--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Good morning. For the record Friday 12 November 1991. We are continuing with the sitting of the Amnesty Committee at JISS Centre in Johannesburg. We are dealing with the amnesty applications of J M Patose and others, which matter has been recalled in order to receive the testimony of a witness Mr Selai, Johannes Selai who is the victim in respect of the incident that forms the subject matter of the application.

As has been indicated on the record on an earlier occasion, Mr Selai was absent at the time when the application was heard and he arrived at the venue of the sitting after the matter had been concluded. The indications were that there was some or other misunderstanding with regard to the venue of the hearing. That resulted in Mr Selai's failure to appear when the matter was actually dealt with by us.

In view of all the circumstances of the matter, it is in our view necessary to receive the testimony of Mr Selai and for that purpose the matter has been recalled in order to take that testimony which we would seek to do.

Ms Mtanga, Mr Selai is present. Is there anything else that you wanted to put on record? Do you want him to take the oath and present his evidence?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson I would like to call him as a witness and he can take the stand now.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

JOHANNES MONAFI SELAI: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Mtanga do you want to present his evidence?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson, thank you.

EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Mr Selai, when were you born?

MR SELAI: 1964, 19 July.

MS MTANGA: And where do you reside?

MR SELAI: 1257 Sekhati Street.

MS MTANGA: Were you residing at this house in 1992, at the time of the incident?

MR SELAI: Yes, that is where I was born. I was residing at that place.

MS MTANGA: You are aware that you are giving evidence in respect of the incident that took place on the 26th of July 1992, in which you were a victim?

MR SELAI: Yes, I do.

MS MTANGA: Did you know the applicants before this incident? Were they people known to you?

MR SELAI: Yes, they are the people that I knew.

MS MTANGA: How did you know them?

MR SELAI: They are all the residents of Boipatong, our parents and their parents know each other.

MS MTANGA: Were you employed in 1992? What were you doing in 1992 for a living?

MR SELAI: I was doing a temporary job then.

MS MTANGA: Where was this? What were you doing?

MR SELAI: I was working at Iscor as a packer.

MS MTANGA: What was your political affiliation in 1992?

MR SELAI: I did not belong to any political organisation in 1992.

MS MTANGA: Coming to the incident of the 26th of July 1992, can you tell the Committee what happened on this day?

MR SELAI: It was on the 26th of July 1996, it was on Saturday. I had knocked off the job at 6 o'clock in the afternoon. The distance from Boipatong to Iscor can be about 800 metres so I had families at Boipatong. From my work I went to my aunt and then from there I went home.

MS MTANGA: I'm sorry Mr Selai, where did you aunt reside?

MR SELAI: She resided at 536 Amatola Street, Boipatong.

MS MTANGA: Alright, you can go ahead with your evidence.

MR SELAI:

MS MTANGA: When you were discharged from the hospital, what happened to you? Did you go back to Boipatong?

MR SELAI: No, no. When I was discharged from the hospital, I went to Meadowlands at my uncle's place and then from Meadowlands I had a problem because I needed to change my bandages frequently. I had to travel from Meadowlands to Natalspruit and there I went to stay with my sister, my elder sister. I wanted to live with her because she was a professional nurse then and she's the person who took care of me.

MS MTANGA: During our consultation you mentioned that you reported this case to the ANC. Can you just explain how you went about doing this?

MR SELAI:

MS MTANGA: Mr Selai, is there anything that you want to add?

MR SELAI: What I want to say is that I was not assaulted or injured at Tshegase Tavern. I was embarrassed when I heard these people saying that I went to Tshegase Tavern accompanied by people who were shooting people at the Tshegase Tavern, but when we were at Vanderbijlpark, there is nothing that they said that I was with the people who shot at Tshegase Tavern. The other point that I want to know from them, if I was with the people who shot at Tshegase Tavern, why did they manage to catch me, if I was in the company of those people? Thank you.

MS MTANGA: Mr Selai, I just want to point out one aspect of the evidence of the applicant. All the applicants testified that they are not the people who captured you. They found you already captured by some other group of residents of Boipatong. What do you say to this?

MR SELAI: What they are saying, on the 11th of November in 1992 when we started with the case at Vanderbijlpark, they did not disagree that I have pointed wrong people. Boipatong is a very small place because all the residents at that place, we know each other. When they say that I was caught by other people, I would have known those people.

MS MTANGA: Mr Selai, they are not denying that they assaulted you and set you alight as you indicate, but what they deny is the fact that you are saying they were amongst the group of people who accosted you.

MR SELAI: Mr Hlongwane did not dispute the fact that he's the first person to stab me. The person who said, the only person who disputed what I was saying in Vanderbijlpark is Mr Patose, the rest did not dispute what I said in court.

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, this ends my evidence with the witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Mtanga. Mr Koopedi, any questions?

MR KOOPEDI: Thank you Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: Mr Selai, you say even in 1992 you belonged to no political party? Did you support any other, if you did not belong to any?

MR SELAI: I was a supporter of the ANC although I did not join them officially.

MR KOOPEDI: Being a supporter, did anyone know that, anyone in the township know that you are such a supporter?

MR SELAI: Yes, there are people who knew.

MR KOOPEDI: Did any of the applicants here know that you are an ANC supporter?

MR SELAI: The people who knew that were the leaders of the ANC.

MR KOOPEDI: So what you're saying is that these four applicants here before us did not know that you are an ANC supporter?

MR SELAI: Well I cannot say that with certainty. I don't want to answer on their behalf.

MR KOOPEDI: Okay. Now I find that there are discrepancies between your version here today and what you told the trial magistrate during the trial of these gentlemen and I would want to take you through just a few of those aspects and get your comment. You've told this Honourable Committee here today that you were accosted by some people. They stopped you and Patose, who would be the second applicant that is from my right, asked you why you were an IFP person. Now what I find strange is that you told the magistrate that it's in fact not him but accused number 3 who be Hlongwane, the man seated just next to me here. Can you explain why the discrepancy?

MR SELAI: Hlongwane was the first person to stab me. Patose was the person who was politically active in Boipatong and he was the person who asked me questions. Even presently he is the only person who is more aggressive than the rest.

MR KOOPEDI: I put it to you that your version here today is not the truth because you told the magistrate under oath during trial that accused 3, being Mr Hlongwane here, was the first person to speak to you that day and he's the one who asked you why you were a member of the IFP. Chairperson this can be seen from the Judgment on page 33 on the bundle, the very first paragraph, so I put it to you that your version here today is not the truth.

MR SELAI: I disagree with you Mr Koopedi.

MR KOOPEDI: Now I heard you say that you were not injured at Tshegase, just before you wandered off your testimony. Can you please explain? What do you mean you were not injured at Tshegase, you were not assaulted at Tshegase?

MR SELAI: I'm not saying they did not injure me at Tshegase. I said that I was stabbed between Moshweshwe and Batlong Street, I stabbed with a knife. When I arrived at Tshegase Tavern, then I received more injuries on my body, that was inside Tshegase Tavern and when I was hurt on my hand, I was inside Tshegase Tavern. I was stabbed with a screwdriver inside Tshegase Tavern. What I'm saying is, inside the tavern itself, that's where I received more injuries than I did on the street.

MR KOOPEDI: Okay. One other aspect perhaps which needs correction is that when you started off with your testimony you said that this incident occurred on the 26th of July 1996.

MR SELAI: No, no.

MR KOOPEDI: Did you want to say 1992?

MR SELAI: Yes, I wanted to say 1992. If ever I said it happened 1996, then I wanted to say 1992.

MR KOOPEDI: Now let's go to the events inside this tavern. When you were brought inside the house, what happened to you? Were you put on the floor, on the table, on a chair, were you standing? What happened?

MR SELAI: It was very difficult inside the tavern because Patose had already told the people that he has caught "Umdlwembe".

MR KOOPEDI: What I want to know is what did they do to you? Did they parade you as "Umdlwembe" while standing, did they order you to lie on the floor, were you put on a chair, what did they do to you? I want to know your situation. How were you situated?

MR SELAI: I was made to sit on the ground, on the floor rather.

MR KOOPEDI: Were you ever ordered to stand up at any stage?

MR SELAI: They were not telling me because every one of them was just grabbing, no one was giving me instructions to stand.

MR KOOPEDI: Let's go through the events slowly. You were put inside the tavern and ordered to sit down. What happened then, whilst you were sitting on the ground?

MR SELAI: While I was on the floor, they cut my right hand nerves, veins and they hacked my left hand. They were also asking me why I'm the member of IFP while living in Boipatong. Even Mr Msimango in court in Vanderbijlpark, he asked the question why I stayed in Boipatong knowing very well that we were not wanted in Boipatong. I explained to them that I was not a member of the IFP, I was born in Boipatong.

MR KOOPEDI: Now after being asked those questions, having your wrist slit, what happened to you then? Were you further assaulted?

MR SELAI: They told me that they are going to burn me.

MR KOOPEDI: Who told you so?

MR SELAI: That's Mr Patose.

MR KOOPEDI: At this stage were you still seated, or where were you?

MR SELAI: I was standing at that time.

MR KOOPEDI: Were you still inside, inside the tavern, or outside?

MR SELAI: I was still inside.

MR KOOPEDI: Now, this van where they got petrol from, where was it situated?

MR SELAI: It was outside.

MR KOOPEDI: And were you in a position to see what was happening outside, whilst you were inside the house?

MR SELAI: No, I would not see, but what made me aware that they were taking this petrol from that van, is that Mr Patose asked for the keys from the owner of the tavern and he's the person that gave him this mango atchar bucket.

MR KOOPEDI: So do you know who actually took the petrol out of that vehicle?

MR SELAI: I would say it's Mr Patose, he's the person who went outside with this bucket and he came back with this bucket full of petrol, so there was no-one who accompanied him to the outside.

MR KOOPEDI: Okay. You said in court that an unknown person forced you to drink petrol and poured petrol over you and why has that version changed today? Why are you today saying Mr Patose is the one who did this?

MR SELAI: There was another person who was involved in this case, Mr Patose said that he's the person who made me drink petrol. He mentioned somebody in Vanderbijlpark who was also involved in this case. I said before the court that he was not the person who made me drink this petrol. The person that I mentioned that I did not know is the one who set me alight.

MR KOOPEDI: Well, I want to say to you, one of the reasons why the magistrate found you to be a very good witness was the fact that you were able to tell the truth by saying you actually did not know this person who forced you to drink petrol and who poured petrol over you. What's your comment on that?

MR SELAI: May you please repeat that question?

MR KOOPEDI: I'll do that slowly. One of the reasons why the trial magistrate at Vanderbijlpark found you to be a credible, that is believable witness is the fact that you told him under oath that you do not know this person who forced you to drink petrol and who poured petrol over you. Today you know this person. What's your comment on that?

MR SELAI: My comment is that maybe the magistrate, maybe there was a misunderstanding between myself and the magistrate because for the magistrate to hold that view was that from the beginning of our case Mr Patose was the person who gave more evidence and I was the only person who was showing some respect in court, unlike Mr Patose.

MR KOOPEDI: Still, well it doesn't satisfy me, I'll leave that for argument. Perhaps one other thing that I need clarity on, is that you told court that, may I rephrase this Chairperson? Right. You told the Court that you were chopped by an axe and you lost consciousness. Do you remember telling this to the magistrate?

MR SELAI: I did not say to the magistrate that I lost consciousness. I was chopped with this axe outside the tavern. I would ask this Committee to tell me whether those things that you are asking me about were actually mentioned in that document from the Vanderbijlpark Court.

MR KOOPEDI: Well even if I'm not obliged to respond, I'm talking to you, I'm referring to the court documents, perhaps the Evidence Leader could show you the Judgment? Be that as it may, whilst the Judgment is still being showed to you, I put it to you that your entire version here today is incorrect and you have merely fabricated it. Particularly looking at the very big discrepancies in what you said in court and what you're saying here today. You told court that you, Mr Patose chopped you on the head and you lost consciousness and ...(intervention)

MS MTANGA: I'm sorry Chairperson, can I get the page for the witness, reference?

MR KOOPEDI: It's page 34, the second paragraph. No sorry, that's not it. I'll get to it now. There is a place where the Magistrate commends you as a witness and one of the reasons why he found you as a very good witness is that you could not tell who set, who's the one who struck the match and that you lost consciousness before that could be done. I will find the page now. If you could bear with me please Chairperson, let me find this page. Page 44, the third paragraph.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes and I think the other portion that you're talking about is at the top of page 44 where the Court says it was, it is in his favour he could so easily have accused the ...(intervention)

MR KOOPEDI: Thanks Chairperson, that's what I was referring to.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR KOOPEDI: On the third paragraph that I was referring to, you told court, this is what the Magistrate has recorded, that after accused number 4, who is Mr Patose, chopped you with an axe on the head you lost consciousness and then you are in no state to say who actually set you alight. In your evidence you also told court that you only then later woke up in hospital, finding yourself with burn wounds. What is strange is that your version today and the day before yesterday when you spoke to the Citizen, is different. It appears now that when you were set alight, you had not lost your consciousness. Can I get your comment on that?

MR KOOPEDI: When Mr Patose hacked me with the axe we were not inside the house. He hacked me with this axe while we were outside the house and that's the axe that made me unconscious, that is where I became aware of the person who set me alight. I hear you mentioning the evidence that appears on this paper. I would ask you to explain the difference between the evidence that appears on this paper and the one that I gave to the Citizen newspaper.

MR KOOPEDI: It said in the Citizen that you were forced to drink petrol, you were taken outside, you were set alight. You are quoted, in quote marks that:

But this is not the version the court heard, the version that convicted these applicants and all I need is your comment as to why the different versions.

MR SELAI: The way I understand English, when I read this paper ...

MR KOOPEDI: I take it you have no comment as to why we have different contradicting versions, is that so?

MR SELAI: No you are not correct because the way you say this to me, it seems as if you were present, but the truth of the matter is that you were told about what happened. When I was stabbed at Tshegase Tavern, I was dragged there and it is also mentioned on this newspaper that you say I must read, there's a difference between Sesotho and English. It says there I was dragged.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi is putting to you what you had apparently said at the trial to the Magistrate. He's comparing that to what you are saying today. He's saying that what you apparently said then does not agree with what you are saying today and he's asking you whether you are able to explain those differences, that's what's happening. It's got nothing to do with the fact that Mr Koopedi was or was not on the scene.

MR SELAI: My comment would be when you are chopped with an axe on the head, that does not make you unconscious but what happens to you, you become more weak. The strength that I had when I entered that house was reduced after I was hacked with this axe outside.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Koopedi.

MR KOOPEDI: In your evidence in chief you say, maybe let me rephrase the question. How many people came to you, how many people accosted you while you were walking?

MR SELAI: There were many people.

MR KOOPEDI: Could there have been 20, 30?

MR SELAI: There could be between 20 and 30.

MR KOOPEDI: Precisely what you told the magistrate, that is what he has recorded. Now what I find strange is that you said in your evidence in chief you fought with this group. Were you saying, did I hear you correctly that you said you fought this group?

MR SELAI: No, I was not fighting with them when they caught me.

MR KOOPEDI: Well I put it to you and I have a record of this, that when you were accosted you fought with the group. Perhaps one final question. I see no reason why the applicants here would ask for amnesty and not tell the truth. I see no reason why they could admit to having assaulted you, but in a different way. Could you tell me why? Do you think there's any reason why they would lie about events, put themselves on the scene, agree to having assaulted you, chopping you, stabbing you, but not tell the truth? Is there a reason known to you?

MR SELAI: There's no reason that can make me lie but when they ask for amnesty, what surprises me is that what kind of forgiveness that Mr Patose is asking because he does not see any remorse, I still see that aggression in his face, so I just want to know what kind of forgiveness is he asking?

MR KOOPEDI: Are you and Mr Patose enemies?

MR SELAI: Can you explain this word "enemies"?

MR KOOPEDI: Like someone you hate, someone who has done you some harm, someone who's talked bad about you and you have ill feelings about him?

MR SELAI: I do not hate Mr Patose, but I did not like the way he assaulted me and the things that he said about me and the fact that he does not show any remorse after he had injured me, then after, even when we meet, I do not like his behaviour.

MR KOOPEDI: I put it to you that the entire version that you've presented here is based on the fact that you do not like Mr Patose. May I get your comment?

MR SELAI: I never said that I dislike Mr Patose. I remember that you were next to us on Wednesday when I arrived here. Those people who were with Mr Patose were happy for me and they were talking to me. You even saw that Mr Patose was not happy. There was no peace between myself and Mr Patose, you saw that yourself, Mr Koopedi.

MR KOOPEDI: I had thought I would avoid the events of Wednesday and perhaps just one question on that. Do you remember saying to me on Wednesday that this matter would not have proceeded to court if it was not for Mr Patose?

MR SELAI: Yes, I do.

MR KOOPEDI: I have no further questions for this witness, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Koopedi. Has the Panel got any questions?

MR LAX: No questions, Chair.

MR SIBANYONI: Maybe just one from me Mr Chairperson. Mr Selai, it appears you've got no objection that this Committee can grant amnesty to Msimango, Hlongwane and Mzumbe, is that so?

MR SELAI: That's correct.

MR SIBANYONI: The only problem is with Patose?

MR SELAI: The problem that I have is that I have a problem with Mr Patose. Even at the township, I still have problems with those people who supported Mr Patose when he stood for elections in Boipatong.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: What were you saying? Are you saying that you're opposing the amnesty application of Mr Patose?

MR SELAI: Yes, I do.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Mtanga, have you got any questions?

MS MTANGA: Just one question Chairperson.

RE-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Mr Selai, Mr Koopedi just put it to you that at the time, before the trial went on, you were willing to leave the matter and not take it to court, what was the reason to be willing to forgive them, to forgive the applicants then?

MR SELAI: Their legal counsel and the ANC representatives in Boipatong met with me in court and they asked me that we should discuss this matter so that it should not be known by the parents because our parents knew each other. They were trying to avoid a conflict between the parents themselves, but when we were at court in Vanderbijlpark, Mr Patose was the person who was against what the representatives and other leaders in Boipatong were trying to do to resolve this matter. The legal counsel and the representatives of Boipatong said that because we all come from Boipatong, they did not want the situation to result in conflicts in Boipatong, but Mr Patose did not accept what they were saying.

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, this ends my re-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Mtanga. Mr Selai, thank you very much, you're excused.

CHAIRPERSON: ... was the only further evidence that was forthcoming, not so?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, from your side. Mr Koopedi, what is the position of your clients in the light of this testimony, do they intend to present anything else?

MR KOOPEDI: Mr Chairperson we have discussed this matter, that is myself and applicant. We were of the opinion that we should call further evidence. Further evidence in the sense that there would be witnesses in Boipatong who know and saw what happened. We had however agreed that we are going to see what this testimony is like and from what has happened and the notes that I've got and I think we've agreed that if this evidence is the way it is, then we are not going to call any further witness and we are therefore saying that will be our case. We are not calling any other witness, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. I'll give you an opportunity to add anything further to your, if you wish, to your address that you've already given in this matter in the light of this evidence. If there are any further submissions that you want to make, then I'll give you an opportunity to do so.

MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, I take it I'm given the opportunity now? Thank you Chairperson, because I would say I wouldn't want to add much so there wouldn't be a need for a written submission.

MR KOOPEDI IN ARGUMENT: My submission is very brief. I'm going to ask you Chairperson, Honourable Committee Members, to look at the evidence just given to us today by Mr Selai in totality. The whole of his evidence today, the court's finding on the trial and it is my submission that there are very big and unexplainable contradictions.

My further submission is that we have four applicants here who most probably wouldn't have gone to prison had there been some kind of a liking chemistry between Mr Patose and Mr Selai at one stage or another. The fact of the matter is, we have applicants here who are convicts who may have not gone to prison.

Chairperson I still wish to reiterate that none of these applicants acted in any way other than political. What they did, their actions on the day, were political. I see no reason, Chairperson, why people who are in prison, convicted of an offence, changed, you know, what they initially said in court, came here and said they're now telling the truth, placed themselves on the scene, agreed to have chopped and stabbed the victim, when in fact they are not telling the truth. It is my submission that they have told this Honourable Committee the truth.

My further submission is that from the evidence given here, there hasn't been any proof of personal gain by any of them.

It is finally, my final submission is that it is strange that amnesty is not opposed in regard to the other three applicants, it is only opposed with regard to one of the applicants being Mr Patose. Surely Honourable Chairperson, Honourable Committee Members, this shows that all this is caused by the fact that the victim and Mr Patose have a problem, or perhaps the other way around, the victim has a problem with Mr Patose and that's it, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Koopedi. Do you want to add anything further in the light of this evidence?

MS MTANGA: Yes Chairperson, I'll be very brief.

MS MTANGA IN ARGUMENT: My instructions are that, my submissions are that the victim is opposing the application in respect of Mr Patose and the ground for this is that he hasn't fully disclosed before this Committee the role he played when attacking the victim. He underplayed his role and even though this is not a requirement, the victim has taken into account the fact that Mr Patose is not showing any remorse for what he did to him. That is all I want to place before the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Mtanga.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi is there anything further?

MR KOOPEDI: No, nothing further, thanks Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that concludes this matter, the further evidence that was forthcoming in this matter as we've indicated earlier. We will consider all of the evidence carefully and we will decide the applications, at which stage we will notify the parties of the decision that the Panel has made in respect of the applications. So we will, as has been indicated, reserve the decision in the matter.

I think that also concludes the roll of this session. We would once again express our thanks to the lawyers, Mr Koopedi, for yet again making himself available at some inconvenience and rearranging your schedule in respect of other commitments that you had in order to accommodate this matter and Ms Mtanga for your assistance and also for the assistance of those many other people who would normally make it possible for us to have a hearing of this nature. It takes a lot of effort, organisation, logistical arrangements etc and it takes a lot of work and preparation before we are able to come and to sit down and to hear matters of this nature and we are always grateful for that. Our staff for their efforts, the interpreters, the Correctional Services for their assistance in these proceedings.

We have in particular in this session had to sit fairly late hours, long hours and beyond the normal sort of times that are involved and we know that there is always a degree of discomfort that goes with that and we appreciate the assistance that we get and the co-operation that we get in this regard and also to the proprietors of this venue, for making their venue available to us to be used for our purposes. We will now adjourn. Thank you.