery. In Afrikaans it is "menseroof", so it was ...

CHAIRPERSON: So, it is just the abduction?

MR MOTEPE: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Of the four people to the sports ground?

MR MOTEPE: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you confirm that Mr Mngomezulu? There is no robbery, there wasn't any robbery?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. So, can we then amend that to read - I will delete robbery and that will read kidnapping.

MR MOTEPE: That will be in order.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Motepe. Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: Tell me, this comrade of yours that was killed, was he also your son-in-law?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is correct and he had two children.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, you say that - what was he, was he the Secretary of the Youth League?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes.

MS LOCKHAT: Perhaps you want to clarify, was he the Secretary of the Youth League?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: That is the ANC Youth League?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is correct.

MS LOCKHAT: In the criminal trial it was stated that yourself and accused 3, were the persons who actually decided to get the petrol and to actually initiate the burning of these people, is that correct, and that it wasn't really the community?

MR MNGOMEZULU: The Street Committee can explain better about the fetching of the petrol, because they are the people who fetched the petrol and everybody was agreed on the burning of these two individuals.

MS LOCKHAT: Is it true that it was your initiation, yourself and accused 3? It is fine that the Street Committee fetched the petrol, but was it your idea?

MR MNGOMEZULU: No, it was the community. I was part of that.

CHAIRPERSON: I know, but the community doesn't - when you've got 100 people or 200 people, they don't all, like a choir singing the same thing at the same time, somebody suggests it and then the rest agree, so although at the end of the day it might have been a decision of the community, you need somebody to spark the idea. What Ms Lockhat is asking you is, at the trial you said that you were one of the people who came up with the idea, go and fetch petrol, is that correct?

MS LOCKHAT: It wasn't that the applicant suggested it, but witnesses in the criminal trial said ...

CHAIRPERSON: Witnesses in the criminal trial said it was you who suggested that petrol be fetched. What Ms Lockhat is asking you, is that correct or not? Somebody must have made the initial suggestion, which was then agreed upon by all the people present?

MR MNGOMEZULU: It was the Street Committee that came up with the idea, and we all agreed.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you a member of the Street Committee?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, I was a member.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And were you the leader of that Street Committee, the Chairperson?

MR MNGOMEZULU: No, it wasn't me.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Who was the leader?

MR MNGOMEZULU: It was Mr Rasta Mawhela who is deceased now, and we do not know who killed him.

MS LOCKHAT: Would you say, this is - would you say that the death of your son-in-law was an avenge because it was your son-in-law or because he was the Secretary of the Unit?

MR MNGOMEZULU: It was not revenge, but it was because of the situation that was initiated by those people. We realised that after killing this comrade, they would also target us, so we realised that they were killing our comrades and we went out looking for them, and we found them and decided that we must deal with them.

MS LOCKHAT: Were they involved in any other incidents prior to this, the killing of your son-in-law?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, lots.

MS LOCKHAT: Can you elaborate on those incidents?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Sometimes they would stab and kill people. We were always on the lookout for them, but because they did not reside in the township, they would move from where they came and they will come to the township to conduct their affairs, and on this particular day, we were able to get hold of them and we questioned them, and they admitted to their crime.

MS LOCKHAT: In the criminal trial, it was also said that these people were also targeted because they didn't want to belong to your group, is that true?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is not true, we did not know those people.

MS LOCKHAT: Tell me, how did you come to find out that these two people actually killed your comrade, how did you come to know that it was them?

CHAIRPERSON: I think he said in response to an earlier question that the deceased, the comrade was seen in their possession on the Friday and then they went there on the Saturday and found the blood-stained weapons.

MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson, I am indebted to you.

MR MNGOMEZULU: Initially that comrade had informed us that they wanted him to collaborate with them, and he did not wish to do so. He had informed us of this three days prior to his death, and that is why we had very strong suspicions that in fact it was them who killed him. That is also why we went to that house and approached them and found those weapons and questioned them further and they admitted their act and that is when we started assaulting them, after they had admitted the act.

JUDGE DE JAGER: I've got a problem. You have told us that you suspected them of previous killings, is that correct?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did the deceased, your comrade, go to them and join them and spent time with them, if he and you people knew that those people are murderers?

MR MNGOMEZULU: We tried investigating on what their business was at the township, and we learnt that they wanted him to join them and it was evident that they collaborated with the police, because each time we had meetings, the police would shortly thereafter, arrive to disturb us. This we got from the comrade.

MS LOCKHAT: Tell me, did you also hit the deceased with iron bars?

CHAIRPERSON: When you say you, do you mean you, plural, the group or him personally?

MS LOCKHAT: The applicant personally.

CHAIRPERSON: You yourself, did you use an iron bar to assault the deceased persons or one or both of them?

MR MNGOMEZULU: No, I had a sjambok in my possession.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Could you tell me, did you - were they still conscious when you poured the petrol on them and burnt them, or were they in a coma or unconscious at that stage, what was their physical state when you started the burning?

MR MNGOMEZULU: They were still alive.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Still standing upright?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, they were still conscious.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Now who lit the fire? Who struck the match?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Samuel Nigene.

MS LOCKHAT: Tell me, wasn't it you, you also, I think one of the deceased asked for water and you said that they should give them petrol to drink rather? Is that true?

MR MNGOMEZULU: No, it was the Street Committee.

ADV SIGODI: Who is the Street Committee, who said that?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Agnes Nkosi.

MS LOCKHAT: I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Lockhat. Mr Motepe, do you have any re-examination?

MR MOTEPE: I've got no re-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: Judge de Jager, do you have any questions that you would like to ask?

JUDGE DE JAGER: It is still not clear to me why you also lied to the Amnesty Committee, in writing these letters or instructing somebody to write it on your behalf. Why did you not tell the truth in the letters?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Well, at the time I thought that they were not dissimilar to the police, but I have realised that that is not so, now that I am here.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, I still don't understand, I didn't get the answer clearly. What did you think of the TRC?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I thought they were also working with the police and I have learnt that that is not so, but it is a forum where we should all tell the truth.

ADV SIGODI: If they were with the police, if you thought that the TRC was in (indistinct) with the police, then why did you apply for amnesty?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I was not aware of the functioning of the TRC, that is why I did so at the beginning.

ADV SIGODI: I still don't understand why you would apply for amnesty to the TRC if you did not understand how the TRC operated, or what it stood for.

MR MNGOMEZULU: The police informed us that there was a TRC through which we could apply and tell the truth about everything that happened.

ADV SIGODI: And apply so that, what did you expect to get in return if you apply?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I thought that we would approach the victims of whatever actions that we had to take, and approach them and seek for their forgiveness and reconcile with them. Because whatever happened then, was because of the situation.

ADV SIGODI: So you thought that you would be able to approach the victims and try to reconcile with them? But if you kept on denying that you were involved, how did you expect to reconcile with the victims?

MR MNGOMEZULU: If it were not for the TRC, I would not be in a position to meet with those victims, therefore this is the proper forum where we can meet and discuss whatever happened in the past. It was because of the political situations, the fact that we belonged to different organisations, that prompted that situation.

ADV SIGODI: So you knew that when you filled in your application for amnesty? I am trying to understand?

CHAIRPERSON: If I may just interject here, you say in your actual application form, the form that you filled in, you indicate that you were involved in the killings, etc, political objective was to achieve, you put it down as if you were a perpetrator, then you write two letters to the Amnesty Committee, one appears on page 5 and the other on page 6, both in 1997, where you deny it, saying you were in Pietersburg, you were not there?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, I did deny the crime in the letters, but I knew that I would be called before this Committee where I would account and I do seek forgiveness.

CHAIRPERSON: I see from your application form, Mr Mngomezulu, that you say that the deceased, your son-in-law, who you said here was the Secretary of the Youth League, you describe him in the form as "the brutal murder of one of the Umkhonto weSizwe cadres", was he an MK member?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is correct.

ADV SIGODI: Your co-accused, have you been in contact with them, the people you were accused with at the trial? Samuel Nigene, Agnes Nkosi and Simon Ncuna?

MR MNGOMEZULU: We were placed in different prisons. They are in Benoni, in Modabi, one of them is in Boksburg. Simon Ncuna and myself are in the Maximum prison.

ADV SIGODI: So are you together with Simon?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know if he has applied for amnesty in respect of this?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, he is also present.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe, do you have any questions arising?

MR MOTEPE: I've got no questions Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat, do you have any questions arising?

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: I just want to check, just in relation to the amnesty application form, your first amnesty application form, I see you signed it there at the bottom on page 3, I don't know if you can just check, is that your signature on page 3?

MR MNGOMEZULU: That is correct.

MS LOCKHAT: And the others, page 7, there is the letter as well, and page 5, who signed that for you? Is that your signature on page 5 and on page 9, if Mr Motepe can just show him the signatures.

MR MNGOMEZULU: No, that is not my signature on page 7.

MS LOCKHAT: I can see that on page 3, that looked more or less like your signature. Can you read or write?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I can read Zulu a bit, and I can write the language, not very well.

MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Could I, you said Simon is here, is it Simon Mnyankene or Simon Ncuna, which one is here?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Samuel Ncuna.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Is he present in the hall today, at this hearing?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, he is present.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Is he still in prison?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, we are both in prison. The four of us are still in prison.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Do you know whether he has applied for amnesty?

MR MNGOMEZULU: Yes, he informed me that he had applied.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And the others, do you know whether they have also asked for amnesty, or do you not know?

MR MNGOMEZULU: I do not know.

MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson, if I can just come in here, I see on page 9, there is the letter and I see someone has made an amnesty number 141/96 and I think that it could be next to Simon Ncuna's name, I don't know if you can just - of the Bundle, so I would like to just follow that up as well, after this application.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, perhaps you can establish it from the person himself, if he is here.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And can you perhaps tell us, are there any of the family of the victims present?

MS LOCKHAT: None of the families of the victims are present.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mngomezulu, that concludes your testimony.

MR MNGOMEZULU: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe?

MR MOTEPE IN ARGUMENT: Chairperson, the applicant here is an illiterate person. It is clear that there are some mistakes that happened during the filling of forms. Myself, during consultation with the applicant, it was very difficult to get through him and one can understand why there are such mistakes.

In my submission, he has associated himself with the murders, it is clear that he was there during the kidnappings and the assaults. He clearly associated himself and this incident itself, it is as a result of the killing of their cadre, it was in retaliation of the killing of the Secretary of the Youth League, and that in itself, it does indicate that there was, it was not - let me rather say that there were suggestions that Mzibinzi, the person who was killed, was his son-in-law, it is clear from his evidence that that particular fact, did not play part in deciding the killing of these particular people, it was purely on a political basis that he was a member of the Youth League, and he was killed by the people who they perceived as working with the system at that particular time. In my submission, it is very clear that the applicant did commit those particular acts, in pursuance of a political objective at that particular time as the situation at that time was very volatile. The applicant here has been very clear in his answers, he has sought to answer very directly. It is my submission that he gave us all the information that is required for him to get amnesty. In my submission, he does qualify, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Motepe. Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Chairperson. The only issues in relation to this application is indeed the previous

application form of the applicant that was submitted to the Commission in 1996 and then the previous letters from the applicant, which is also, which is in contrast to that initial application that he makes. It was in the Commission's view that he was denying guilt to this, after receiving the subsequent letters, but we were still uncertain as to what his position was, because of the criminal record that we received. I think we have to take into account the fact that the applicant is not that, although he says he can read and it seems to me that the signatures are not the same and other people did write these for him and I think the initial application was, I don't even think that was written by him, he just signed it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think it is quite clear if you take a look at the signature, the rest of the writing, it is not the same person.

MS LOCKHAT: Yes, exactly. I think the applicant did not take the Commission into his confidence.

CHAIRPERSON: That is quite clear.

MS LOCKHAT: That is quite clear.

CHAIRPERSON: He has admitted he lied?

MS LOCKHAT: Yes. But we must also look at the fact that people do tend to stick to the story that they used in the criminal record, and my experience with older folk, it just seems that I had previous applications where they stuck to the same story as well that they used in the criminal trial.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, he was found guilty in the criminal trial, the Court found that he was there and that he lied to the Court. Now he has come and he has said well, he did lie and he also lied to us the same story. He is not a very good liar, but he has at least admitted to lying.

MS LOCKHAT: Yes Chairperson. And it seems that the applicant also didn't have a clear idea as to what the Commission was all about, he thought he was only going to come to reconcile with the victims.

CHAIRPERSON: He was suspicious with it, because I think if he was told by the police of it, he thought maybe there is some sort of link.

MS LOCKHAT: Exactly, by the police, correct. Correct Chairperson. That is basically my submission in this respect.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Motepe, do you have any response?

MR MOTEPE: I have nothing further Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, we will reserve our decision in this matter and hope to get out a decision as soon as possible. Mr Mngomezulu, thank you Mr Mngomezulu, that concludes your hearing.

MR MNGOMEZULU: Thank you Chair.

ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson, I just need to check whether we can proceed with the next amnesty application?

MR MOTEPE: Yes, we can proceed.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that Mr Sithole?

MS LOCKHAT: Mr Khumalo.

MR MOTEPE: That is correct. Can I call them? The applicant speaks Zulu as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Is this Mr Sithole?

MR MOTEPE: That is correct, it is Mr Sithole.

GODFREY B. SITHOLE: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Sithole. Mr Motepe? We do have an affidavit that you handed to us yesterday?

EXAMINATION BY MR MOTEPE: That is correct. Before we start Chairperson, the applicant has indicated to me that he needs to add some further information on the particular affidavit.

CHAIRPERSON: You can lead him as much as you want, Mr Motepe.

MR MOTEPE: Mr Sithole, we have already filed a supplementary affidavit. You confirm the contents and the correctness thereof, is that correct?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe, if we could mark this as Exhibit A.

MR MOTEPE: Thank you Chair. You also indicated to me this morning, that there is some information that you wanted included in this particular affidavit. Can you kindly explain what that information is, about the names that you forgot?

MR SITHOLE: I was saying that there are some other names that I forgot of some people, that is the information I was letting you aware of.

MR MOTEPE: Are those the people that were involved in the incidents referred to in this affidavit?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, they have not been included.

MR MOTEPE: But are they in relation to this incidents, were they with you when these incidents were committed, what is the situation?

MR SITHOLE: No, they were not present when this incident took place. These were people who were around.

MR MOTEPE: Can you explain what their relevance is then, why do you feel you should mention them?

MR SITHOLE: No, I was only informing you in the event that I am asked about them, because ...

JUDGE DE JAGER: Could you tell us the names of those persons you want to mention?

MR SITHOLE: As I was saying, I have forgotten their names, that was one thing I was reminding him this morning.

JUDGE DE JAGER: But do you remember their names now?

MR SITHOLE: No, I don't.

JUDGE DE JAGER: So you cannot give us any names?

MR SITHOLE: I cannot.

MR MOTEPE: Chairperson, perhaps we should leave it there, thank you. I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, before you proceed, Mr Sithole, you have also completed an application form and there is also a letter from yourself to the TRC in which it contains certain information relating to the incident, dated October 1997 and there is also a statement made by yourself, in the file, in the Bundle before us. Do you confirm the correctness of those documents that you submitted to the TRC?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, I do.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Lockhat.

MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Mr Chairperson. These incidents, you said you were not a member of the Self Defence Unit, is that correct?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, what was that, you were not a member?

MS LOCKHAT: He was not a member of the Self Defence Unit. Did you see yourself as a supporter as you stated in your amnesty application form, a supporter of the ANC?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

MS LOCKHAT: Did you attend any meetings relating to ANC activities or Self Defence Unit meetings or anything like that?

MR SITHOLE: No, our leaders were the ones attending such meetings.

MS LOCKHAT: But weren't there meetings where everybody could attend, the whole community for instance?

MR SITHOLE: No, the leaders of the SDU's and their seniors as well, will be the ones attending.

MS LOCKHAT: In 1993 you and Thami Khumalo hijacked this Mercedes Benz and you met people and you received money therefore, is that correct?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

MS LOCKHAT: And you said you got orders from people to do this? Is that correct?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

MS LOCKHAT: Can you just tell us, because you mention a whole lot of people's names in - can you tell us who gave you that specific order in that incident?

MR SITHOLE: The people who were giving orders to us was Ephraim Pitso, Stanley Ndingana.

CHAIRPERSON: Just repeat that name please Mr Sithole?

MR SITHOLE: Ephraim Pitso, Stanley Ndingana. And Mr Zongo, and Mr Zongo.

MS LOCKHAT: Wasn't Mr Ephraim Pitso your landlord at some stage?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, he was.

MS LOCKHAT: And Mr Stanley his neighbour?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, he was the neighbour, indeed.

MS LOCKHAT: And aren't they also in prison with you?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, I found them there already.

MS LOCKHAT: So are you saying that these people gave you the orders to commit this offence?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

MS LOCKHAT: Did they belong to any organisation?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, they are members of the ANC.

CHAIRPERSON: Did they hold any position there or office or rank or anything else?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, because they were in the senior management or the senior structures.

CHAIRPERSON: When you say the senior structures, you are talking about those structures as they existed in Katlehong at the time?

MR SITHOLE: No, that was in the district level, in Katlehong.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: Thank you Chairperson. Did you, what were you deciding to do with the money that you got from this car hijacking?

MR SITHOLE: We would take the money to Mr Zongo, and he will then distribute it for the purchasing of the ammunition.

MS LOCKHAT: And who is this Mr Zongo?

MR SITHOLE: Mr Zongo is one of the leaders, or was one of the leaders.

MS LOCKHAT: Of what party?

MR SITHOLE: Of the ANC.

MS LOCKHAT: And how did you get into contact with Mr Zongo?

MR SITHOLE: I knew him through Ephraim and Mr Ndingana.

MS LOCKHAT: Just the people that had given you the money, the R10 000-00, you said it was given to you by one Mike and you mentioned some other white people as well, is that correct?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

MS LOCKHAT: But your fellow applicant, Mr Khumalo says that Mr Zongo showed you two black males from Maputo, they were unknown to you and, well they liaised that you got the money, so your stories don't really coincide?

MR SITHOLE: You see the two men are the ones that we have been introduced to by Mr Zongo, they are the ones also who took us to these white men where we left the vehicle or the car. They left subsequently, the following day, that is when we went there to fetch or collect the money, but in the absence of the men.

MS LOCKHAT: And these people that they mentioned from Maputo, is that an incorrect story or what?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, they are foreigners, but knew the other gentlemen, I think in connection with ammunitions and such things.

MS LOCKHAT: And the second incident, the 6th of December 1993, where did you obtain that car from?

MR SITHOLE: The incident relating to the 6th, I was not there, but the person who had come to get a statement from me, I informed him about it and he said there is no problem, he will sort it out.

CHAIRPERSON: That incident does not appear on the application form, is that correct, it is only the one of the 1st of December?

MS LOCKHAT: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: I know, it is mentioned here, but - so I take it Mr Sithole, you are not applying for amnesty in respect of the incident that took place on the 6th of December?

MR SITHOLE: No, because I wasn't convicted for it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS LOCKHAT: And tell me, did you just do these hijackings to obtain and to sell the cars, or what was your main purpose for hijacking these cars?

MR SITHOLE: The intention was to get money so we may be able to buy ammunition, because of the situation that had prevailed at the time, violence and volatile, at the same time we felt we need to get more ammunition and to augment the weapons we have. Now, we felt obliged to go that direction.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, after the 1st of December or on the 1st of December, was that your first dealings with this person called Mike or had you done business with him before?

MR SITHOLE: No, it was the second time then.

CHAIRPERSON: Second time?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What does Mike do, does he run a second hand car shop or something like that? Who is he?

MR SITHOLE: I did not know Mike quite well, as I said that we were introduced to him by the two men from Mozambique. I was - he was a member of a Vehicle Squad, working in Benoni.

CHAIRPERSON: With the police?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And you say before this one for which you were arrested, the 1st of December, you had sold another motor vehicle to him before?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

JUDGE DE JAGER: For how much?

MR SITHOLE: R3 000-00.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And what did you do with the money?

MR SITHOLE: We took the money to Mr Zongo.

CHAIRPERSON: At the time that you were doing these dealings with Mike, did you know that he was a member of the Vehicle Squad in the police?

MR SITHOLE: No, I did not know.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe, do you have any re-examination?

MR MOTEPE: I've got no re-examination, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Judge de Jager?

JUDGE DE JAGER: What would you have done if these people opposed your hijacking? Supposed they were not willing to hand over the keys or hand over the cars, what would you have done?

MR SITHOLE: Well, I really don't know, to be honest with you. We tried to plead with them until such time that he will agree to give us the keys.

JUDGE DE JAGER: But you didn't plead with him, you had a gun? Wasn't that so?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, that is the case, but I don't think we would have shot at him or them.

JUDGE DE JAGER: What was the purpose of having this gun?

MR SITHOLE: That was to intimidate mostly.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And do you want us to believe if they didn't cooperate, you would have turned away and you wouldn't have shot them?

CHAIRPERSON: They would have pleaded, they would have negotiated the hijack.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Yes. Is that what you ...

MR SITHOLE: Yes, yes.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And if they wouldn't agree?

MR SITHOLE: We will try to chase him away if he does not cooperate with us.

JUDGE DE JAGER: How would you chase him away?

MR SITHOLE: We will tell him to go and run after him, so that we can disappear as well.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And if he wouldn't go, what would you do then?

MR SITHOLE: We will try our best, we will get him where we want him to be.

CHAIRPERSON: Adv Sigodi? Why are Mr Pitso and Mr Ndingana in prison, do you know?

MR SITHOLE: No, I don't know, I don't know that much.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know where Mr Zongo is?

MR SITHOLE: The last time I had heard, he was residing in Siluma View in Vosloorus.

CHAIRPERSON: So this money that you got from Mike, it was in cash, was it?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, it was cash.

CHAIRPERSON: R10 000, did you count it?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, we counted it.

CHAIRPERSON: And you say that you took that money and gave it over to Mr Zongo?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: How did it come about that you were arrested for this December the 1st, robbery?

MR SITHOLE: No, the one relating to the 1st of December, we were never arrested for it.

CHAIRPERSON: Which one were you convicted for?

MR SITHOLE: It was the 1st, but we were not arrested for that one, but we were arrested for the one of the 6th.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, you were arrested for the 6th, and then it came out that there was also this. The 6th, was that some sort of trap situation?

MR SITHOLE: Yes.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And there you received R15 000-00?

CHAIRPERSON: He says - did you receive the - you said you weren't involved?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, we received it.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I can't quite understand on the one of the 6th, because in your evidence you said that you weren't involved in the robbery of the 6th, is that correct, but were you there when the money was received? If you could just tell us what the position is?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, that is the case because he came to us as well, because he was one of them, I knew, he came to us that we need to take the car and he had already consulted with Mr Zongo and took it to Mike. That is where we were arrested, on our way back.

CHAIRPERSON: I mean, this is quite a lot of money we are talking about, you have spoken about a robbery for R3 000-00, then on the 1st, there is one where you get R10 000-00, and now on the 6th, there is one where you get R15 000-00, that is a lot of ammunition? Were you getting orders to hijack every week?

MR SITHOLE: No, it was not happening weekly.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, from the 1st to the 6th, is less than a week. Did you get an order on both occasions, you or Khumalo got an order to effect a hijack to get money?

MR SITHOLE: Yes, we would receive orders to that effect, on the 1st and the 6th, that was the first of its kind, that it happened so close, the two incidents happened so close.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know why these people should order you to indulge in car hijacking in order to get money and they should not ask members of the SDU to do that, because you were not a member of the SDU, you say you were just a supporter, you were not even a member of the ANC, why should they order you who weren't in one of the structures, if I could put it that way, to do this work for them, when they had SDU's and they had people who were involved in the protection of the community?

MR SITHOLE: As I said earlier on, as I was living in Pitso and a member as well, and I was part of the community's struggle. The reason why the SDU people were not around, it was because they were always occupied with patrolling at night, and we were not into that ourselves.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Motepe, do you have any questions arising? Sorry.

JUDGE DE JAGER: What did they give you for your trouble that you had taken and the risk that you had taken? Did they give you say R1 000-00 or some part of the money?

MR SITHOLE: No, we were not paid for that. We would be given money for transport purposes.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Now, how much did they give you for transport purposes?

MR SITHOLE: It will be around R150-00.

JUDGE DE JAGER: On each occasion?

MR SITHOLE: Not on each occasion.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Even when you get R15 000-00, they are only giving you this peanuts of R150-00?

MR SITHOLE: No, the R15 000-00, we did not even get to use it, because we were arrested and the money was confiscated from us.

JUDGE DE JAGER: But what were you promised on that occasion?

MR SITHOLE: There was nothing that we were promised, because we did not even get to them on that day.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe, do you have any questions arising? Sorry, Adv Sigodi wishes to put a question.

ADV SIGODI: This Mike who gave you the money, did he give evidence against you in your criminal trial, the undercover policeman?

MR SITHOLE: No, he did not do that.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know what his full names are?

MR SITHOLE: I know him as Sergeant Mike, I know him as Michael Sher.

ADV SIGODI: And do you know which Branch he worked from?

MR SITHOLE: He was in Benoni at the Hyper Square.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know how Mr Zongo had contacts with this Mike, or he had come to know this Mike? Do you know how Mike was identified as a person who had a potential to buy these hijacked cars?

MR SITHOLE: Mike did not know Mr Zongo. We knew Mike through the two Mozambique men. As to how they knew one another and Mr Zongo, I really don't know.

ADV SIGODI: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Was Mr Khumalo a member of the SDU? Thami Khumalo?

MR SITHOLE: No, I don't know, because we were not in the same area, from the same area.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions arising, Mr Motepe?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR MOTEPE: Mr Sithole, besides this subsistence moneys for transport you received, this R150-00, was there any other reward that you received for your troubles?

MR SITHOLE: No.

MR MOTEPE: And can you tell us what the situation was like in the community at that particular time, was it a peaceful situation, why did you need this particular arms, what was happening at the time?

MR SITHOLE: At the time, there was this conflict between the hostel dwellers and the ANC people, the violence was rife at the time, because of the presence of the hostel in the area, the section that I resided in.

MR MOTEPE: I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat, any questions arising?

MS LOCKHAT: No questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sithole, thank you, that concludes your testimony, Would this be a convenient time to take the tea adjournment, I see it is ten past eleven. Yes, we will now take the short tea adjournment.

MS LOCKHAT: All rise.

ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe, are you calling Mr Khumalo now?

MR MOTEPE: That is correct Chairperson, it is Thami Khumalo the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR MOTEPE: I am appearing on his behalf.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

THAMI KHUMALO: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Motepe?

EXAMINATION BY MR MOTEPE: Mr Khumalo, you are the applicant in this matter, and you have filled in an application form for amnesty, is that correct?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MR MOTEPE: In your application form, you state that this application is in connection with the armed robbery, is that correct?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MR MOTEPE: You also mention that the date of the robbery was the 8th, whereas your colleague has mentioned that it was on the 1st. Which is the correct situation, can you just explain to the Committee?

MR KHUMALO: The correct date of the robbery was the 1st of December. I think the 8th was on that date when we were arrested.

CHAIRPERSON: So we will amend paragraph 9(a)(ii) to read the 1st of December, rather than the 8th?

MR MOTEPE: That is correct Chairperson.

JUDGE DE JAGER: According to the records here, there was a charge on page 36, and they were charged with robberies on the 26th of October, the 1st of December and the 6th of December.

CHAIRPERSON: That is pages 35, 36 and 37 of the Bundle.

MR MOTEPE: My understanding is that similarly with the previous applicant, they were arrested, but the conviction was on the offence of the 1st.

CHAIRPERSON: There were acquittals in respect of the others, is that correct?

MR MOTEPE: That is correct, that is my understanding.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR MOTEPE: Can you just explain to the Committee, at the time of the commission of this robbery, were you a member of any organisation?

MR KHUMALO: I will say I was a supporter of the ANC.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Just a moment.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, sorry Mr Motepe, the answer to that last question was I was a supporter of the ANC?

INTERPRETER: Yes.

MR MOTEPE: Now, where were you residing at this particular stage?

MR KHUMALO: At Siluma View.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, if you could just repeat that, whereabout, which View?

INTERPRETER: Siluma, S-i-l-u-m-a.

MR MOTEPE: On the day of the commission of this robbery, can you kindly explain the circumstances that led to it?

MR KHUMALO: We received an order that we should go out an commit a robbery for the reason that we required equipment, that we could use to protect ourselves as the community because of the violence that was going on. It was mentioned that we should acquire vehicles which we would sell and be able to get some finances.

MR MOTEPE: Can you tell us who gave you that order?

MR KHUMALO: Mr Zongo.

MR MOTEPE: And the order was given to yourself and who, were you alone?

MR KHUMALO: It was myself and my co-accused, Godfrey Sithole.

MR MOTEPE: You said the order was to go and rob, is that right?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MR MOTEPE: Were you told specifically what to rob?

MR KHUMALO: They were already coming from a meeting and I think they did discuss the fact that we should rob or hijack vehicles that we could sell to acquire funds, because at that time, we were short of finances.

MR MOTEPE: If I get you well, you received your order on the 1st of December, is that correct?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MR MOTEPE: Around what time, the time when you received the order?

MR KHUMALO: Around nine or ten in the morning.

MR MOTEPE: yes, and after getting the order, what did you do?

MR KHUMALO: I was informed that Godfrey had already been told about it, and thereafter I went to him and we remained together and left that afternoon to carry out the order.

MR MOTEPE: You left in the afternoon, whereto?

MR KHUMALO: We went to Alrode.

MR MOTEPE: And you have testified that Godfrey had already identified the car, that was your information at the time?

MR KHUMALO: No, he did not know. We were together and we just spotted the vehicle and discussed it amongst ourselves, we think it is proper to target that one.

MR MOTEPE: How did you identify your targets? Was it because of its value, was it any other attribute that you used, how did you identify the targets?

MR KHUMALO: We were on the lookout for vehicles that were of value, because we understood that weapons were expensive, therefore the money that we were going to get from the vehicle, should be able to cover the expenses of the weapons.

MR MOTEPE: After you identified this vehicle, then what happened?

MR KHUMALO: It was in the afternoon and we were aware that the owner of the vehicle, might be coming at any time, because it was around the time when people were knocking off work. We then waited there and he approached and when he did, we approached him and we told him that we wanted the vehicle's keys.

MR MOTEPE: That was before he entered the car?

MR KHUMALO: No, we approached him after he had already entered the vehicle.

MR MOTEPE: Yes, you demanded the keys, and then what happened?

MR KHUMALO: He just requested us not to harm him, and we informed him that as far as he co-operated, he would not be harmed. He then handed the keys over to us, and we took the vehicle and left.

MR MOTEPE: So you didn't harm him at all?

MR KHUMALO: No, not at all.

MR MOTEPE: Then what happened after you took the keys?

MR KHUMALO: My friend then drove the vehicle to Siluma and we showed the vehicle to Mr Zongo and it was driven into the garage. On the following day, he introduced us to the two gentlemen from Maputo and they informed us that they were going to accompany us to Westonaria and that is where everything was settled.

MR MOTEPE: You said you parked the car in the garage, which garage are you referring to?

MR KHUMALO: Mr Zongo's garage.

MR MOTEPE: At Mr Zongo's home?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MR MOTEPE: Then you left with this two Mozambicans, is that correct? What happened thereafter?

MR KHUMALO: On our arrival at Westonaria, we encountered a certain gentleman by the name of Peter and these Mozambicans talked to him. He informed us that he would have to contact Mike, who was supposedly his boss. We left the vehicle there. The following day, we went back. I was together with Godfrey and we did find Mike who was satisfied with the vehicle and he gave us the R10 000-00 that we demanded for the vehicle. We then returned back to Spruit with the R10 000-00.

MR MOTEPE: How did you return back to Spruit, did you use taxi's or did you have your own car? How did you return back to Spruit?

MR KHUMALO: From Westonaria to Baragwanath, we were driven by Peter and from there, we boarded taxi's to Spruit.

MR MOTEPE: On your arrival at Spruit, what happened?

MR KHUMALO: On our arrival, we informed Mr Zongo that everything had gone well, and we handed the money over to him, and he thanked us for the job well done.

MR MOTEPE: Did he just thank you by word, or did he give you any reward?

MR KHUMALO: There was no reward involved. He just said that you had done a good job, and that was the end of it.

MR MOTEPE: Now, in your operations, you used transport, am I right, you used taxi's, am I right?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MR MOTEPE: Now, where did you get the money for the taxi fares and ...

MR KHUMALO: We received such moneys from Mr Zongo. We would inform him if we needed money or if there was no need for him to give us money for transport, we would also inform him.

MR MOTEPE: Mr Zongo, what was his status in the community, what was he? Was he a member of any organisation?

MR KHUMALO: I would say he was an ANC member. In the community, he was called Baba. I would say he was the community leader.

MR MOTEPE: Now the events on the 6th of December, can you kindly explain what happened on that particular day?

MR KHUMALO: On that day Thulani Hlatzwayo came to me and said there was a vehicle that was for sale and we directed him to Mr Zongo and they discussed the matter, after which Mr Zongo informed us that he had spoken to Thulani and the vehicle should then be taken to Westonaria. On Thulani's return we went to Westonaria and everything went well and we received a sum of R15 000-00 for that vehicle. On our return, Peter drove us back and we were arrested on the way.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Motepe, why did Thulani Hlatzwayo approach you about selling a vehicle?

MR KHUMALO: We knew each other, and we used to discuss these matters with him.

CHAIRPERSON: Was Thulani, was that his own vehicle or had he stolen it?

MR KHUMALO: He informed us that it was stolen.

CHAIRPERSON: Was Thulani Hlatzwayo a car thief?

MR KHUMALO: I would not say so, because I knew him as an SDU member.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe?

MR MOTEPE: This - the car by Hlatzwayo, you say that he told you that it was - was it stolen or it was robbed? Did he tell you that?

MR KHUMALO: He did say that it had been hijacked.

MR MOTEPE: But you were not there at the hijack stage, when it was hijacked, you just entered the picture when the car was to be sold?

MR KHUMALO: No, I was not present.

MR MOTEPE: For Thulani to come to you specifically, not to other members of the community, what was the reason? Was it maybe because of your connections, why did he come to you specifically?

MR KHUMALO: He knew that we were involved in such activities.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Didn't he tell you that he received orders to hijack a car or did he do it out of his own?

MR KHUMALO: He did state that they had received such orders from his Branch seniors.

JUDGE DE JAGER: So why didn't he go back to his Commander and tell him "listen, I have carried out your order", why did he come to you?

MR KHUMALO: I am not certain, but I think he had discussed the matter with his Commanders, but when he arrived, he was seeking a meeting with Mr Zongo and that is where we took him. Mr Zongo came back to us to issue an order, therefore from what I saw, I assumed that they knew one another.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe?

MR MOTEPE: What is the situation after a person robs a car, that particular time, a person robs a car, does he come to you first to tell you about, so that you give him connections of where to go and sell this car, you said you were in the selling branch, sort of? You were selling these cars. Now this person, does he come to you first or does he report first to the Commander? What was the common approach?

MR KHUMALO: Your question was quite long, please repeat.

MR MOTEPE: I am sorry for that. After a person steals a car, rather you are in the selling branch, is that right?

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps we could ask him, you said that you sold this vehicle on the 1st of December, was that the first time you had sold a stolen car or a robbed car?

MR KHUMALO: It was not the first sale.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe?

MR MOTEPE: But you have already explained to one of the Chair members that on that particular instance, Thulani might have reported to Mr Zongo, but you are not aware, you don't have first hand knowledge, is that right? You cannot say whether Thulani reported to Mr Zongo or not?

CHAIRPERSON: My impression was that Thulani came to him and then he took Thulani to Zongo?

MR MOTEPE: He did explain thereafter that Thulani might have reported first to Zongo?

CHAIRPERSON: No, he said he might have reported first to his Commander. He said that he understood Thulani to be a member of the SDU, then Mr de Jager said well, if he - and that he said that he had got orders to rob that vehicle, then Mr de Jager said, well, why then did he come to you and not go to his Commander and he said "well, he might have gone to his Commander", but he came to him and then he took him to Zongo.

MR MOTEPE: Perhaps I missed, I mixed the Commander with Zongo. But the point was that there was a report before he came to ...

CHAIRPERSON: No, he wasn't sure. He said he might have, he didn't know.

MR MOTEPE: That is correct, he was not sure. Now, we were at the stage where you were arrested by the police. What happened to the money, the R15 000-00? You had testified that you received R15 000-00, when you were arrested by the police, what happened to the money?

MR KHUMALO: It was confiscated by the police.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Khumalo, did you get the impression that what happened on the 6th was some sort of trap, police trap?

MR KHUMALO: No, we did not see anything.

CHAIRPERSON: How did it come about that you were arrested?

MR KHUMALO: We were on our way back to Siluma and Peter was driving us. He informed us that there was a car behind us that was flickering its lights for him to stop. He then stopped and when he did so, some people who were in their private clothes, came out of this car and we realised that they were police and that is how we were arrested together with Peter. On our arrival at the police station, he was not taken inside, but he was just left outside the police station.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Mr Motepe?

MR MOTEPE: Mr Khumalo, you said this money that you acquired from hijackings were used, were going to be used rather to purchase arms, is that right?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MR MOTEPE: What was the situation at the particular time in the township, why was there a need to purchase these arms?

MR KHUMALO: At that time, there was a war situation in the township, the war was between the ANC and the IFP who were residents of the hostel. We were of the belief that the IFP was supported by whites and we had to protect ourselves because they would attack and kill people in the township, therefore we had no other option, but to acquire weapons to protect ourselves.

MR MOTEPE: I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Motepe. Ms Lockhat, do you have any questions?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: Yes, just a few thank you Chairperson. In your amnesty application form you said that the orders were given to you on behalf, this was conducted on behalf and approval of the residents as a mass and that is where you basically got your orders from, can you explain that to us, how did that happen? It is on page 10 of the Bundle.

MR KHUMALO: As I have already mentioned, there was this war going on and there was a need for weapons. Mr Zongo is the person who came up with the idea that the community needs weapons to protect itself, therefore we should be able to raise funds for that purpose. That was how it transpired that some of us should go out to carry out robberies for those reasons. Mr Zongo is the person who informed us about the community, that is the information he would give us when he returned from meetings, community meetings.

MS LOCKHAT: As an SDU member, did you attend any meetings?

MR KHUMALO: No, I did not attend meetings because our activities were underground, undercover, because Mr Zongo was concerned that there were informers within the community who might endanger us.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, are you saying Mr Khumalo that at an open mass meeting of the community, a decision was taken that cars be hijacked?

MR KHUMALO: I would say so because that was information that we received from Mr Zongo.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: Tell me, the day of the incident on the 1st of December, were you armed on that day?

MR KHUMALO: Yes.

MS LOCKHAT: And can you tell us what did you have on you, what arms and ammunition did you have on you?

MR KHUMALO: It was a small automatic firearm.

CHAIRPERSON: A pistol? Do you know what sort, what calibre?

MR KHUMALO: It is a small firearm that can take six bullets.

CHAIRPERSON: Was it a pistol or a revolver?

MR KHUMALO: It is similar to the police service firearm.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: Where did you get this firearm from, from whom?

MR KHUMALO: I received it from Mr Zongo.

MS LOCKHAT: And tell me, after you had given the money to Mr Zongo, do you know whether he in fact bought arms and ammunition for the community with that money?

MR KHUMALO: I would say so, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: The question was do you know whether he did, not do you think he did. Do you know of your own knowledge whether he purchased weapons or whatever, ammunition?

MR KHUMALO: Yes, I would sometimes see firearms.

JUDGE DE JAGER: When did you give him the first money, on what date?

MR KHUMALO: I did not understand that.

JUDGE DE JAGER: When was your first robbery and the selling of a vehicle, when did you give money to Zongo?

MR KHUMALO: I do not recall. The only dates that I remember is the 1st of December, because that was the date that was referred to in court.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but was that the first time you had given money to Zongo, which money was the proceeds of a robbed or stolen vehicle?

MR KHUMALO: No.

JUDGE DE JAGER: On how many occasions before that, did you give him money?

MR KHUMALO: The R10 000-00 that was handed over to Mr Zongo, was the second instance that I know of.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And how long before that instance did you give him money and how much?

MR KHUMALO: I think it was about R3 000-00 but I do not remember the date.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Wasn't it only a few days before the 1st of December, in fact the 26th of November, if that was the robbery? October?

MR KHUMALO: A couple of days had elapsed.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any re-examination Mr Motepe?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR MOTEPE: I do have. Mr Khumalo, you had testified earlier about Thulani who also had a hijacked car, are you - or rather were you the only ones who were supplying Mr Zongo with moneys from stolen cars, was it only you, Thulani and Boy or did you know of any other people who also supplied Zongo the money?

MR KHUMALO: I was aware, I thought it was just us, because we had volunteered to do these activities at the meeting.

MR MOTEPE: You thought it was just you, but are you sure that it was only you? You are sure? You mean that you are sure that it was only you, or there were other people, I didn't get it clearly?

MR KHUMALO: That is what I think because I was aware of just one, of our group. There were other groups that existed, but I was not aware of what their activities were.

MR MOTEPE: So if Mr Zongo had received some moneys from some of the people and he bought arms, would you know about that? Would you have first hand knowledge of him buying arms?

MR KHUMALO: No, I would not.

MR MOTEPE: So you used to see arms, but you did not know when for example were they bought, is that right?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MR MOTEPE: I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Motepe. Judge de Jager, do you have any questions?

JUDGE DE JAGER: No, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Adv Sigodi?

ADV SIGODI: Just one aspect I want to clarify. Mr Khumalo, you made a statement to the TRC, didn't you, the statement which has been signed presumably by you on pages I, J, K and L after page 9, after the form. Have you got that?

CHAIRPERSON: Just immediately prior to page 11? The typed version is on page F.

MR MOTEPE: What particular page?

ADV SIGODI: It is J, the hand-written page, the hand-written J.

MR MOTEPE: Okay, thank you.

ADV SIGODI: Do you confirm that you made that statement to the TRC?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

ADV SIGODI: Yes, okay, if you look on the second paragraph, you mention that as you were hijacking this man with the Mercedes Benz, Godfrey Sithole, the first applicant searched this man, do you see that? Godfrey found nothing from him and take away his watch, do you confirm that you said that?

MR KHUMALO: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: Did he in fact take away the watch?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

ADV SIGODI:

do you confirm that?

MR KHUMALO: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know what happened to the watch afterwards?

MR KHUMALO: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: What happened to it?

MR KHUMALO: It was given to Mr Zongo.

CHAIRPERSON: Why? Why did he take the watch if he asked you to rob motor vehicles? Why take a watch and give it to Mr Zongo?

MR KHUMALO: We required anything of value that could help us in our fund-raising campaign, particularly items made of gold. Those would be ideal for fund-raising.

CHAIRPERSON: While you are on that, sorry Adv Sigodi, if you take a look at page 36, you also took, or allegedly took his wallet and pens, is that correct? You were charged with stealing his wallet, pens and watch, as well as the car, and his ID document. Did you take his wallet and pen as well or did Sithole take his wallet and pen as well?

MR KHUMALO: We only found those things in the car, but I was not charged for that.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, this is your charge sheet here, I mean this is the charge sheet, this is a copy of the charge sheet. This comes from the court records.

MR KHUMALO: I would not dispute that. They used Afrikaans in court and I do not know the language, so I was not aware that there were such ...

JUDGE DE JAGER: Sorry, I didn't follow the previous answer. We only found that in the car, or in the court?

INTERPRETER: Car.

CHAIRPERSON: In the car, that is the wallet, the pens.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And the ID document?

MR KHUMALO: Yes, those items were found in the car. Not that we removed them from him, but were in the car.

CHAIRPERSON: Adv Sigodi?

ADV SIGODI: Thank you. That is all Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you a member of the SDU?

MR KHUMALO: I would say so.

CHAIRPERSON: What do you mean "I would say so", are you not sure or were you?

MR KHUMALO: I will put it this way, after my arrest, I learnt that some people had been registered and because we, I was part of the group that protected the community, that is what we called ourselves, SDU's.

CHAIRPERSON: So you only heard after your arrest that you were registered as an SDU, but when you were doing these things, you were unaware of that?

MR KHUMALO: Yes, I would put it that way.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe, do you have any questions arising?

MR MOTEPE: I've got no questions, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Khumalo, that concludes your testimony.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you leading any further evidence, Mr Motepe?

MR MOTEPE: No further evidence, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: No further evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motepe?

MR MOTEPE IN ARGUMENT: Chairperson and members of the Committee, this sort of applications, whenever they are mentioned, one will raise eyebrows, especially in the circumstances we are living in today, where the hijackings are the order of the day. But perhaps we should just think back of the situation when communities were being attacked, riddled with violence and when the people who are attacking them, usually had sophisticated weaponry behind them, either by assistance of the State or otherwise. Unfortunately the communities at that particular times, did not have those sort of weapons and they needed the weapons desperately. One would concede that some of the methods that were used, were a bit unconventional, like hijacking cars obviously, but the community found itself in a desperate situation where they had to survive, and one of the decisions that was taken as the applicants have already testified, was that cars should be hijacked, items of value should be acquired and sold and the moneys used to buy those particular

weapons. The applicants cannot themselves say that they did see Mr Zongo buying weapons, but they had their orders from community leaders that they must go hijack cars and they brought back the moneys to Mr Zongo. There is nothing to suggest that they were working for their own pockets, that they actually received any reward. In fact what they received was what one would term as subsistence allowance, transport moneys and so forth. The applicants in their testimony perhaps they were a bit shaky there and there, but if one looks at the totality of their application, the essence is that yes, we have committed robbery, yes, we received moneys for the robbery and we handed the money to Mr Zongo. These events happened some five, six years ago, and one cannot be expected to be accurate to this day about some of the events. In my submission Chairperson, the applicants have satisfied the requirements of getting amnesty. They have given enough information, not one hundred percent satisfactory in all respects, but it is in my submission, the kind of evidence that thus entitle them to amnesty. They wanted to acquire arms to protect their community and that was the political objective that was sought to be achieved. I've got nothing further to say.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Motepe. Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Chairperson. My submissions are the following in terms of the first applicant, that

is Mr Sithole. The first fact that he was not a member of the SDU's, he never attended any meetings in that area which can indicate to us that he was politically active, the people that he stated that had given him orders, were his landlord Ephraim and then their neighbour Stanley, who also happens to be in prison with him. It seems it would be easy to choose them as people giving orders, because they could probably corroborate all of this for them. In terms of, in my submission, this is purely criminal acts on the part of the applicant. In terms of the second applicant, in his application form, he stated that he was an ANC supporter and then in the later submission to the TRC, he states that he was a member of the Self Defence Unit. In his evidence he stated that he was a member, but he never attended any meetings, that he was reliant on Mr Zongo to furnish him with information and that he was acting on one would say an order given by the community at large, which also seems absurd in the circumstances. And then later, under cross-examination, he stated that afterwards he found out that he was a member of the SDU, so there is so many contradictions regarding his political affiliation. It is also my submission that these acts were basically criminal activities and that both applicants' amnesty applications be refused on that basis, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any response, Mr Motepe?

MR MOTEPE: I've got no response Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. That then brings us to the conclusion of this particular hearing, the applications of Messrs Sithole and Khumalo. We will reserve our decision in the matter and hand down the decision as soon as possible. Mr Motepe, does that bring your representations here to an end? I would like to thank you for your assistance that you have given to us over the past couple of days, thank you very much.

MR MOTEPE: Thank you sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR MOTEPE: Chairperson, may I be excused?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly Mr Motepe. Do you want us to reconvene or what, are you ready to proceed with the next matter now?

MS LOCKHAT: Chairperson, I am ready to proceed, I just want to see whether the legal representative and the applicants, or unless we can adjourn for lunch, but we don't know whether lunch is available.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what we will do is, we will take a five minute adjournment.

MS LOCKHAT: Just a short adjournment.

CHAIRPERSON: And you let us know and then we proceed, because lunch might only come at quarter past one or something like that.

MS LOCKHAT: Correct Chairperson. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: We will take a five minute adjournment before proceeding with the next matter.

MS LOCKHAT: All rise.

ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: We commence with the application of Mr Hoffman Boy Mhlongo. I would at this stage kindly request the legal representatives please to place themselves on record.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: I am Anina van der Westhuizen, appearing on behalf of the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms van der Westhuizen.

MR NYAUZA: O.P. Nyauza, appearing on behalf of the victim.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Nyauza.

MS LOCKHAT: Lynn Lockhat appearing on behalf of the TRC.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Lockhat. Ms van der Westhuizen?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you honourable Chairperson. The applicant requested me to point out one or two things appearing on his application form, which is not correct. The first one ...

CHAIRPERSON: We are getting some sort of whaling sound in the earphones, it is - sorry, it is screaming, the earphones are making a noise. Okay, let's see how it goes now, thank you.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you. The first one is the date of the incident for which he is applying for amnesty for, that appears on page 1.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I picked that up when I was reading the papers, yes.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Honourable Chairperson, the applicant informs me that he cannot remember the exact date on which this incident occurred. He however clearly remembers it was during 1993 and towards the middle of the year. It was also - the record of the court proceedings or the parts attached thereto was shown to him and the date of the 9th of July 1993 is indicated on those documents and he confirms that if that ...

CHAIRPERSON: That could be the date? He does not dispute...

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: That could indeed be the date, he is not disputing that date.

CHAIRPERSON: Nothing really turns on what the actual date is?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: He is however applying for all the incidents that happened on that day, specifically the hijacking of a minibus as well as the killing of the taxi-driver, a certain Mr Ngwenya, which took place on that day. Then there is just also on page 1, in which he is asked, it is 7(b) to state the capacity he served in the IFP, it is stated there that he served as Secretary, Jeppe Hostel. He indicated to me that he was in fact the Assistant-Secretary to the Youth Branch at Jeppe Hostel. Thank you honourable Chairperson, those were all the ...

CHAIRPERSON: Is that all?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: That is all, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Assistant-Secretary of the Youth Branch?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Of the Youth Brigade of the Jeppe Hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: Of the Youth Brigade at the Jeppe Hostel? Just while we are on this Ms van der Westhuizen, perhaps if you could just give us his date of birth, I see it is not here, date of birth and age, just to get an idea.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: I think I will just go through it under examination, I am planning to lead him on the personal bit.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, do you want him sworn in?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: He has not yet been sworn in.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I will swear him in.

HOFFMAN BOY MHLONGO: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms van der Westhuizen?

EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Mhlongo, where and when were you born?

MR MHLONGO: I was born in Ladysmith.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: How old are you now?

MR MHLONGO: I am 33 years old.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Did you attend school in Ladysmith?

MR MHLONGO: In Nkandla, that is where I went to school.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Were you married?

MR MHLONGO: Traditionally, yes.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Do you have any children?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, I do.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: I just want to question you now a bit on your political background and your affiliation with the IFP. Can you remember when you joined the IFP?

MR MHLONGO: In 1975 at school, I joined the organisation.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Was it a party then or was it some other sort of organisation at that stage?

CHAIRPERSON: Was that the stage when the IFP was still a cultural organisation, before it had become a political movement or party, when you joined it in 1975?

MR MHLONGO: It was then the ...

INTERPRETER: Inkatha weSizwe, that is how you call it, it is a bit difficult to interpret that.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you nine years old when you joined it?

MR MHLONGO: I wasn't nine years, but the entire family is Inkatha.

CHAIRPERSON: Because why I say that is because you say you are 33 years now, 1975 was 24 years ago, 24 and 9 makes 33, so that makes you nine years old? What year were you born in, do you know?

MR MHLONGO: The reason why I say that is because that was my first year at school.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Can you perhaps remember your ID number?

MR MHLONGO: No, I don't know that off-hand.

CHAIRPERSON: So anyway, when you went to school, you became involved with the IFP as it then was? Is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, the school you will join in your capacity as a student.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And you stated, is it correct, that your whole family actually supported the IFP?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, that is true.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: When you moved to Johannesburg, where did you obtain work?

MR MHLONGO: I worked in Braamfontein hotel.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: From which year more or less, until which year did you work at the Braamfontein hotel?

MR MHLONGO: 1987 until 1993.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Were you still working there when you were arrested for this matter?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, I was arrested on duty at work.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: After you moved to Johannesburg, were you still involved with the IFP in any, maybe formed part of their structures and can you just explain to the honourable Committee?

MR MHLONGO: I have been playing this role ever since.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What role, can you just describe that for the Committee please?

MR MHLONGO: Because when I got here in Johannesburg, I was a follower of the organisation and always interacted with the people, or with the fellow members in the organisation.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And your position as Assistant-Secretary, which Branch was that?

MR MHLONGO: Jeppe Hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Mhlongo, did you used to live in the Jeppe Hostel?

MR MHLONGO: Sometimes yes, because I had my bed there.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Can you just explain to the Committee as well, you informed me that you also had another place of residence. Can you just give that address?

MR MHLONGO: In Mofolo South, 457 Ndaba Street.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Is it correct that you resided at both addresses at intervals?

MR MHLONGO: Yes.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: ... (tape ends) ... Chairman or can you give us names of other leaders of the IFP structures in the hostel?

MR MHLONGO: People who would be leaders were Mkhize.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What - was he a leader of the IFP?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, he was the one leader in charge of the entire Johannesburg area.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Who was the Chairman of your Branch?

MR MHLONGO: The Chairman of the Branch was one man who lived there in the hostel by the name of Mr Ntuli.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And the Secretary of your Branch, who was that?

MR MHLONGO: Mazibuko.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Is that the same Mazibuko who you claim gave you a certain order?

MR MHLONGO: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, when we are talking about Branch, Ms Mhlongo, are we talking about the Jeppe Hostel Branch or the Youth Brigade Branch within that, what are we talking about? Mr Mazibuko was the Secretary of what Branch of the IFP?

MR MHLONGO: Youth Brigade, Jeppe Branch, he was the Secretary for that particular Branch.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Good. Now, I just want you to in general tell the Committee what was the political climate as you experienced it during 1993 and with specific reference between the situation, or the conflict between the ANC and IFP.

MR MHLONGO: What used to happen, people were being killed. When we attend or go for rallies or meetings, we would encounter some disturbance from the opposing organisation, the ANC that is.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: You describe certain events that took place on trains, please enlighten the Committee as to that?

INTERPRETER: The applicant cannot hear.

CHAIRPERSON: If you could just repeat your question Ms van der Westhuizen, let's see if he can hear now.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you. Mr Mhlongo, you also described certain incidents that happened on the trains between ANC and IFP supporters, will you just briefly tell the Committee about that as well?

MR MHLONGO: It would happen that on our way to work, there will be stay-aways that will be launched and there will be toy-toying in the trains and people would be thrown out of the windows from the trains, whilst the train is in motion, and those things would happen in our full view.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Did you believe that those people were attacked by the ANC?

MR MHLONGO: That I knew for a fact, because they would explain before they undergo, or do something.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: You referred to stay-aways and you also described to me certain ...

JUDGE DE JAGER: Ms van der Westhuizen, I think we could accept, we had evidence before about it, that there was a conflict situation between the ANC and the IFP at that time.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you honourable Chairperson, I will therefore not waste unnecessary time on that. Maybe just one point on that issue, is it correct that you also personally was travelling in minibuses, were attacked by ANC members?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, that is true.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And during that period, it is the half of 1993, that was the build-up to the elections the following year and because of that, there was also extra tension between the two political parties, can you confirm that?

MR MHLONGO: Yes.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now, I want to ask you about specific meetings that prior to this incident, this fatal day of the 9th of July, there was - you informed me there was a meeting at the Jeppe Hostel. Will you please inform the Committee what happened?

MR MHLONGO: There was going to be a conference, an Inkatha Conference in Ulundi, then we had a meeting prior to the conference in the Jeppe Hostel. We were also organising the logistics around getting things like transport and so on. The followers of the IFP got highly upset because of the fact that things were not getting in order and in place in so far as it relates to the transport arrangements and we had to excuse ourselves from the big meeting to have our own caucus on the side.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now, you as part of the leadership, were you confronted by the hostel people about the transport arrangements?

MR MHLONGO: Yes.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And did you make certain promises to the people about the transport?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, we did promise them.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: After that meeting, did you have another meeting and can you describe where and how that happened and who do you remember that was present there?

MR MHLONGO: Mr Mazibuko was present and others, Mkhize as well as Lamula from (indistinct) were present.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Was that sort of a Committee meeting, a leadership meeting?

MR MHLONGO: It was a leadership meeting, or people who held positions.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What did you discuss during that meeting?

MR MHLONGO: We discussed ways in getting transport for the people.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What was decided, how were you going to go about that?

MR MHLONGO: Well, Mazibuko had an opinion that we could attempt to hijack a car, that will help a great deal.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: You say ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry before you proceed Ms van der Westhuizen, what was your responsibility, how many people were you expected to transport from the Jeppe Hostel to Ulundi for this meeting, what sort of numbers are we looking at?

MR MHLONGO: We thought if we could gain about three cars, that would be quite ideal.

CHAIRPERSON: When you talk about a car, are you talking about a vehicle or a minibus.

MR MHLONGO: I am referring to kombis.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Sorry Ms van der Westhuizen.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you honourable Chairperson. Mr Mhlongo, you say that Mr Mazibuko suggested this way of getting vehicles. Were you specifically instructed to get a vehicle and was it only you alone or were the other people also instructed to do the same, meaning hijacking a minibus?

MR MHLONGO: We were two, and we were given the order separately.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now, if you say separately, it was at the same meeting, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: It was at the same meeting, but we were going to take our own respective routes afterwards.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Did you have your own firearm at that stage?

MR MHLONGO: No, the firearms that we would have used, belonged to Mr Mazibuko.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Can you just on this point also, tell the Committee what you know about firearms that were used or that were stored in the hostel, whatever you know about that?

MR MHLONGO: Well, what I know about that firearms was that Mkhize and others would collect money from the hostel dwellers to purchase more firearms in an attempt to defend or protect ourselves.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, just before you proceed, hostel dwellers made contributions to buy firearms. Was it ever contemplated that they make contributions to hire a kombi?

MR MHLONGO: Well, we did not have sufficient funds even then, we were just under pressure and we did not have money.

CHAIRPERSON: So it wasn't considered?

MR MHLONGO: No, as leaders, we will not have even considered that, because we had limited time at our disposal.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms van der Westhuizen.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Can I just maybe clarify one point or just get it across to the Committee, the bigger meeting that took place, let's call it the general meeting, the people at that meeting, how - what was the attitudes like? Were they angry at you, was it just a normal meeting, how did the people respond to the shortage of transport?

MR MHLONGO: There was no way we could even present ourselves in front of them, but because we were so brave as the leaders, we did try to go and stand in front of them, but they were highly infuriated, those people that is.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: After ...

JUDGE DE JAGER: Sorry, he told us "I and somebody", but he didn't mention the name "were separately given orders". Who was the other person?

MR MHLONGO: This other person was a hostel dweller as well, he also lived there, by the name of Buthelezi.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Thank you.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, just on that aspect, what position did this Buthelezi hold? Did he have any leadership position?

MR MHLONGO: No, he was just one of the men there, he was not hold any specific position as such.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you. I want to take you - now, can I just confirm, were you then handed a firearm by Mr Mazibuko?

MR MHLONGO: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What sort of firearm was it? Was it an AK47, a pistol, a revolver, what sort of firearm?

MR MHLONGO: A firearm, 38.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Just to get a bit of a time sequence right here, when were the buses to leave to Ulundi, can you remember on which day were they to depart?

MR MHLONGO: The day was supposed to be Friday, around ten, passed ten to eleven o'clock.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And this meeting where you discussed about the transport problems, can you estimate how long before the Friday did this meeting take place?

MR MHLONGO: Approximately it could have been two days prior to the day of departure.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now, after you left that meeting and I assume that you also took the firearm with you, when did you go out and attempt this hijacking?

MR MHLONGO: I left the meeting and I went to the location where I was residing, to wake up the following day and go to work.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: On which day did you actually continue to commit this hijacking?

MR MHLONGO: It was on a Friday.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now will you please describe the events on that day, let's start, what time did you leave your work?

MR MHLONGO: I left at two o'clock in the afternoon, I went to the residential area in the location.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What did you go and do in the location?

MR MHLONGO: I was going to fetch my firearm that I had left in my room.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Yes, and after you got your firearm, where did you go to?

MR MHLONGO: I went to get my friend by the name of Ndlandla Zondi.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Yes, and where did you two go to?

MR MHLONGO: Well, we boarded a taxi and went to Bara and connected, and took the other taxi that we had already identified as a target, or our target.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now ...

CHAIRPERSON: So you went with Zondi, you went by taxi to Bara, is that Baragwanath?

MR MHLONGO: Baragwanath Hospital, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Because you say there was another taxi that you had already identified? Is that right, did I hear you right, I just want you to confirm what you said?

MR MHLONGO: After alighting from the first taxi, we looked around as which taxi we will possibly hijack and that is the one we went into.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, so you identified it then, when you got there? Thank you, I had the impression it was previously, before going there identified, thank you.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you honourable Chairperson. Just to ask about Mr Zondi, have you seen him since that day and do you know his whereabouts at this stage?

MR MHLONGO: Well ever since my arrest, I haven't seen him to date.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What happened after you and Mr Zondi boarded this specific taxi?

MR MHLONGO: We joined the other passengers in the taxi, the taxi took off. Inside the taxi, I could hear that the passengers were discussing and talking about the situation in the area, the conflicts, but we were quiet, we kept very quiet inside, listening to the other passengers discussing and talking until they all got off the taxi and we were the only ones remaining.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, where was this taxi going to Mr Mhlongo, when the other people got off, where was it that they got off the taxi?

MR MHLONGO: Well, how the taxi operate is that they will, it will get the passengers and once it is filled, it will drive all the way to its destination. Now in this case, the destination was Umdini.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Umdini? Is that U-m-d-i-n-i?

MR MHLONGO: Yes. It was going to Umdini terminus.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Mhlongo, you must forgive me, I am not familiar with these places. I know where Baragwanath is and I know where Jeppe is, but I do not know where Umdini is. Where is Umdini in relation to either of those places?

MR MHLONGO: Well, that is the last part, the southern most part of Soweto, Umdini.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Before you continue Mr Mhlongo, you say that you overheard the people having discussions in the taxi and talking about the situation. What did they talk about, can you remember?

MR MHLONGO: Although I don't quite remember well as to the details, but they were talking about the killing of people that was rife at the time between the two organisations, Inkatha and the ANC as it was nearing the election.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Was there anything said about the hostels?

MR MHLONGO: They disliked the people that were in the hostel. They were also alluding to the fact that the hostel dwellers should be, should vacate the location and leave the area. In other words the hostel should cease to exist.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Honourable Chairperson, I notice that it is one o'clock. I do not know whether you would like to adjourn.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we can take the lunch adjournment now, thank you Ms van der Westhuizen.

ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms van der Westhuizen, just before lunch, Mr Mhlongo was testifying, saying that they were in the taxi, and he described the conversation that he heard from his fellow passengers.

HOFFMAN BOY MHLONGO: (s.u.o.)

EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: (cont) Thank you very much Chairperson. Mr Mhlongo, now after all the people got off from the taxi, or let me call them passengers, who remained in the taxi?

MR MHLONGO: The two of us remained, as well as the driver.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And what happened, did you speak to him, what happened? Or did he speak to you, what happened after that?

MR MHLONGO: He enquired as to where we were going to get off.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Yes?

MR MHLONGO: We responded, saying that we were going to get off near Hladi.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Anything else that was said?

MR MHLONGO: Thereafter I questioned him on the discussion that had taken place in the taxi as to what political organisation he was affiliated to. The then revealed that he was in the ANC camp. I then pointed my firearm at him.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Before you continue, can I just ask you, did you ask him his name and what can you remember he said to you?

MR MHLONGO: If I recall, I think he said he was Mr Moloyi.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: But you know today that the man that you killed surname was Ngwenya, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: That is what I heard in court.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now, you say that after he told you that he was from the ANC, you produced your firearm, can you just explain to the Committee, just in your own words, what happened then?

MR MHLONGO: After producing the firearm, I moved him from the steering wheel and instructed Ndlandla to point his firearm at him, so that I could drive the vehicle.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Where did you drive to?

MR MHLONGO: We drove to Jeppe Hostel.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And did you reach Jeppe Hostel?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, we did.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What happened at the hostel?

MR MHLONGO: I left him with Ndlandla in the vehicle, to report that we had acquired a vehicle. On my return, I discovered that there were a lot of people surrounding the vehicle, and at that point there was a discussion held, that because the man had seen us, he could easily identify us, that is why it was better to kill him.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: The people around the vehicle at that stage, in the Jeppe Hostel, what were their mood like? Can you describe that?

MR MHLONGO: They were very happy that a vehicle had been acquired.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry before you proceed, sorry Ms van der Westhuizen, why did you take him to Jeppe Hostel where you stay? Why didn't you when you pointed the gun at him, when you got into the driver's seat, why didn't you just leave him outside the vehicle and drive off? Why take him to the very place you come from?

MR MHLONGO: The reason why we did not leave him, was because we were not certain whether he had been telling us the truth and because of the reason that there were hostel residents who had families who drove taxi's, they could perhaps identify him if he was really an ANC person.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms van der Westhuizen?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you Chairperson. Now what did you decide, what happened after that?

MR MHLONGO: Thereafter when it had been decided that he had to be killed, we drove off. We proceeded towards Denver and came up on an open veld, where we off-loaded him and where he was also killed.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Before you proceed, if you say "we took him to Denver Hostel", who was with you?

MR MHLONGO: I was with Ndlandla and some other members who were also driving with us in the car.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What happened in the open area that you described at Denver?

MR MHLONGO: I parked the vehicle, Ndlandla alighted the vehicle with him, at the time, he was still pointing the firearm at the man. That is where he shot at him.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that Zondi shot him?

MR MHLONGO: Yes. He fired the first shot.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And you yourself, did you fire any shots at the deceased?

MR MHLONGO: No, I did not.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And what happened thereafter, what did you do?

JUDGE DE JAGER: Ndlandla fired the first shot, then you proceeded and said you didn't fire any shots. Were there a second shot fired, and a third shot, how many shots, and who fired the other shots?

MR MHLONGO: He was shot at three times.

CHAIRPERSON: All by Zondi, Mr Zondi?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now, after that, what did you do?

MR MHLONGO: Thereafter I returned to Jeppe, to report that we had completed the task. That was where Mr Mazibuko informed me that we had to go and collect firearms, using the vehicle.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Did Mr Mazibuko tell you where to go to fetch firearms?

MR MHLONGO: He informed me that it was at Jabulani.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And where did you go from the Jeppe Hostel?

MR MHLONGO: We first went to Jabulani township, to a friend of mine, whom I promised to give a lift, that is Jabulani Majola.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Just on that aspect, this Jabulani Majola, is it correct that he worked together with you at Braamfontein Hotel?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: You say that you promised him a lift. Where was he going to?

MR MHLONGO: There was a religious ceremony that was to held at his home at Nqutu.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And you say this Jabulani, he stayed in the area Jabulani, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What happened there, when you went to his house, was he there, did you speak to him?

MR MHLONGO: We parked the vehicle and sounded a horn and a vehicle approached. I think it was a Skyline. That is when we encountered problems and we therefore could not find out whether Jabulani was home, because after that, we were involved in a chase with this car.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: You say this car was chasing you, is it correct that you then made an accident and fled from the scene?

CHAIRPERSON: Just carry on, sorry.

MR MHLONGO: Yes, I did get involved in an accident where I hit the pavement upon which time we got off the vehicle and fled.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now, can you tell this Committee why do you regard this whole incident as being politically motivated, or one with a political objective?

MR MHLONGO: Please repeat?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: You yourself, why do you regard this whole incident and the events that happened as one with a political objective, or trying to reach a political objective?

MR MHLONGO: Because whatever I did, was under the banner of the organisation.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms van der Westhuizen. Mr Nyauza, do you have any questions you would like to put to the applicant?

MR NYAUZA: Yes, I do.

CHAIRPERSON: Proceed.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, how many of you were in this motor vehicle when you were involved in the accident after the chase?

MR MHLONGO: There were three of us, and Jabulani would have been the fourth one.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that yourself, was Zondi still there?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, he was still present.

CHAIRPERSON: Zondi and who else?

MR MHLONGO: Just myself, Mr Zondi, Mazibuko as well as somebody who had come with Mr Mazibuko.

CHAIRPERSON: So that means there were four of you?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: You have been given instructions, according to your testimony you had been given instructions by Mr Mazibuko to go and collect arms at Jabulani, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: And he accompanied you, he gave the instructions and he decided to be part of the people that he had instructed, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: That is not the same Mr Mazibuko who was the Secretary. It is just a similar surname.

MR NYAUZA: From - let's suppose you had gone to collect the firearms, what were you to do after you had collected?

MR MHLONGO: We would have taken them to Ulundi, to safeguard against whatever problems we may encounter along the way.

MR NYAUZA: Where would you have driven from? Would you have driven from Jabulani to Ulundi or what was your next stop after the collection of the firearms?

MR MHLONGO: From Jabulani we would have gone via Mofolo to pick up my clothes and then we would then drive to Jeppe to pick up the other members.

MR NYAUZA: In your testimony you told this Commission that at some stage you addressed a meeting of very agitated members who were disappointed that you could not arrange transport for them, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: And in your testimony as well, you testified that at least three kombis would have been appropriate for these members, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: How many kombis did you get at the end of the day?

MR MHLONGO: We managed to get two.

MR NYAUZA: You got two?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: And you were still short of one, is that correct to please the members?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, that is why ultimately we were not able to reach the place.

MR NYAUZA: No, we haven't arrived there yet. You decide to pick Jabulani up at Jabulani, when he was not part and parcel of the people who were agitated. What about the feelings of the other people?

CHAIRPERSON: You see, I think what Mr Nyauza is getting at Mr Mhlongo is, you said you needed three vehicles to satisfy the dwellers of Jeppe Hostel, you only got two, so in other words you won't be able to satisfy all the people who required transport, yet, despite that, you pick up your friend, Jabulani who has got nothing to do with the hostel. Why take up space when you are short of space to start off by somebody who is not from the hostel, that is what Mr Nyauza is asking you?

MR MHLONGO: He had requested me as a friend who was also my co-worker, to give him a lift.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, we are in a political scenario. You are amongst the leaders of your followers in the IFP, and despite the fact that your followers are not happy with the fact that you and the other leaders could not get them transport, you leave others behind. Explain that, it beats me, I cannot understand.

MR MHLONGO: I was not going to leave them, but because I had promised him, I went via his place to pick him up, but we were still going to go to the hostel to pick up the rest.

MR NYAUZA: But you wanted three kombis, is that correct, to pick everybody up?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, that was our opinion at the time.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Would you take this friend of yours to Ulundi or where did you want to, where did he want to get off?

CHAIRPERSON: He wanted to get off at Nkandla. Whereabout is Nkandla in relation to Ulundi?

MR MHLONGO: I was going to leave him at Nqutu and then he would have to board taxi's to Nkandla and I would go on a different route to Ulundi.

CHAIRPERSON: I think, is Nkandla near, sort of down to Pietermaritzburg, that way?

MR MHLONGO: No.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, you have testified before this hearing that you were a member of the IFP since the age of 9, according to your testimony. When did you start becoming a card-carrying member of the IFP?

MR MHLONGO: Previously the system of membership cards was not in use, but when we arrived in Johannesburg, that is when we received membership cards which had identity photo's. That is when I came to Johannesburg for employment purposes.

MR NYAUZA: When did you arrive in Johannesburg?

MR MHLONGO: In 1980.

MR NYAUZA: In 1980?

MR MHLONGO: Yes.

MR NYAUZA: And you were presented with this card in Johannesburg, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: It had a number?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, it did.

MR NYAUZA: You carried this card since 1980 to 1993, is that correct, when you were arrested?

MR MHLONGO: They system changed in 1993 and the new system was no longer plastic, but paper cards.

MR NYAUZA: The system changed, did the numbers change?

MR MHLONGO: No, it did not. I just renewed my membership.

MR NYAUZA: So the number remained the same for 13 full years, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, I am certain of that.

MR NYAUZA: And in your application for amnesty you were asked to supply the Amnesty Committee with your number, which you failed to do. Didn't you know your number by heart, Mr Mhlongo, you had it for 13 full years?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, even up to this day, I do not even know if off my head.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, how far did you go with your schooling, we know you went to school at Nkandla, but it was not taken further as to how far you went with schooling. How far did you go in schooling, Mr Mhlongo?

MR MHLONGO: Standard 7.

MR NYAUZA: Standard 7?

MR MHLONGO: Yes.

MR NYAUZA: What was your criteria in the IFP, of appointing office bearers?

MR MHLONGO: It was your commitment in the organisation.

MR NYAUZA: You were staying at - at some stage you mentioned somebody by the name of Mr Masimola and you stated that he was from some other IFP Branch, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: Masimola?

MR NYAUZA: Yes, there is some name that you mentioned that went nearer to that, you said -

after you had made promises about transport and you mentioned some members, some people were at this particular meeting, you said Mazibuko was amongst them and there is a guy, apparently you said Mr Masimola who was from the Soweto Branch. Who else was at that meeting, after you had made promises that you would go and get transport?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Chairperson, may I just assist, it is actually Ndula Lamula from Morafe Hostel, just to assist my learned colleague, Lamula, Morafe Hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms van der Westhuizen.

MR NYAUZA: Did you have a Branch at Morafe, or did the people in Denver have jurisdiction, did they control people living in Morafe?

MR MHLONGO: We were still talking about somebody who had resided in Morafe prior to moving to Denver and the person was a leader in the Soweto area.

MR NYAUZA: So this Lamula was a leader in Morafe, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: What did he have to do with the meeting that effected people in Jeppe?

MR MHLONGO: For the reason that he was also a leader who would come to resolve a problem that we encountered.

MR NYAUZA: Where is Mr Mazibuko, the one that gave you orders? When was the last time that you saw him?

MR MHLONGO: I last saw him before my arrest and he was residing at Jeppe.

MR NYAUZA: After you were arrested, he never pitched up?

MR MHLONGO: He last came when I was still on trial.

MR NYAUZA: And when you were convicted, he never pitched up?

MR MHLONGO: No.

MR NYAUZA: And you were doing this whole thing in the name of the organisation, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: Isn't it sinister that you did something in the name of the organisation, you are convicted, you don't get any moral support from the people that you are trying to tell this Commission, that you were helping, isn't it funny?

MR MHLONGO: It did surprise me, even today, I am still shocked as to why.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, the house that you went to in Jabulani, isn't that a Priest's house?

MR MHLONGO: It belongs to Jabulani's father.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, the question was isn't it a Priest's house? Do you know whether Jabulani's father is a Priest?

MR MHLONGO: He is a Priest.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, why didn't you make mention of affiliation to the IFP during your trial?

MR MHLONGO: Please repeat that.

MR NYAUZA: Why didn't you make known to the Presiding Officers at your trial, that you were an IFP member?

CHAIRPERSON: And that the whole hijacking was committed under instruction?

MR NYAUZA: I am indebted to yourself, Chairperson.

MR MHLONGO: I did not tell the truth in court.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nyauza wants to know why.

MR MHLONGO: Because I was denying the offence. I was fearing for my life as well, that I may be killed if I mentioned that these are the people that gave me the order.

MR NYAUZA: Who was going to kill you?

MR MHLONGO: People like Mazibuko from the hostel.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, we are not kids here, you are arrested, you are incarcerated, you tell the police officer that "guys, I am an IFP member, I plead guilty to this thing because I did it in the name of the struggle, our struggle against the ANC" as it more fully appears in your papers here. Naturally you would be sentenced. When are you going to be killed?

JUDGE DE JAGER: I think it is rather common cause that at that stage, on both sides of the political spectrum, people denied that they were involved in politics, because they thought it may have repercussions on the sentence, etc.

MR NYAUZA: I would withdraw that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, also from our experience in these matters, Mr Nyauza, it is very common for us to hear that people in courts lied because they denied guilt and they were in the first instance endeavouring to get themselves free, so they told a completely different story.

MR NYAUZA: That is what I was leading at, Your Honour. Mr Mhlongo, what is going to make us believe you today, that you are not lying?

MR MHLONGO: It is because of the reason that I realise that I should admit what I did and tell the truth.

MR NYAUZA: What is it that you did? You didn't kill the deceased, what are you admitting to?

MR MHLONGO: It was to hijack the car, take the deceased to the hostel and lead ultimately to his death, because if I had not hijacked him, he would not have been killed.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, who is this Agrip Ncuncu, I never heard you saying anything about him in your evidence-in-chief?

MR MHLONGO: He is my cousin.

MR NYAUZA: I would wish to refer this Commission to pages 9 and 10 of the record, number 2 in his affidavit. Mr Mhlongo, you say in your affidavit that -

What is it that he knows and what is it that he saw? You never said anything about this in your evidence-in-chief?

MR MHLONGO: He was one person I used to visit at the hostel, and when I left the hostel, he took up my room, so whenever I went to the hostel, I would go to his room. So he knew everything.

MR NYAUZA: What is it that he saw?

MR MHLONGO: He saw the car as I arrived at the hostel.

MR NYAUZA: You have testified here today that you arrived at Bara, Baragwanath Hospital taxi rank, you identified the motor vehicle that you wanted. How did you identify the motor vehicle that you wanted because my experience tells me that cars queue there to ferry passengers to different destinations?

CHAIRPERSON: Is it the usual taxi ranks where there is taut and when the first one is filled, the next one comes into the front, fill, the next one?

MR NYAUZA: Yes, Your Honour, it is like that.

CHAIRPERSON: You cannot pick and choose which one you want?

MR NYAUZA: The first one - you cannot.

MR MHLONGO: We identified a car that looked a bit new, so when the queue was moving up, we also joined it, so that we could get onto that car.

MR NYAUZA: Had the driver of the motor vehicle according to your testimony, not have been an ANC member, just an ordinary member, would you have killed him?

MR MHLONGO: No, we would not have killed him. Our intention was not to kill.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry Mr Nyauza, on that aspect, but didn't you say in your evidence, that you killed him because he had identified you? You took him to that place and you killed him because he had seen you and would be able to identify you? Wasn't that the reason he was killed?

MR MHLONGO: I did say so, because he had been in our company for quite a while.

ADV SIGODI: In other words he would have been killed even if he was not an ANC member? Is that not the case?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, but I cannot be absolutely sure about that, because it is not that we had problems with every organisation. The only people we had problems with, was the ANC.

ADV SIGODI: Yes, but the point I am trying to understand is that you said yourself that he was killed because he had identified you?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, I did say so.

CHAIRPERSON: Just before you proceed Mr Nyauza, central to what you said to us today, particularly relating to the actual killing of Mr Ngwenya is Mr Zondi. I mean he is the man who went with you, he was with you the whole time, he is the person who actually pulled the trigger and executed the victim. Why did you not make any mention of Mr Zondi in your application form?

MR MHLONGO: It is because I did not know his whereabouts, where I could get hold of him.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the only reason why you did not mention him?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, that is correct.

MR NYAUZA: I want us to go back to the IFP membership number. How many numbers does it comprise of?

CHAIRPERSON: You mean the IFP ...

MR NYAUZA: IFP membership number. How many digits does it comprise of?

MR MHLONGO: It is something that I did not really notice. I do not want to assume, so I cannot respond.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, I get the feeling that you are evading my questions. Is that so?

MR MHLONGO: No, that is not so.

MR NYAUZA: you are quite aware that you've got to tell the truth here so that you can get amnesty, is that so?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, you lived for the IFP, you killed for the IFP, but you didn't give a thing for your membership number, which I believe it is extremely important to you, because you are carrying the IFP banner?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Nyauza, do you have any idea how long the digits are because you know, if you had to ask me what my ID number was, I might battle to tell you and I have had it for longer than 13 years. If it was a three or four number, digits, you know, then of course it is easier to remember, but if it is one of these ...

MR NYAUZA: That is what I wanted to find out from him because he can approximate and say about six or seven.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes.

MR NYAUZA: But he doesn't even respond.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but do you know?

MR NYAUZA: No, I don't. I don't, Your Honour.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Well, I can remember my ID number, but I cannot remember any political party's number and I have been a member of quite a few.

MR NYAUZA: I think the reason is that you have been a member of quite a few, that is why you cannot remember.

JUDGE DE JAGER: That may be so, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Nyauza, you can continue.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, you know your home telephone numbers off my heart, is that so?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: And you don't know your IFP numbers off by heart?

MR MHLONGO: Such numbers are not used regularly.

CHAIRPERSON: I think it is quite clear, he hasn't got a clue about the IFP number, he doesn't know. I think it is quite clear that he doesn't have a clue about it, he doesn't know whether it is four digits, six digits, a whole number of digits. I think it is quite clear that he doesn't know it is.

MR NYAUZA: No, the point taken. Mr Mhlongo, let's go back to the question why the driver was killed. Why specifically was he killed?

MR MHLONGO: We had discovered that he was a member of the ANC as well as for the fact that he had identified us, so he could recognise us and get us arrested.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, Jabulani, your friend, you have been so his place many times, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: I did not usually go to his home, but I worked with him.

CHAIRPERSON: But you have been there before? Have you been to his place before that occasion when the chase happened?

MR MHLONGO: Well, if we knock off work at night, we would normally drop employees off at home, so that is how I knew where he stayed.

MR NYAUZA: So you agree that you had been to his place many times, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, I do.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, would you visit him even on weekends? Sometimes?

MR MHLONGO: I was working on weekends.

MR NYAUZA: You were working every weekend of the year?

MR MHLONGO: It did not happen that we would both be off at the same time, because if I was off during weekends, he would have been off during the week, so he would be working during the weekend.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mhlongo, the question was very simple. The question was did you visit him at his home over the weekend, then you answer saying "well, I worked the weekends". That is not an answer, the answer is either yes or no. Did you visit him at his home over weekends, anytime, ever over a weekend?

MR MHLONGO: No, I did not.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, what time was it when you went to Jabulani's place at Jabulani?

MR MHLONGO: Around ten o'clock.

MR NYAUZA: And you knew the route quite well because you were used to dropping him off at Jabulani, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, I did know the route.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, you were working at Braamfontein, is that correct?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: And you have told this Commission that when you knocked off late, you dropped Mhlongo at his residence?

CHAIRPERSON: Jabulani.

MR NYAUZA: Jabulani - excuse me. You dropped Jabulani at his place. Whose car were you using?

MR MHLONGO: It was cars that had been hired by the company.

MR NYAUZA: And you would be in the same motor vehicle as Jabulani, but you would not have the same weekends off, how funny? Is there any comment on that?

MR MHLONGO: That is so. We worked, doing duty from 3 to 11 pm, but we worked in different departments, because the hotel itself had many departments.

MR NYAUZA: But when you knocked off, you used the same transport, irrespective of the different departments? That is your testimony?

MR MHLONGO: That is so.

MR NYAUZA: But you want to tell this commission that you would not have the same weekends off? Mr Mhlongo, you want amnesty here?

MR MHLONGO: The fact is we did not get our leaves on the same days. He would be off on a certain day and I would be off on another, we worked in different departments.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mhlongo, I put it to you, I don't know how to - my criminal, court background ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, no, that is the way to go.

MR NYAUZA: I put it to you Mr Mhlongo, that you had been to Jabulani's place of residence on some weekends, what is your comment on that?

MR MHLONGO: I never went to visit him during weekends.

MR NYAUZA: I further put it to you Mr Mhlongo, that during your visits to this place, to Jabulani's place, you once, you spotted this kombi being washed at the next door of Jabulani, what is your comment on that?

MR MHLONGO: I never saw it before.

CHAIRPERSON: When you say the kombi, the self-same one that was hijacked?

MR NYAUZA: The one that he hijacked. And Mr Mhlongo, I further put it to you that you killed the driver of this kombi because he knew you well, he saw you on weekends when you were there? Not that he was an ANC member, but because he could tell that you hijacked the motor vehicle from him?

MR MHLONGO: I cannot comment on that, because if he saw me or if he knew me, I cannot tell because I did not know him.

MR NYAUZA: No further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Nyauza. Do you have any questions you would like to put, Ms Lockhat?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS LOCKHAT: I just have one question Chairperson. Earlier you said that you didn't mention Mr Zondi's name in your application form and your further submissions was because you didn't know his address, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: He didn't know his whereabouts.

MS LOCKHAT: His whereabouts?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

MS LOCKHAT: But in your amnesty application form, your initial one, on page 3, you mention Mr Mazibuko as the person who had instructed you and then on page 6 you state that - the Commission asked you a question as to Mr Mazibuko's whereabouts and your response was on page 6, paragraph 2 that you do not know the address of Mr Mazibuko. You didn't know his whereabouts. Can you comment on that?

MR MHLONGO: I do not know his address up to this day, but I know that he resides at Jeppe Hostel, although I am not aware of the room number.

MS LOCKHAT: So you put his name in the application form although you didn't know his whereabouts, but you excluded Mr Zondi's?

CHAIRPERSON: I think the follow up is, if, if - take for example you didn't know Mr Mazibuko's address or where he lived, would you also have not mentioned him in your application?

MR MHLONGO: I mentioned him because my cousin resides with him at Jeppe Hostel.

JUDGE DE JAGER: On page 9 he says -

MS LOCKHAT: That was later, yes. But I am talking about his initial application form, when he just mentions about the instructions and so forth, and then he gives us further information as to the questions we asked as to who was involved in the incident and so forth, and he does not mention Mr Zondi. He mentions Mr Mazibuko, but he says - well he still does not know, but he gives us another person we can contact to get the address. I have no further questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms van der Westhuizen, do you have any re-examination?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: None, thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Judge de Jager, do you have any questions you would like to ask?

JUDGE DE JAGER: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Adv Sigodi, do you have any questions you would like to ask?

ADV SIGODI: A few. Mr Mhlongo, as you were the Assistant-Secretary of the Youth Brigade at the hostel, do you know roughly how many people resided in the hostel?

MR MHLONGO: You are referring to IFP members.

ADV SIGODI: The Jeppe Hostel? Yes. All the people, or the IFP members who resided at Jeppe Hostel, the IFP?

MR MHLONGO: The hostel was occupied by only IFP members because the Xhosas had been driven out.

CHAIRPERSON: The question was how many people stayed in the hostel then, approximately, a ball-park figure.

MR MHLONGO: I think there may be 300, 400.

ADV SIGODI: Thank you. And now for this conference that was going to be held in Ulundi, what provisions did the IFP make for its people at Jeppe Hostel, to transport them?

MR MHLONGO: We had arranged to collect funds, contributions, so that we could get transport, but for the reason that many of the hostel residents were unemployed ...

CHAIRPERSON: Did the IFP take it upon itself, when I say the IFP, I am going beyond the Jeppe Hostel, take it upon itself to provide buses or whatever for people not necessarily only at Jeppe, but for people in the Reef, on the Reef, in the Rand area to say "look buses, we've got this big conference, IFP people are encouraged to go. If you want to go, go to such and such a place, there will be buses you can hop on", was there anything like that that you know of, to get people to the conference?

MR MHLONGO: That is not the practice of the IFP, we normally pay for our trips.

ADV SIGODI: In my experience with the other matters, even if the people paid, but the IFP would provide buses for people to go and attend conferences as big as the ones that are usually held at Ulundi. You mentioned that you sought to get three kombis for this conference. How many, I man how much transport was there besides the three kombis that you sought to get, was available?

MR MHLONGO: There were buses that were going to ferry amabutu.

ADV SIGODI: All right, how many buses were available?

MR MHLONGO: Five.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know roughly how many people a bus can take, if you had five buses?

MR MHLONGO: I am not certain, we just get into the bus, as long as there is space.

CHAIRPERSON: These, are these, talking about the normal single storey bus, the Putco type bus? Those are normally, if it is that sort of us, they are normally 65 or 70 seaters.

ADV SIGODI: 70 people?

MR MHLONGO: Yes, I am referring to such buses.

ADV SIGODI: So if you had about five buses, at least about 300 to 400 people would be able to get into those buses? What do you say to that?

MR MHLONGO: These buses were not only for the Jeppe Hostel, but we were going to carry members from other hostels as well, such as George Koch.

ADV SIGODI: Okay, and then for the Jeppe people, how many buses were available?

MR MHLONGO: I am not sure as to how many were going to be transported from Jeppe. That is why we felt that the transport was not sufficient.

ADV SIGODI: Yes, but I mean as a member of the leadership group that was concerned with transport, how can you not know how many buses are available in order to be able to determine how many people will not be able to get transport?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think what Adv Sigodi wants to know is how did you arrive at the conclusion that you needed three extra kombis, why not one, why not 15?

MR MHLONGO: It was clear that the people who were not going to get spaces in the bus, were not that many.

ADV SIGODI: They were not that many? How many were they?

MR MHLONGO: I should think about 50 or so. That is the youth.

ADV SIGODI: All right, and you say you managed to get two kombis. Where did the second kombi come from?

MR MHLONGO: I am not sure about the other kombi. But I only learnt of it on our return.

ADV SIGODI: On your return from Jabulani?

MR MHLONGO: After returning from Ulundi. But I was not able to go to Ulundi myself.

ADV SIGODI: You were not able to go to Ulundi, after all the trouble that you went to to try and get a kombi, to get people to Ulundi?

MR MHLONGO: Our kombi sustained an accident and it was already in the evening at that time. When we arrived the following day, in the morning, we realised that the other members had already left.

ADV SIGODI: So these people were not so angry, the people that you sought to get the kombi for?

MR MHLONGO: They were angry, but the thing is I did not get to see them again, because I was arrested shortly thereafter.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know how the second kombi was obtained, and who obtained it?

MR MHLONGO: It was obtained by Mr Ntuli who had also been given an instruction.

ADV SIGODI: Was it also hijacked?

MR MHLONGO: I would say so, because he had been issued with the same instruction.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know where Mr Ntuli is today?

MR MHLONGO: I do not know.

ADV SIGODI: Was he not arrested?

MR MHLONGO: No.

ADV SIGODI: Okay. The third point which I want to come to is, I still want to understand why you did not leave the driver in the township, why did you have to take him back to Jeppe? There were two of you, you could have easily pushed him out of the vehicle, why did you have to take him back to Jeppe?

MR MHLONGO: That was part of the instruction that we should return with the person.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying to us Mr Mhlongo, that you were ordered to go and hijack a vehicle and bring the victim, the owner back? Is that what you are saying?

MR MHLONGO: No.

CHAIRPERSON: So what did you mean then to say that you were told to bring him back?

MR MHLONGO: I am trying to explain that we had been told that if we encounter a person who is from the opposing camp that we were fighting, we should either kill him or return with him to the hostel.

ADV SIGODI: To do what? To do what with him at the hostel? Why was it necessary to bring him back to the hostel if you could have killed him immediately?

MR MHLONGO: I did this so that I could show the other persons at the hostel that I have conducted the task satisfactorily.

CHAIRPERSON: Wouldn't the vehicle itself be evidence of that?

MR MHLONGO: I do not know, but they were satisfied when I arrived with the driver.

ADV SIGODI: What happened when you arrived at the hostel? Because in your evidence you mentioned that the people came around and they were very happy that you got the kombi and then you decided to take the driver away to kill him because he had identified you? Is that all that happened?

MR MHLONGO: That is what happened.

ADV SIGODI: Is that all that happened?

MR MHLONGO: I don't remember anything else.

ADV SIGODI: If I recall your evidence clearly, you mentioned that you brought him back because you were not sure that he was ANC.

CHAIRPERSON: Earlier you said you brought him back because you thought he may not have been telling you the truth when he said he was ANC, and you brought him back to the hostel in case somebody could identify him as being an IFP person?

MR MHLONGO: That is correct.

ADV SIGODI: What measures were taken to identify him there? Nowhere do you tell us that measures were taken to identify him as either IFP or ANC or some other political party?

MR MHLONGO: We gathered that from what he told us.

ADV SIGODI: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms van der Westhuizen, do you have any questions arising out of questions that have been put by the panel?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, none, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nyauza?

MR NYAUZA: None Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: None, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mhlongo, that concludes your testimony.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms van der Westhuizen?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you Mr Chairperson, we do not intend calling any further witnesses, so that is the whole application for Mr Mhlongo.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Nyauza?

MR NYAUZA: Mr Chairperson, we wish to call the uncle to the deceased who was residing with him at his address. He is seated next to me. Let me just check the name.

CHAIRPERSON: Can I have the full names please?

MR MABIZELA: Edward Mabizela.

CHAIRPERSON: Edward?

MR MABIZELA: Mabizela.

CHAIRPERSON: Mabizela?

MR MABIZELA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nyauza, he is going to give evidence?

MR NYAUZA: Yes, he is Your Honour.

INTERPRETER: I don't think the witness hears.

CHAIRPERSON: I think just check the volume there, Mr Nyauza, the ... Can you hear now, Mr Mabizela?

MR MABIZELA: Yes, I can.

EDWARD MABIZELA: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Nyauza?

EXAMINATION BY MR NYAUZA: As it pleases you. Mr Mabizela, are you related to the deceased, Vuzi Ngwenya?

MR MABIZELA: He was my nephew and he resided at my home in Jabulani.

MR NYAUZA: How long did you reside with him?

MR MABIZELA: More than 16 years. He was born there, attended school there until he finished, completed his schooling.

MR NYAUZA: Do you know of his political alliance?

MR MABIZELA: He was not affiliated to any political organisation.

MR NYAUZA: You have told us that he grew up at your home. What is the address?

MR MABIZELA: 7070 Jabulani.

MR NYAUZA: Do you also come from Jabulani?

MR MABIZELA: Yes. That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: Do you know Jabulani Wilson Mzokono Majola?

MR MABIZELA: Yes, I know him, he is Pastor Majola's son.

MR NYAUZA: How far are they resident from your home?

MR MABIZELA: We are neighbours.

MR NYAUZA: Neighbours in what sense? You know, is he your next-door neighbour or is he the third street from where you are resident?

MR MABIZELA: There are a few houses between our homes.

MR NYAUZA: Are you in the same street?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, if you could perhaps just get it more clear.

MR NYAUZA: Are you on the same street?

MR MABIZELA: No, there is one street separating us.

MR NYAUZA: For how long have you known the Majola's?

MR MABIZELA: For a long time, we grew up together. We have known them ever since.

CHAIRPERSON: If you are at the Majola's house, can you see your house?

MR MABIZELA: No. There are houses in between.

MR NYAUZA: Your nephew, how long had he been a taxi driver?

MR MABIZELA: I cannot remember, but it has been quite a while, he used to drive for a Mr Moloyi from Moletsane.

MR NYAUZA: Do you know of his girlfriend?

MR MABIZELA: Yes.

MR NYAUZA: Where was she residing?

MR MABIZELA: She resided next to the Majola home.

MR NYAUZA: And earlier on, when I consulted with you, you told me something about him washing the kombi at some place, what place was that?

MR MABIZELA: He had friends who resided in the same street as Mr Majola, so he would wash the car at his girlfriend's.

MR NYAUZA: You had known the Majola's and I would assume that you knew Jabulani. Do you perhaps know some of his friends?

MR MABIZELA: I knew the family well, as well as their son. I grew up with them and they were religious people.

CHAIRPERSON: The question was did you know some of Jabulani's, that is the son's, friends?

MR MABIZELA: No, I did not.

MR NYAUZA: Do you know the applicant before this hearing today?

MR MABIZELA: No, I do not.

MR NYAUZA: When was the first time you saw him?

MR MABIZELA: I am seeing him for the first time today. I just learnt that he is Mr Mhlongo today.

MR NYAUZA: What would you wish to tell this Commission today, are you happy with what has been said in this Commission today?

MR MABIZELA: It worries me because when I arrived I was questioning as to why this person is seeking amnesty.

MR NYAUZA: Yes, proceed?

MR MABIZELA: Because this act was intentional and there was no violence in Jabulani as he claims. We grew up in that area, there was no violence in Jabulani. Up to this day, there is no violence. We were even close to the Majola's.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, just before you proceed, Mr Nyauza, you say that the deceased drove taxi's for Mr Moloyi. Do you know which route he operated on, what - whereabout did he drive taxi's? If you don't know, just say so.

MR MABIZELA: It was a route from Zola (indistinct), to town.

CHAIRPERSON: He drove from Zola to town?

MR MABIZELA: Yes, from Zola to town.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, could you tell me please where Zola is, and to town, do you mean Johannesburg?

MR MABIZELA: Zola is in Soweto.

CHAIRPERSON: And to town, do you mean Johannesburg, CBD?

MR MABIZELA: Yes, it is correct.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mabizela, do you - you have told this hearing that you grew up with Jabulani and you know that he was not at all affiliated, sorry, let me rephrase that question, were you aware of his political affiliation?

CHAIRPERSON: This is not Jabulani, this is ...

MR NYAUZA: Jabulani?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, you are asking now not about the deceased, Ngwenya?

MR NYAUZA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: You are asking about Jabulani?

MR NYAUZA: Jabulani, do you know perhaps of Jabulani's political affiliation?

MR MABIZELA: I know Mzokona Majola Jabulani.

MR NYAUZA: No, his other name is Jabulani Wilson Mzokona Majola. Did you know of his political affiliation?

MR MABIZELA: No. They were not politically affiliated, they were very religious people.

CHAIRPERSON: But some religious people have political affiliations? The fact that they are religious people, does not mean that they don't have a political affiliation? Are you saying that you believe that he was - did not have any political affiliation because he was religious?

MR MABIZELA: Yes, I believe so. There would be religious ceremonies even at the Majola home. I never heard any political discussions, we just worshipped together.

MR NYAUZA: So Mr Mabizela, you have given testimony before this Commission today that the deceased had friends at the street where your nephew had a girlfriend and where Jabulani Wilson Mzokona Majola was resident, is that correct?

MR MABIZELA: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: And you have stated that he would wash his kombi on that street?

MR MABIZELA: That is correct.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Have you seen him washing the kombi?

MR MABIZELA: Many times.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Many times? At that place? At that house?

MR MABIZELA: Yes.

MR NYAUZA: And he would do this even on weekends when Jabulani was home, is that correct?

MR MABIZELA: Sometimes he would wash it during the day and even weekends when it wasn't so busy, he would wash the car.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Nyauza, this kombi belonged to Mr Moloyi?

MR NYAUZA: Yes, Your Honour.

CHAIRPERSON: And - sorry, I am going to ask your witness now. Did the deceased keep it full-time, he would go to sleep with it, you know, take it home, take it to work the next morning, or did he have to when he is not driving as a taxi driver, leave it at some sort of depot?

MR MABIZELA: He would take the vehicle to the Moloyi home if he was not working, but he used it most of the time.

MR NYAUZA: So he used this one kombi only?

MR MABIZELA: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: And invariably Jabulani would have known, Jabulani Majola would have known that, would have known this kombi well because he used to wash it at the street, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: I think Mr Nyauza, this line of evidence, we know subject to what Ms van der Westhuizen is going to cross-examine, but on the evidence of this witness, he washed the car in the street quite often. We know from Mr Mhlongo's evidence that sometimes he went there when he dropped him off from work, but the witness says he has never seen Mhlongo before. He says he is seeing him for the first time today. So, I mean we know it is cleaned there, etc, this is sort of a question of argument now, I think. I don't know what more the witness can say.

MR NYAUZA: Yes, what else can you tell the Commission to sum up your evidence?

MR MABIZELA: What I can say is that the applicant is not telling the truth with regard to the political situation. As I said before, my nephew was not politically affiliated and moreover the Majola's were religious people. His intention was to rob that vehicle and when my nephew did not return on that day, he himself, told us that my nephew was somewhere around, so what I am trying to say is that the applicant is not telling the truth. His intention was to rob that vehicle, unfortunately he had to take a life too.

MR NYAUZA: Is that all Mr Mabizela?

MR MABIZELA: With regards to the political conflict, there were no problems in Jabulani, so he is not telling the truth.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mabizela, the witness wasn't, Mr Mhlongo wasn't necessarily confining, saying that there was political violence in Jabulani. He was saying it was around Jeppe Hostel and that sort of area. In any event, we hear what you are saying.

MR NYAUZA: Is that all?

MR MABIZELA: It was discovered later that he removed the person and the Majola's were not even aware what was happening, because there was this altercation going on. Even the people who were there at the Majola home, were surprised as to what that vehicle's business was at their home. What I am therefore saying is that Mr Mhlongo knows why he killed that person. It had nothing to do with politics, but it was just a criminal act and that was a kombi that they had already targeted before. Even Mr Nala informed me that he had heard from Mhlongo that Mhlongo already had a kombi to use and Mr Nala is also a Priest.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mabizela, are you telling this Commission that there were women passengers in this kombi?

MR MABIZELA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see the kombi yourself, with your own eyes?

MR MABIZELA: People were chasing the kombi.

CHAIRPERSON: No the question was did you see it yourself, the kombi?

MR MABIZELA: They only came to my home to enquire about my nephew, as to where he was, because the kombi was seen on the street, and there were women inside the kombi.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mabizela, please just listen to my questions, it is a very easy question, it is a very simple question, did you see the kombi yourself, with your own eyes?

MR MABIZELA: I did see the kombi.

CHAIRPERSON: What did you see, who did you see, did you see anybody in the kombi with your own eyes?

MR MABIZELA: Mr Mhlongo.

CHAIRPERSON: And were there any other people that you saw in the kombi?

MR MABIZELA: The women.

CHAIRPERSON: How many women?

MR MABIZELA: It was not full, maybe four or so, because they had bags around with ...

JUDGE DE JAGER: Sorry, did you see him that night in the kombi?

MR MABIZELA: I saw the driver.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And you recognised him?

MR MABIZELA: (Indistinct) said it was Mhlongo.

JUDGE DE JAGER: But you only saw him today for the first time?

MR MABIZELA: I recognised the voice.

ADV SIGODI: I am listening to the Zulu and the English interpretation. I think, can I clarify that with the Interpreter?

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mabizela, are you saying you heard people saying it is Mhlongo or you heard Mhlongo's voice?

MR MABIZELA: I heard people saying that it was Mhlongo. I did not know him.

CHAIRPERSON: I think it is common cause that he was in the vehicle, he said so himself.

MR NYAUZA: Yes.

MR MABIZELA: No, I did not know Mr Mhlongo.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mabizela, let's not confuse issues here. Let's take issues step by step, don't rush, listen to questions, and respond correctly. Mr Moloyi's kombi is missing, he sends about two or three boys according to the testimony that prevailed at the trial. These two boys go out, did they come to pick you up first or they went to the kombi? Let's clarify issues?

MR MABIZELA: They first came to me, then we went towards the kombi.

MR NYAUZA: So you were one of the occupants of the Skyline that we are being told about in the records here?

MR MABIZELA: That is correct, I was.

MR NYAUZA: How many of you were in the Skyline?

MR MABIZELA: Moloyi's sons, two of them, plus Mr Moloyi himself.

MR NYAUZA: And you drove to Mzokona Majola's place in Jabulani?

MR MABIZELA: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: Who got off the motor vehicle?

MR MABIZELA: Moloyi's sons.

MR NYAUZA: You remained in the motor vehicle, is that what you are telling this Commission?

MR MABIZELA: Yes, I remained in the vehicle.

MR NYAUZA: And who else? You told us there were four of you?

MR MABIZELA: They were with my nephew's friend, so I remained with him in the car.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mabizela, you parked behind the kombi. Take this Commission through what happened, they got off, they did this, they did that, we did this, we did that, steady?

MR MABIZELA: Okay. As we arrived there, there was an altercation that ensued and that is when the kombi drove off, fled, and we chased at the kombi.

MR NYAUZA: Those boys came back. Who was the driver of your Skyline?

MR MABIZELA: Moloyi's son.

MR NYAUZA: And he had gotten out to speak to the driver, is that so?

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think we need all this sort of, but the fact is they chased it.

MR NYAUZA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we don't need ...

MR NYAUZA: And how many people were in the motor vehicle, in the kombi that you chased?

MR MABIZELA: There were four people, the kombi was idling at that time. It looked as if they were there to collect some people.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mabizela, it is at night, it is about ten o'clock. You are telling this Commission that there were about four people in the kombi. Did it have dim windows, or was there a light that showed you that there were about four people in the kombi? How do you know that there were four people?

MR MABIZELA: The windows were not dimmed.

MR NYAUZA: And it is ten o'clock at night, it is not as simple as during the day. How did you see them, with the lights, were your headlights on, or whatever, give us, put us through that?

MR MABIZELA: When the kombi drove off, because it was supposed to go and collect some other people from the Majola home, and that was when there was this confusion that ensued.

MR NYAUZA: And then were these women inside the kombi or they were about to board the kombi? When this kombi was chased, did it have women passengers inside or not?

MR MABIZELA: They were inside.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mabizela, testimony given by the applicant today is that there were four of them, males only, no females, what is your comment on that?

MR MABIZELA: I would dispute that. He had come to Jabulani to collect people who were supposed to go to church.

MR NYAUZA: So, how many males, you say there were four people, people are makes and females. What are you referring to when you say there were four people? Is he included or not?

MR MABIZELA: Others had just loaded their property onto the kombi and were not as yet inside the kombi. When the altercation ensued, that was when the kombi drove off and it was chased.

MR NYAUZA: Mr Mabizela, my question is simple and straight forward, you are saying there were four people, my question is was he the fourth person or not?

MR MABIZELA: No, I am not counting Mr Mhlongo. There was a driver.

JUDGE DE JAGER: He said it was about four people, so it could have been five, it could have been three. I don't know how we figure out whether he was the fourth if there was about four people there?

MR MABIZELA: It was also dark, but there were four women inside.

MR NYAUZA: So when you say there were about four people, you are referring only to the women?

CHAIRPERSON: We know that, he said Mr Mhlongo was in the kombi. Are you trying to get Mr Mhlongo out of the car?

MR NYAUZA: No, no Your Honour, no. These women were inside the car, you chased the car, it stopped and he ran away, left some items in the motor vehicle that he was subsequently identified about, is that so?

MR MABIZELA: That is correct.

MR NYAUZA: Is that your testimony then today?

MR MABIZELA: Yes. There were items that remained in the vehicle and the women also got off because they did not know anything, because at that time we were enquiring from them as to where was the driver, the person who drives this car. We did not know what was going on.

MR NYAUZA: No further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Nyauza. Ms van der Westhuizen, any questions?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Chairperson, just in short, one or two questions. Mr Mabizela, your nephew, was he much younger than you, the deceased?

MR MABIZELA: Yes, he was very young.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: You didn't go out with him on a social basis to the theatre or something like that?

MR MABIZELA: No.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: I am not going to pursue this, I just want to put it, you might not necessarily know his political affiliation on the basis that you are a much older person, you didn't use to go out with him, you were much older than him. Do you have any comment on that?

MR MABIZELA: This nephew was fond of me, we were close and I will sometimes send him to the bank, but he had never mentioned anything about politics, he just loved soccer. On his way, on his return from work, he would also play soccer and also during weekends, on Sundays, he would play soccer, but he never participated in political activities.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And it is on this basis that you say that he was not politically affiliated, because he never mentioned it to you, is that correct?

MR MABIZELA: That is correct. He used to play soccer with his friends, he never mentioned anything about politics. He used to tell me about things, he used to confide in me.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mabizela, did he actually live with you under your roof?

MR MABIZELA: Yes, at my home.

JUDGE DE JAGER: ... place where he was killed?

INTERPRETER: Please repeat that question.

CHAIRPERSON: At the time of his death he lived with you?

MR MABIZELA: Yes.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Didn't he stay there up to the age of 16?

MR MABIZELA: No, he used to reside at my home, he never left. His home was in Diepkloof, but he spent most of his time at my home.

JUDGE DE JAGER: So he had a home in Diepkloof?

MR MABIZELA: Yes, he did.

JUDGE DE JAGER: With whom was he staying in Diepkloof?

MR MABIZELA: His parents as well as his siblings.

CHAIRPERSON: From the time that he was killed, for how long had he been staying at your place? When did he last stay at Diepkloof prior to his death?

MR MABIZELA: He didn't stay at Diepkloof, he stayed at my home. He would maybe go there during the day to see them, but he didn't spend time in Diepkloof, he spent most of his time at my house. Even when he was attending school, he was staying at my home.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms van der Westhuizen.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you Chairperson. Mr Mabizela, regarding your evidence just on that night and the people inside the kombi, I am not going to ask you detail about that, but wouldn't you agree with me that things happened very quickly, it was very dark at night and you could easily get confused as in making a mistake between men and women inside the kombi?

MR MABIZELA: Please repeat that.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Let me tackle this from another angle, you at some stage testified that there were four, about four people inside the kombi, then at a later stage you testified there were four women in the kombi. This is a clear indication that you are not exactly sure whether you indeed saw women in the kombi or not, would you agree with me?

MR MABIZELA: There were women in the kombi.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Well, you have heard the evidence of Mr Mhlongo and he will still maintain that there were only men inside the kombi. I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms van der Westhuizen. Ms Lockhat?

MS LOCKHAT: No questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination Mr Nyauza?

MR NYAUZA: No re-examination Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Judge de Jager, any questions? Adv Sigodi, any questions?

ADV SIGODI: Yes. Did the deceased have any children?

MR MABIZELA: No.

ADV SIGODI: So his closest relatives would be his parents?

MR MABIZELA: That would be his parents and the closest members of the family.

ADV SIGODI: Okay, and are both his parents still alive?

MR MABIZELA: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: Do you perhaps have their names?

MR MABIZELA: Kenneth and Eva and the father is also present.

ADV SIGODI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Any questions arising? Thank you. Thank you Mr Mabizela. That concludes your evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nyauza?

MR NYAUZA: I was wondering as to whether it is argument time or not?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I just asking if you've got any further evidence?

MR NYAUZA: No, I don't.

CHAIRPERSON: No, okay.

MR NYAUZA: That will be the case for the victims.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it is argument time, now.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you Chairperson. Just before we proceed, the applicant, it is not part of his application, but indicated that he would just express how he felt about what he had done.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly Ms van der Westhuizen. Ms Mhlongo, Ms van der Westhuizen has indicated that there is something that you would like to say about what you had done. You are free to say what you wish.

MR MHLONGO: Well, there is one thing I would like to say regarding what I have done. I do regret for all the acts I have committed. I would like to extend my apologies to the family of the victim. I feel this great remorse in me as a result of my acts.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mhlongo. Ms van der Westhuizen.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN IN ARGUMENT: Thank you honourable Chairperson, just in short, I will submit that the applicant's application comply with all the formal requirements of the act, it is an act associated with a political objective and that full disclosure was made by this applicant. Honourable Chairperson, if I say full disclosure was made, that should be seen in view of the fact that this applicant has been in prison for quite a long time, and obviously will not be in a position to specifically state addresses and details where people involved, or people he knew at that stage, is still residing. As far as the political objective is concerned, I want to submit that from the background of the applicant, it is clear that he was part of the political struggle. He experienced attacks on himself, people got injured very close to him, it is clear that he came from a family, he was brought up within the IFP, support - in that group, he became part of the leadership of the IFP Youth at the Jeppe Hostel, he acted there as Assistant-Secretary of the IFP. He did not act on his own in this matter, he followed the instructions of a person whom he regarded as his leader, namely Mr Mazibuko. It is also clear that there was further pressure from the community in the Jeppe Hostel to obtain transport and that they felt under the circumstances very pressurised. It is clear from his evidence that he did not gain anything personally from committing this act. The transport that he was seeking was to be used at the hostel for the IFP and to go to the specific conference and also to transport guns. The applicant bona fide believed that he was acting in the furtherance of the political structure. This whole incident took place during a period in which there was basically a war between the IFP and the ANC and it was the middle of 1993, leading up to the elections in 1994. It was a very tense climate and it should be seen against that background and I will humbly request this Committee to grant the applicant amnesty. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms van der Westhuizen. Mr Nyauza?

MR NYAUZA IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Testimony has been given before this hearing that, by the applicant, that he wanted this kombi to be used to transport arms and members of his political affiliation. There was agitation from his own members about them not getting them transport, but despite that, he had the nerve to get a friend of his whose

political affiliation he did not support, he did not say he was an IFP member, he just said "he was my co-worker and a friend". So he is compromising the, if we are to believe his version, then it means he is compromising the seat that is supposed to be used by a bona fide IFP member to attend a meeting that is extremely important to them, for somebody who is not politically affiliated to the IFP.

CHAIRPERSON: For somebody who was not going to the conference?

MR NYAUZA: Yes, he was not going to the conference. Somebody, that seat could have been used by somebody from his political affiliation.

CHAIRPERSON: I think the idea of the transport was to shuttle people to the conference, you know, so even if somebody was an IFP and got a lift, who wasn't going to the conference, it would be taking up a seat of a conference goer?

MR NYAUZA: Exactly.

CHAIRPERSON: So you are saying it is improbable, his version is improbable?

MR NYAUZA: It is improbable.

CHAIRPERSON: Taking into account that?

MR NYAUZA: That is what I am saying. And as regards him not having gained anything out of the whole thing, we have heard testimony from Mr Mabizela and I would kindly submit to this Committee that despite the problem that we had with Mr Mabizela to adduce evidence, testimony has been given that there were women in this motor vehicle, and these were church women and we know that they were going to religious ceremony somewhere in Natal. That has not been disputed, it was actually not contested further.

CHAIRPERSON: It would seem, just on this whole aspect, that it would have been, it must have been on the applicant's version, an incredible coincidence that he goes to Baragwanath taxi rank, which is busy, picks a taxi to hijack, hijacks the taxi and it turns out to be a taxi which gets washed next door to his friend's house in Jabulani. It is just an incredible coincidence?

MR NYAUZA: Exactly.

CHAIRPERSON: That the taxi was found by Mr Moloyi and his sons, right there at Jabulani, when it was hijacked at Baragwanath?

JUDGE DE JAGER: But it is also a fact that in the meantime, they had killed the man, dropped him in the veld, so that happened, it is a fact, they found the body there and then came back by coincidence, next to the house where the girlfriend was living?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, if you could just tell me and that is not evidence, but we can always look it up, Jabulani, where is Jabulani in relation to Baragwanath for instance? Mr (indistinct) can just tell me.

MR MABIZELA: Next to the Fire Brigade, Jabulani Fire Brigade.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, next to where?

MR NYAUZA: I think Jabulani is about eight kilometres, eight to ten kilometres from Baragwanath Hospital.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And how far from the place where the body was found?

MR NYAUZA: More than 25 kilometres, it is in town, it was found in Denver, just when you are on the M2 East.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on Mr Nyauza.

MR NYAUZA: Honourable Commissioners, we have heard numerous applications before this hearing, and members who were politically affiliated, have been supported with affidavits by people who gave instructions, and they would state that there was political turmoil at the time, but what we did not give these people were rights to take people's lives. We are today faced with a situation where the applicant is the only person who knows, who tells us that he was an IFP member. As regards the addresses of people who gave instructions to him, he does not know. He only knows that they stay at Jeppe Hostel. It is common cause that IFP members stayed at hostels around the country, and any person, you know, if I were to for want of a better word, I could have committed an offence in 1993 and then become a loose canon and say "no, I was acting within the ambit of a particular party."

CHAIRPERSON: It is always very easy to just say that.

MR NYAUZA: Exactly. So, we needed him to support his version, that he is an IFP member, we needed him - I asked him questions regarding his membership number. This is a gentleman who was Assistant-General Secretary.

CHAIRPERSON: Assistant-Secretary.

MR NYAUZA: Assistant-Secretary, and we expect a person would be in the know-how more than his other followers, but a lot of things we wanted from him, we would have to dig it out of him, to say "why didn't you mention X, why didn't you mention Y"? My argument is this thing was done, it is a criminal offence, it is not an offence that falls within the ambit of the Truth and Reconciliation Act, it is something that he did and with this friends and failed to achieve whatever he wanted to achieve. It is just that we did not want to get into the nitty-grittys of the criminal trial in that they don't have that much weight here, but based on what has been said before this Commission today, Mr Mhlongo's version cannot be corroborated by anybody. He has referred us to a lot of people. Where is his cousin, Agrip Ncuncu that he has referred us to? He is not in this court today, he has not made an affidavit to support that "yes, I know he did", he calls him his witness, but he is not here.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Have we any evidence that contradicts what he said?

MR NYAUZA: Yes, we do Your Honour. He stated that there were four males in the motor vehicle. The guy who went with the Moloyi's to the car that was parked there, has given testimony that there were women in that motor vehicle which supports the version that he had told those people that "I will organise a kombi to take you to that religious ceremony in Natal."

JUDGE DE JAGER: He also stated that Mr Moloyi, the father was in the Skyline and according to the evidence at the trial, he wasn't in the Skyline.

MR NYAUZA: No, he said Mr Moloyi's son.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Was the driver?

MR NYAUZA: Yes.

JUDGE DE JAGER: But he also referred to Mr Moloyi?

MR NYAUZA: I didn't pick that up Your Honour.

JUDGE DE JAGER: ... notes, that we can ...

MR NYAUZA: In essence I would make an application to this Committee to dismiss the application for amnesty. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Nyauza. Ms Lockhat, do you have anything?

MS LOCKHAT: I have no further submissions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any reply Ms van der Westhuizen?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN IN REPLY: Maybe just as to further support or the lack of further support as indicated by my learned friend, the applicant is in prison, he has supplied whatever detail he could to the TRC. He is hardly in a position to find these people himself.

CHAIRPERSON: We understand that, yes.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And that is - I would just make one comment on the fact that he didn't know his membership number, as rightly stated by you honourable Chairperson, a lot of people go through life without knowing their ID numbers, so I would respectfully submit that that cannot hold any water. Furthermore as to the evidence of Mr Mabizela and women getting in and out, his evidence is on record, and I will just submit that he wasn't a very good witness and there cannot be placed any reliance on his evidence. As the honourable Committee pleases.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. We will reserve our decision in this matter and we will get out a decision as soon as possible. I would like to thank Ms van der Westhuizen, Mr Nyauza, Ms Lockhat for your assistance in this matter. Ms Lockhat, is that the roll for the week?

MS LOCKHAT: That concludes our roll Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: For - yes, thank you. We have now come to the end of our roll, there were nine matters set on it. One was withdraw, we have heard eight, and we have finished two days ahead of schedule, so we didn't do badly at all. I would like to, before we adjourn, just thank everybody who made these hearings possible. The people at JISS for providing this venue, which is very convenient and very nice, television, sound technician people, the interpreters who have worked very hard all week. All the matters that we have heard, involved a lot of interpreting. The logistics officers, our secretaries, the caterers, everybody, security people, Correctional Service for bringing the people, thank you very much. We will then be adjourning now. I believe there will be another Committee here next week, even again the week after, I will be back in two weeks time. Thank you very much, we are now adjourned.

MS LOCKHAT: All rise.