CHAIRPERSON: Mr Khumalo, may I remind you that you are still under your previous oath, that is the oath you took yesterday?

MR KHUMALO: Thank you Sir.

BONGANI KHUMALO: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson and Honourable Members of the Committee. I think yesterday I finished leading the applicant before we adjourned.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo. Mr Coetzer, any cross-examination?

MR COETZER: Indeed Mr Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo what does AZANYU stand for?

MR KHUMALO: It's Azania National Youth Unity.

MR COETZER: Explain again to us, when did you join the PAC?

MR KHUMALO: In 1991.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, is it correct that you testified yesterday that in 1990 you joined the PAC?

MR KHUMALO: My apologies Sir, I joined in 1990.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, is it also correct that yesterday you testified that Mr Makwara recruited you on the 23rd of February 1992 for the PAC?

MR KHUMALO: He did not recruit me on the 23rd, that is the day he commanded me.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, why did you then tell us that you met Mr Makwara the 23rd of February 1992 and that he recruited you there, not for APLA but for the PAC?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, the word recruit means he recruited me to the organisation. On the 23rd he commanded me, that was the day he gave me order.

MR COETZER: So is it correct then to conclude that on the 23rd of February he gave you the command after you were recruited in 1990?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct, Sir.

MR COETZER: Why, from 1990, there were no other instructions given to you concerning any other actions against white people or white farmers?

MR KHUMALO: He was the person known to me, he's the person I used to meet often.

ADV SANDI: Sorry, maybe one can put the question in a slightly different way. What activities were you involved in for your organisation AZANYU before February 1992? Actions, I'm talking about actions, operations, what did you do? Was this the first operation?

MR KHUMALO: This was the first operation Sir.

ADV SANDI: Right, thank you.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, why weren't you recruited before for operations?

MR KHUMALO: I do not know. Had the Commander been here he would respond quite positively to that question.

MR COETZER: Very well. Mr Khumalo when did you say you met Mr Makwara?

MR KHUMALO: On the 23rd when he commanded me.

MR COETZER: And that was also the only day when you saw Mr Makwara, is that correct?

MR KHUMALO: No, I knew him from the day he recruited me into the organisation.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, then you must explain. Your testimony was in your main evidence that you met Mr Makwara on the 23rd of February 1992. Furthermore you said that afterwards you wouldn't be able to meet with him because you were in prison, you were arrested.

MR KHUMALO: To clarify this, I last saw him on the 23rd.

JUDGE DE JAGER: He also testified initially that he was recruited by Makwara at the beginning of his evidence.

MR COETZER: I apologise. How often did you meet Mr Makwara?

MR KHUMALO: He used to come to Qwaqwa during weekends. Sometimes he would come for two consecutive weeks and two consecutive weeks he would not come.

MR COETZER: Before the 23rd of February, what did he tell you? What did he teach you concerning the organisation and their workings?

Most of the times he taught me about the weaponry, the weapons and even our chatting was basically about the weapons and how he managed to reach the point where he was.

CHAIRPERSON: What did he teach you about the weapons?

MR COETZER: I explained yesterday that he taught me about weapons, the firearms and petrol bombs.

CHAIRPERSON: What type of firearms was he teaching you about?

MR KHUMALO: 9mm and an AK47.

CHAIRPERSON: What was happening to those? What did he teach you about those two?

MR KHUMALO: In other words he taught me how to dismantle, how to assemble them.

CHAIRPERSON: Would that also mean the 9mm, to teach you how to dismantle it and reassemble it?

MR KHUMALO: No, just the AK.

CHAIRPERSON: And what did he teach you about the 9mm?

MR KHUMALO: He taught me to shoot. Most of the times he taught me to shoot.

CHAIRPERSON: What type of 9mm weapon, firearm was that?

MR KHUMALO: There are many of them Sir, I can't remember but I do recall he taught me.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't follow. Did he teach you about several 9 millimetres, how to shoot with them, or what have you forgotten because there were many? I don't follow.

MR KHUMALO: He taught me with those guns but it was difficult for me to recall, this is the kind of an 9mm he used, but I recall he used 9mm to teach me and an AK47.

CHAIRPERSON: Were all these 9 millimetres the same?

MR KHUMALO: I did not expect that I would be asked about them one day, so I did not take a good look at them. My intention at that stage was just to know how to handle and use a gun.

CHAIRPERSON: Did he tell you the reason why he was on each day teaching you about a different 9mm?

MR KHUMALO: He just taught me to shoot and to aim at shooting.

CHAIRPERSON: How many parts did the AK47 have which you dismantled and assembled?

MR KHUMALO: I do not recall well now.

CHAIRPERSON: We would just require you to estimate, we don't want the precise number. You can't estimate either? Very well, you may proceed Mr Coetzer.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, did you only learn how to use a 9mm or did you also learn how to use a shotgun?

MR KHUMALO: No, Sir.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo did Mr Makwara ever show you the use or how to use any other weapons, apart from the AK47 and the 9mm?

MR KHUMALO: I wanted him to teach me about shooting, that was my main concern. I just wanted to know how to shoot and he taught that. I wasn't concerned about the others.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, you said Mr Makwara gave instructions to commit an act. Where and when did he give you this instruction?

MR KHUMALO: I was with him in Qwaqwa.

MR COETZER: And the date?

MR KHUMALO: Which date are you referring to Sir, when he was with me in Qwaqwa?

CHAIRPERSON: You have not referred to dates either, how could you be giving a date other than the 23rd when you received the instructions? That's the only date we know.

MR KHUMALO: My apologies. I did not understand the question. I met with him on the 23rd. It was in Qwaqwa when we met.

CHAIRPERSON: Precisely where in Qwaqwa?

MR KHUMALO: We were at Phuthaditjhaba.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed Mr Coetzer.

MR COETZER: Mr Tshabalala, did Mr Makwara give you this instruction early the morning or late the afternoon?

MR KHUMALO: It was in the day when he gave me the order.

JUDGE DE JAGER: How late in the afternoon? If you can just give us the answer very quickly. Was it 10 o'clock, 12 o'clock, over lunch or what time of the day was this?

MR KHUMALO: It was around 11 o'clock when I met with him in Qwaqwa.

MR COETZER: Mr Tshabalala, did you see Mr Makwara at a later stage on that same day?

MR KHUMALO: I last saw him on that day. Sir, please, my name is Khumalo, I am not Tshabalala.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, in other words the last time you saw Mr Makwara was at 11 o'clock the morning when he gave you the instructions, after that you never saw him again, is that correct?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, you then testified that Mr Makwara told you that he will use you in an operation but that Mr Makwara will choose the day and the place. How can you then receive the place and the date from him if you never saw him again afterwards?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, I did not catch your question.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, 11 o'clock that morning Mr Makwara tells you that he wants to recruit you to go and attack a white farm. He also tells you he will provide the date and the place where this attack will take place, but after 11 o'clock you do not see him again, so he hasn't told you where Mr Odendaal will be on Katdoring farm. Now you want to justify yourself by saying that Mr Makwara gave you the instruction to go and attack this specific persons. Where did you get your instructions from?

MR KHUMALO: You did not understand me well when I put my case. I mentioned that he said, because there are many farms and he said I will choose which one I prefer so that I can be able to carry forward this operation. We did not just meet and disperse without discussing anything.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, I put it to you and in your evidence-in-chief you said that Mr Makwara will choose the date and the place of the attack and not you.

CHAIRPERSON: No, it's not correct. It says the applicant ...(indistinct - interference with mike and then not talking into mike) evidence yesterday, you are mistaken there Mr Coetzer.

MR COETZER: In that case I apologise. Mr Khumalo, what was the specific wording of that instruction?

MR KHUMALO: He told me on that day, he said he wants me to go and perform a function where he would send me and he told me that I will go to any farm where I would be in a position to execute his order and he said I would choose a day myself to go.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Didn't he ask you whether you knew the Reitz area?

MR KHUMALO: He did ask me.

JUDGE DE JAGER: No, whether he knew the Reitz area.

MR KHUMALO: Yes, he asked me.

JUDGE DE JAGER: So did he direct you to go to Reitz, in the vicinity of Reitz?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct, because we were talking about those farms.

JUDGE DE JAGER: So you couldn't choose a farm at Bethlehem, for instance?

MR KHUMALO: It was quite far than Reitz.

CHAIRPERSON: No, the question is could you choose a farm in Bethlehem? Did you have a discretion, in other words?

MR KHUMALO: I don't understand you, Gentlemen.

CHAIRPERSON: When you spoke to Makwara, you just said to my brother here that you spoke about the Reitz area. Now the question is, because you had to choose the farm, could you have chosen a farm in Bethlehem, other than what Makwara was saying to you? Could you choose a farm anywhere else other than the area mentioned, or the area you were speaking about when you were discussing about these attacks?

MR KHUMALO: It would depend on our discussion Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: So you had no discretion where to go, but to go to Reitz?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct, Sir, that is the place that was under discussion.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Coetzer, you may proceed.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, did you have to reconnoitre the farm at first?

MR KHUMALO: I'd never been to that place, but I just knew it by passing.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is, did you go and identify the place?

MR KHUMALO: On the 24th when I was already there.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words, you only took one day and the next day you attacked?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed Mr Coetzer.

MR COETZER: The order from Mr Makwara, what did the order entail? What were you supposed to go and do at the farm?

MR KHUMALO: He said I should go and kill the boers.

MR COETZER: Just kill them?

MR KHUMALO: He said I should kill the boers and take anything that would be of benefit.

MR COETZER: Were you supposed to murder anybody specific?

MR KHUMALO: There was nobody specific that I should go and kill, it was just a command.

MR COETZER: Then why did you select this specific person?

MR KHUMALO: This was a vulnerable place to get in to fulfil the command.

MR COETZER: When did you discover this, that it was a vulnerable place?

MR KHUMALO: What is your question, Sir?

MR COETZER: When did you discover that it was a vulnerable place?

MR KHUMALO: When I met with Jabulani Tshabalala, because he is the person who provided me with information.

MR COETZER: What information did he provide to you and at what time?

MR KHUMALO: On the same day, the 24th and he knew the set-up on that house and he knew how many people lived there.

MR COETZER: Where did you meet Mr Tshabalala?

MR KHUMALO: I met with him at that farm in Reitz.

MR COETZER: So you went to the farm of Mr Odendaal beforehand specifically?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct, that is after I had received information.

MR COETZER: After you received what information?

MR KHUMALO: I knew that the owner was alone. I knew which days the sons were visiting. I knew that he was indoors at which times. I knew how many safes were in the house. All those things Tshabalala explained to me.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Why did you tell Tshabalala that you wanted to know when the sons would be visiting, how many safes there would be, did you give him any reason for wanting this information?

MR KHUMALO: He did not ask. I did not make him aware as to what I was going to do.

CHAIRPERSON: For how long had you known Tshabalala when you met with him on the 24th?

MR KHUMALO: I knew him on the same day, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And on the same day he volunteered all this information?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, I arrived during the day and in the evening we were sitting around a fire and we were chatting and I asked questions and he managed to answer some of those - to answer those questions. He is the person who referred me to a place where I would be given accommodation.

CHAIRPERSON: Where were you referred to to get accommodation?

MR KHUMALO: At Anna Magwa's place.

CHAIRPERSON: Where does she live?

MR KHUMALO: On that same farm.

CHAIRPERSON: Now why do you now call it her place because it's not her farm?

MR KHUMALO: It's true, that's not her farm, but the house that she lived in was her home, not the farm, it was on the farm.

CHAIRPERSON: Even with Anna Magwa, you knew her on the 24th?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Coetzer, you may proceed.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Just in conjunction with that, Anna allowed you to stay at the house that evening?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct, Sir.

JUDGE DE JAGER: So you and Anna didn't have any problems?

MR KHUMALO: No problems at all Sir, on that day.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Is there any reason why Anna would have lied in Court regarding what took place?

MR KHUMALO: I believe there is a reason Sir. She was one of the State witnesses, there were witnesses of the State.

JUDGE DE JAGER: You recall that Anna said that you arrived there before the time, that you stayed there 2 to 3 days before the time, that you departed and that you then returned?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, many times when people turn State witnesses they say something, their own concoction of the story. I would not say where she got that story from.

JUDGE DE JAGER: What did you do after you stabbed Mr Odendaal with a knife?

MR KHUMALO: Petrus went back, he went and stood by the gate next to the fence.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Didn't you take him by the arm and take him back to the house?

MR KHUMALO: No, that is not so.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Weren't you afraid, knowing that he had seen everything that took place, weren't you afraid that he would go and call for help?

MR KHUMALO: I don't understand. Who would have gone to call other people?

JUDGE DE JAGER: Petrus. He saw how the man was being stabbed to death and you left him there outside, he could have run off and told others what had just taken place.

MR KHUMALO: He was scared and he just stood there and I called him.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And where did you call him to?

MR KHUMALO: I called him to the place where I stabbed this white man and I called him to - I wanted him to show me where the keys were. He told me that the keys were with him.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Did he give you the keys?

MR KHUMALO: He showed me the keys, he showed me where they were on his person. I actually called him to search this man. He didn't, he just showed me where the keys were, that they were in the back pocket.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Why couldn't you yourself have searched the man? He was already dead.

MR KHUMALO: Yes, he did not search him, he just pointed. He said at the back pocket and I did the searching.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Thank you Mr Coetzer, you may proceed.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, you have just told us ...

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone.

MR COETZER: You have just told us that you went to the farm based upon information that you received regarding the vulnerability of the farm, is that correct?

MR KHUMALO: I went to that farm because it was the closest, that was due to the discussions with my Commander. In other words, I'm the person who went there after I have received information from Jabulani.

MR COETZER: Where did you meet Jabulani Tshabalala?

MR KHUMALO: I explained that I met him on the same farm in Reitz.

MR COETZER: But am I correct in understanding that you understood - that you went to that specific farm based upon information that you received from Tshabalala?

MR KHUMALO: At that time I had not received information about the house.

CHAIRPERSON: We don't follow. The legal representative said that you said just a minute or two ago, that you went to that farm because of information you received from Tshabalala.

MR KHUMALO: Yes, in other words I'm referring to the house now. I did not go to - not the house, not the farm, maybe we did not understand each other quite well on that issue. I was talking about the house.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, start all over again, because I did not understand you. I understood you as the legal representative has.

MR KHUMALO: I explained that when I arrived at that farm in Reitz, I met Jabulani Tshabalala. Jabulani Tshabalala gave me the information about the farmhouse. I don't know whether it's clear now.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed Mr Coetzer.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Yes, he gave you the information that evening as he was seated by the fire, is that correct?

MR KHUMALO: Yes, we were now sitting down chatting and during the day I had also seen myself.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, did you need to procure weapons for the struggle?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MR COETZER: What weapons did you obtain Mr Khumalo?

MR KHUMALO: Those I saw in the safe were these long guns and we normally call them pump guns.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, in other words you are referring to a shot gun?

MR KHUMALO: I don't understand what you mean.

MR COETZER: Was the weapon in the safe a shot gun?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct, they were long guns.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo you testified that you received a 9mm and an AK47 and when you were examined regarding shot guns, you said no.

MR KHUMALO: Sir the guns that I saw I had never seen before and I'd never used them for training, that's why I'm calling them pump guns.

MR COETZER: Is it correct that there were only two weapons in the safe?

MR KHUMALO: No, Sir, there were not only two.

MR COETZER: And that it was only a 303 and an air gun?

MR KHUMALO: I dispute that Sir, it was quite a number of guns.

MR COETZER: How can there be a number of weapons in the safe if the deceased possessed only two guns, namely a 303 and an air gun?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, I want to stress, what I saw was a number of guns, they were in two rows. There was a row at the back and there were others here to the front.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, the safe, describe it to us. If you open the door were the weapons packed on the left and the right sides, or from the back to the front?

MR KHUMALO: They were packed in a row, Sir. This safe is this big and they were in a row and there were others in the front row.

MR COETZER: Very well Mr Khumalo, you now have the ideal opportunity to obtain weapons for your organisation. Why did you take the smaller of the two weapons?

JUDGE DE JAGER: The smaller of the two, or the smaller of the lot because according to him there were at least two rows of weapons. Could he perhaps give us an indication of how many weapons there would have been in these two rows? 10, 20, 30, how many?

MR KHUMALO: If I'm estimating, there could have been 8 or 7.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Can you then answer the question of why you took only the air gun?

MR KHUMALO: I took a gun so that I could defend myself when getting out and I knew if I do escape and I manage to reach the township, I would not run with firearms that are not covered and maybe I could be summoned, the police could be summoned to come and arrest me, so that was my fear.

CHAIRPERSON: What about the instruction from Makwara that you should take anything that was to be of benefit to the struggle? What about your instruction now? Had you forgotten about it?

MR KHUMALO: I did not forget the instruction Sir, but what remains behind is, when you do something you check as to whether is this right when I approach it this way, is it wrong when I approach it this way? Now at that time I noticed that I do not have any chance to do anything. The accused had see Anna Magwa getting into the other house, so I noticed I did not have a chance, so I had to leave the farm running.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed Mr Coetzer.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Mr Coetzer are there any other aspects that you wish to cover?

MR COETZER: Just one aspect.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo you were aware that the deceased was going to sell his farm - sold tobacco on his farm (correction).

MR KHUMALO: Yes, I learned on that day when we were chatting.

MR COETZER: What sort of work did you do at that stage?

MR KHUMALO: What kind of work was I doing? Are you referring, was I employed? I don't understand your question.

MR COETZER: Were you employed or unemployed?

MR KHUMALO: I was unemployed Sir.

MR COETZER: So you were looking for money?

MR KHUMALO: Are you telling me Sir, or are you asking me?

CHAIRPERSON: It is a question Sir, were you looking for money? It's a question, you can't make a mistake about that.

MR KHUMALO: No, I did not want money.

ADV SANDI: Yes, but on the same aspect, did you have any source of income? How did you manage to live if you were unemployed?

MR KHUMALO: My parents were sustaining me, Sir.

ADV SANDI: Were your parents employed? Were they working people? Did they have an income?

MR KHUMALO: My father was working.

ADV SANDI: What was the position about Daniel Makwara, was he employed?

MR KHUMALO: I think he was working Sir.

ADV SANDI: Where did he work?

MR KHUMALO: I do not recall.

ADV SANDI: I didn't get the last bit. Did you say you don't know remember where he was employed?

MR KHUMALO: He was an APLA member and I thought he was working.

ADV SANDI: What do you mean by that? Do you mean employed by APLA?

MR KHUMALO: I mean to be an APLA members, yes.

ADV SANDI: Thank you Mr Coetzer.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, so your primary motive that day was not politically oriented, you were looking for money?

MR KHUMALO: That is not correct, Sir. If ever we wanted money, we would have tried many other avenues and we did not ransack the house.

CHAIRPERSON: Wouldn't money have benefited your organisation?

MR KHUMALO: It would, Sir, had I laid my hands on it.

CHAIRPERSON: But your response to just the last question was that if you were looking for money, you would have ransacked the house and the instruction from Makwara, if I followed what you're saying is that you should get anything from the farmers ...

JUDGE DE JAGER: I beg your pardon, but the case you are handling is making a tremendous noise on the loudspeakers.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry, Mr Khumalo, the instruction was that you should get anything that would benefit the organisation and your last response thereto was that you did not ransack the house.

MR KHUMALO: Sir we did not ransack the house. It is known that the money is kept in the safe. Now the question was I was looking for money, not I thought the question to me, I wanted money for personal use, not - so I was to kill the white people and take the important items. Had the money been there, I would have taken it for the benefit of the organisation.

CHAIRPERSON: What did you understand the important items would be that would benefit the organisation?

MR KHUMALO: Weapons, money, if a vehicle was close enough, I would have taken it so that I could transport the items that I had.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed Mr Coetzer.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo did you have to report back to Mr Makwara at any stage?

MR KHUMALO: If the mission was well accomplished, I would have reported to him.

MR COETZER: Why didn't you report back to him?

MR KHUMALO: I was arrested on the 25th. I did not have a chance even at the Reitz police station to inform him about my arrest.

ADV SANDI: Sorry, Mr Coetzer, if I could just come in here. What was the arrangement if there was any between yourself and your Commander? Where were you supposed to meet him and give him a report after this attack?

MR KHUMALO: He told me that we will meet during the weekend, in other words the day of the attack, the 25th, was chosen by me. Now in other words the Saturday, the coming Saturday we were going to meet and I was going to present to him the items repossessed.

ADV SANDI: Do you know if he subsequently became aware that you had been arrested?

MR KHUMALO: He subsequently knew because I was with him at Grootvlei.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Grootvlei is the jail, is that correct?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

JUDGE DE JAGER: But you didn't have an appointment to meet him at Grootvlei?

MR KHUMALO: Yes, that is correct, but it ended up being that way, we met there.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo please help me in this. You said the 23rd was the last time that you saw Mr Makwara.

MR KHUMALO: That was the last day to meet with him for the execution of the order he gave me but I never met him in connection with the incident afterwards.

MR COETZER: You said that you wanted to talk to Mr Makwara again, but because you were arrested you couldn't.

MR KHUMALO: Yes, he was still - he was outside, he was a free man, I was inside the prison. As I explained, I last saw him there and I met him in 1998 here in Grootvlei prison.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, were you out on bail?

MR KHUMALO: Yes, I was on bail.

MR COETZER: Couldn't you have met up with Mr Makwara at that stage?

MR KHUMALO: I did not get a chance, the right chance. I used to frequent Qwaqwa, but I did not frequent his place, Mutshabelo.

ADV SANDI: Didn't you think it was a matter of importance to meet him whilst you were out on bail and tell him things didn't go right and give him a report. Didn't you think that was important?

MR KHUMALO: It was important Sir, but I mentioned already that I - the treatment that I got at the station was not well, to put it clearly I was shot at and I was in pains, I even have the scar today.

ADV SANDI: Ja, but couldn't you send out messages to Makwara and say: "Please come and see me, I want to talk to you."

MR KHUMALO: I was not thinking well, Sir and I always thought of what the police told me. They told me that: "You are going to die. You're going to be sentenced to death. You are going to Pretoria." All these things combined with the family problems, these really worked on my mind.

CHAIRPERSON: Where were you shot at?

MR KHUMALO: May I show the Committee?

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, you cant tell me the anatomy of your body, not undress here, it's not a conducive place to do that.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR KHUMALO: I was shot next to the genitals, Sir.

ADV SANDI: Did the PAC or Makwara assist you to secure legal representation?

MR KHUMALO: I did not organise anybody from the organisation to represent me because I was told always that if you are a member of the organisation, they could kill you anytime.

ADV SANDI: Did the PAC or Makwara render any kind of assistance to you whilst you were going through the criminal trial?

MR KHUMALO: No, Sir and I think - I took the blame for what happened, so I did not involve them.

ADV SANDI: Did you require any kind of assistance? Did you need to be assisted with anything whilst you were going through the criminal trial?

MR KHUMALO: I did not expect any assistance from anybody and if the organisation had assisted me, I would have been known to be belonging to a certain organisation, so I was concerned with my life, so I did not ask from any assistance from anybody.

CHAIRPERSON: But didn't you say they told you you are going to die in Pretoria? You would be sent to Pretoria. Was life a matter to you because you were in any event going to die, did that matter?

MR KHUMALO: It troubled me a lot, Sir and it ended up being true.

CHAIRPERSON: Even if you told the PAC, you were still going to die according to what they told you, it did not matter whether the PAC knew or not, you were going to die, isn't it, according to what they told you?

MR KHUMALO: Yes, Sir, the police were telling me: "You are going to die" and some of them will say: "No, you won't die, there will be an appeal made", so all these troubled me and under such circumstances you don't think straight, you don't know what's going on. How would an appeal trouble you because you would probably be successful on appeal and save your life? Wouldn't that be so?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, I agree with you on what you are saying but at that time situations were not like now as we are sitting here talking.

CHAIRPERSON: Now you said earlier, if I may just continue Mr Coetzer, just this last question. You said you were given bail, you recall that?

MR KHUMALO: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: How much was the bail fixed at?

MR KHUMALO: It was R1 000.

CHAIRPERSON: Who paid the bail money?

MR KHUMALO: It's my father.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may proceed Mr Coetzer.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, I will come back to the money. Approximately R300 was stolen from the house on that day.

MR KHUMALO: Sir, I don't know anything about money.

MR COETZER: Constable Mehi testified that you threw money over the fence after you were injured. How do you explain that?

MR KHUMALO: Mr Mehi is the person who shot at me and they jumped the fence, saying they were searching for the weapons and immediately all of a sudden he came up with money, that I did not know where it came from. There was no exhibit from me, now they were using money to pressurise me and I did not know anything about this money.

JUDGE DE JAGER: What happened to the purse that Tshabalala took?

MR KHUMALO: I did not check what happened to the purse, I ended up - the purse was in his hand, that's the last time I saw it. I don't know what happened thereafter.

JUDGE DE JAGER: But you were sent to get money and guns. Now you see this purse but you don't worry about what you've been ordered to do. You ignore your order to take money and guns.

MR KHUMALO: When I looked at the purse, Sir, I saw that was not enough money really and that was not enough money to even assist the organisation, that's why I did not even pay attention to the purse.

JUDGE DE JAGER: You saw it wasn't enough money. How much money was in the purse?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, by just looking at the purse, the purse will give an indication, that was - even when he had the purse, you could see that the purse had nothing. You cannot fit R40 000 in that purse.

JUDGE DE JAGER: But you were not ordered to get R40 000, you were ordered to get money for the organisation and even

R1 000 or R2 000 or R100 could assist them.

MR KHUMALO: Sir, when I looked at the purse, I thought the purse did not have anything inside, that's why I did not pay too much attention to the purse.

JUDGE DE JAGER: No, Sir, you've told us a minute ago it didn't have enough money. Now it's no - it didn't have anything in the purse, what's the truth now? Thank you.

MR KHUMALO: When I say the purse did not have money, I'm not saying the purse did not have money at all, what I'm saying is that little amount that was inside, he had this purse in his hand and according to how he handled the purse, I did not see whether there was money inside, but the way he handled the purse, that to me was an indication that there was no money in the purse and one other thing, we wanted to run away at that same time.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Coetzer.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo Tuesday the 24th of February you arrived on the farm for the first time. Makwara, Dladla and yourself testified in the court case that you've already arrived on the farm before the 24th. Why are you not telling the truth?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, what I said in Court was the way of defending myself. There was pressure from the accused, from the co-accused.

CHAIRPERSON: If I may, Mr Coetzer. You say you were - there was pressure that I think Jabulani Tshabalala was testifying against you, saying things which were not true against you. Am I hearing you to say that?

MR KHUMALO: He was saying things against me, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: In Court, who was accused number 1?

MR KHUMALO: I was accused number 1.

CHAIRPERSON: And between you and Tshabalala, who testified first?

MR KHUMALO: It's me Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And Tshabalala I take it testified after you?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: So he pressurised you after you had testified?

MR KHUMALO: Yes, I had already testified and what he said in Court was considered.

CHAIRPERSON: And when you testified, you were not saying anything against him?

MR KHUMALO: I did not pressurise him on anything, Sir, I did not say anything against him and the focus was my running away and that I ended up being shot at. The killing of the farmer was my - it was placed upon my shoulders, but on many instances he put pressure on some of - on the issues.

CHAIRPERSON: When you testified, who did you say killed the farmer? You said you did.

MR KHUMALO: I said myself Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And what did Tshabalala do? What did you say his role was? I say, according to your testimony, what was Tshabalala's role?

MR KHUMALO: The role played by Tshabalala was to show me where the key to the safe was and he did not do anything really and the purse that has been referred to, he had that.

CHAIRPERSON: What was your testimony in Court? Is that what you testified to in Court?

MR KHUMALO: I did not say it in full, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't follow. I'm asking you about what obtained in Court because you say Tshabalala was pressuring you and I'm asking you because you testified first, what did you say Tshabalala's role in this crime was?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, I only recall that he was pressurising me in Court and some of the things that I have mentioned have left my mind now.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's remind you, we've got the transcript before us. Page 34 and I will request your attorney to show it to you, starting from line 13. As you testified first you said it's Tshabalala who stabbed.

MR KHUMALO: Yes, I agree to that, I said it was Tshabalala who stabbed and this I said under those circumstances.

CHAIRPERSON: What circumstances, Sir? You said you testified under those circumstances, so I don't follow what circumstances you're referring to, so I'm asking you what circumstances were you saying that?

MR KHUMALO: This I mentioned to the police and these police took this statement that we gave them at the police station after we'd been arrested, they forwarded the statement.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me just tell you what I was asking you a few minutes back when I said this is the transcript of the Court. This is what you said personally, no other police man, about Tshabalala, that Tshabalala is the one who stabbed. That is your evidence before Court that Tshabalala stabbed, nothing about the police, taken verbatim as you were testifying.

MR KHUMALO: I ended up saying that Sir, according to the explanation I already gave.

CHAIRPERSON: I asked you yesterday whether Tshabalala was not also an accused. You said yes. How could he now pressurise you when he is charged as well with the same offence? You are both standing there charged with murder and he elects to take the side of the police when he's also charged of murder. I don't understand that, that is what I want you to make me understand because really I may not be upbeat about that.

MR KHUMALO: Gentlemen, that was the era of oppression and all these things happened while I was looking, nobody told me. I was arrested with him and I did not believe it when I saw him washing the cars, he was being sent to the shops and we were both arrested, we were charged with murdering a white person. I don't know what he was given when they were together, but that was evidence enough that he had friends among those police, that is why I'm saying he was pressurising me.

CHAIRPERSON: I understand that it was during the days of oppression, but was murder not committed in this instance or are they plucking it from somewhere that there wasn't murder and they just brought murder to you? Wasn't there murder on this particular day?

MR KHUMALO: It is true Sir, it was murder on that day.

CHAIRPERSON: And you are coming before us to give us the circumstances why there was murder and we have to understand that if you committed that crime of murder, it must have been political and further that we should understand that before we make any decision, we must be satisfied that you gave us all the particulars relating to that murder, in other words full disclosure, is that your understanding why you are here?

MR KHUMALO: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Because if you don't admit your crime, we cannot even think of granting you amnesty, is that not so?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Now we are asking you a simple question, that you testified first and said Tshabalala killed Mr Odendaal and you say no, Tshabalala was pressurising you when you were the first to utter the words that Tshabalala is the one who did it. Now tell us which is which now. Let's get it from you, according to you, let's forget Tshabalala for a moment. Who killed Mr Odendaal?

MR KHUMALO: It's me Sir, I killed Mr Odendaal.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

MR KHUMALO: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. You may proceed Mr Coetzer.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo you haven't explained to us why there were four people who said that you were on the farm before the 24th. Why do four people say that and now for the first time today you say that the first time you arrived on the farm was the 24th?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, those people do not even know me. Those four people I do not know, they do not know me.

MR COETZER: Mr Khumalo, you yourself said during the Court case that you were, you have been on the farm before the 24th, why are you changing your story now?

MR KHUMALO: Sir, I am not disputing what you are saying. Sir I was just responding to the questions and I was fighting for my defence, I was defending myself.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Thank you Mr Coetzer, I do not think that we will get anything else.

MR COETZER: I have no further questions and thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Coetzer. Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: Thank you Chairperson, I have a few questions.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Mr Khumalo you testified yesterday that you joined the PAC in 1990, am I correct?

MR KHUMALO: That is correct.

MS MTANGA: In your application you stated that your political organisation was AZANYU and you mention nothing about the PAC. Can you explain why didn't you mention the PAC in your application?

MR KHUMALO: Truly speaking, I was not mentally stable when I ended up in that organisation.

MS MTANGA: Which organisation, Mr Khumalo?

MR KHUMALO: Where I am sitting now, just as it has been mentioned yesterday.

MS MTANGA: Mr Khumalo, I don't understand your answers. My first question to you was why did you not put the PAC in your application, why did you only mention AZANYU in your application, what's your answer to that?

MR KHUMALO: Oh, when I completed the forms I was in a hurry so I left some items not completely filled.

MS MTANGA: Can you tell this Committee what's the difference between AZANYU and PAC?

MR KHUMALO: PAC is an organisation, AZANYU, it's part of the organisation.

MS MTANGA: What part of the organisation, Mr Khumalo?

MR KHUMALO: It is the youth organisation.

MS MTANGA: Yesterday you gave evidence and you said AZANYU was the Task Force, what did you mean by that?

MR KHUMALO: Well I did not respond correctly, but I'm stressing my response yesterday and I was not mentally stable at that time.

MS MTANGA: At which time, Mr Khumalo?

MR KHUMALO: Yesterday when I was here.

MS MTANGA: So what are you saying today? Yesterday you said you were a member of the Task Force and you were asked what Task Force and you said AZANYU, what are you saying today? Are you saying you were not a member of AZANYU?

MR KHUMALO: I'm a member of AZANYU.

MS MTANGA: And I'm asking you, was AZANYU a Task Force as you testified yesterday?

MR KHUMALO: No, that is not correct. My apologies please.

MS MTANGA: What is a Task Force, Mr Khumalo?

MR KHUMALO: Task Force is also part of the PAC. It is also a youth organisation. My apologies please, yes, I'm being asked questions but many of the things I have forgotten, please bear with me Gentlemen.

MS MTANGA: Did Mr Makwara tell you that the Task Force is a youth organisation that is part of the PAC? Where did you get this?

MR KHUMALO: Well that was my recollection as I responded to questions and because so many things happened and that's why I'm saying I do not - I will not recall some of the things very well because it's been a long time ever since I came into contact with them.

MS MTANGA: Mr Khumalo you were with Mr Makwara from 1990 up until 1992 when you committed this offence and you joined the PAC in 1990 and do you want to tell us you don't know what the Task Force is if you were really a member of the PAC as you testified?

MR KHUMALO: It is the PAC soldiers, they fall under the APLA and they assist APLA with anything that is needed within the organisation, that is if I recall very well, but I believe so.

MS MTANGA: Why did you confuse the Task Force with AZANYU then?

MR KHUMALO: My apologies, I made a mistake.

MS MTANGA: Who was the President of the PAC in 1992, Mr Khumalo?

MR KHUMALO: If I recall well it was Clarence Makwetu.

MS MTANGA: And who was the first President of the PAC?

MR KHUMALO: Just bear with me for a minute.

MS MTANGA: Mr Khumalo while you think that answer, can I ask you my next question? Who was the Deputy President of the PAC in 1992? Do you know who was ... ja, carry on.

MR KHUMALO: I only have Clarence Makwetu's name in my memory, I'm sorry for those that I cannot recall their names.

MS MTANGA: You were a member of the PAC in the Free State. Can you give me the original Chairperson in the Free State in 1992?

MR KHUMALO: I don't quite understand your question.

MS MTANGA: I am saying to you you were a member of the PAC in the Free State region and I'm asking you, who was the original Chairperson of the PAC in the Free State.

MR KHUMALO: I have forgotten, I'm sorry.

MS MTANGA: Mr Khumalo I would like to make you aware that the questions that I'm asking you, it's political education, they form part of political education that you receive as a PAC member especially if you get recruited into the Task Force this is basic information that you should know about the PAC and you don't know. What do you say to this?

MR KHUMALO: Ma'am yes, but I have explained that, I don't know how should I put this really, let me put it this way. I was sentenced to death and ever since that I can't think straight, that is why I'm still having problems even at this stage.

MS MTANGA: Finally Mr Khumalo I want to put it to you that I will argue that you are a criminal trying to hijack the amnesty process and this offence was never committed for the political benefit of the PAC as you have testified here today and yesterday. What do you say to this?

MR KHUMALO: I'm not a criminal, but I explained the problem here and the problem that I find myself in.

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

CHAIRPERSON: Just one before you do, Mr Mbandazayo. In your application, question 9(b), did you know the person you killed because what I'm reading here is that you say it's, I want to give you the full names, Mr Wessels Cronje Odendaal. Did you know that the person you killed was Mr Wessels Cronje Odendaal?

MR KHUMALO: I knew him only as Wessels at that time. The person who provided me with information about his house, told me that.

CHAIRPERSON: And despite the death sentence, you remembered that?

MR KHUMALO: Yes Sir that he was Odendaal and the others, no, I only learned about them in the documents, that was only then that I managed to know his full names.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Khumalo. Any re-examination Mr Mbandazayo.

ADV SANDI: Sorry maybe I can ask just one question before Mr Mbandazayo. I hear you keep on saying yesterday when you gave your evidence-in-chief you were mentally unstable and as a result you could not think straight, but did you tell Mr Mbandazayo, you lawyer yesterday or at any stage thereafter? Does he know about this? Did you tell him about this problem you have?

MR KHUMALO: He does not know, really.

ADV SANDI: Why didn't you tell him if you had such a problem?

MR KHUMALO: When I took the stand I tried not to be difficult.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

MR KHUMALO: Thank you Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination Mr Mbandazayo?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson. Chairperson, I don't think any re-examination now will take our case any further.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that you case Mr Mbandazayo?

MR MBANDAZAYO: That's the case for the applicant, Chairperson, thank you.

MR COETZER: We will not be calling any witnesses.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: No witnesses Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo, could you briefly tell us why we should grant amnesty?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson.

MR MBANDAZAYO IN ARGUMENT: Chairperson, without wasting the time of the Committee and everybody here, it's my submission that the evidence which has been placed before the Committee is enough for the Committee to reach and fair and a just decision in this matter. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo. Mr Coetzer, any argument?

MR COETZER IN ARGUMENT: Chairperson, Committee Members, suffice to say that one should not hide behind another when it comes to the responsibility for one's actions. One cannot expect of a political organisation to carry the blame for deeds that one committed.

In the light of this, I leave the decision in the hands of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Coetzer. Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, I will also be very brief.

MS MTANGA IN ARGUMENT: It is my submission to this Committee today that Mr Khumalo committed this offence for

personal gain. It was in his evidence that he never accounted for the items they robbed from the Odendaal family, he never accounted for these to either Mr Makwara or to any other member of the PAC and he never gave evidence as to what happened to these items and one can only conclude that Mr Khumalo kept whatever they obtained for themselves, that is Khumalo and Tshabalala. Secondly I also would like to submit that the failure by Mr Khumalo to answer very basic questions about his political organisation that he had been a member for more than two years at the time he committed this offence, clearly shows that Mr Khumalo has lied about his political affiliation. He was never a member of the PAC and he committed this offence as a criminal, not as a political person,

Finally he has not given full disclosure in regard to what was obtained from the Odendaal family. It's clear from the evidence from Court that money was taken from the family and the applicant here today denies that he knew money was taken, despite evidence showing that money was found in his possession at the time he was arrested.

That is all I'd like to say, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Mtanga. Mr Mbandazayo, obviously you do not have a reply.

MR MBANDAZAYO: None, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Khumalo, thank you very much. What is going to happen, the three of us here are going to sit down, decide and after we have made our decision it will be written, because the Act requires us, the Act that brought us here, the Act that has brought our existence actually, requires us that the decision that we give should be in writing. Your attorney, Mr Mbandazayo, will be provided with a copy and another copy will come to you, do you understand that?

We will try our utmost that we don't delay it unduly. We will do everything in our power to give the decision as soon as possible, but it has to be written. The same here, Mr Coetzer, we've got to give a written decision and it shall be sent to you shortly, so in other words what I'm saying is that our decision is reserved. We thank you for having come, Mr Khumalo.

I notice it's just about ten to eleven and I hope Mr Kachelhoffer it will be appropriate to have tea at this time. Thank you. We shall adjourn for tea for 15 minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Could we get organised? Mr Mbandazayo, are you ready with Mr King Lebea?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, Chairperson, I'm ready. Can he be sworn in, Chairperson?

CHAIRPERSON: Before I do so, Mr Lebea, just sit for a second. The Panel is as yesterday and the legal representatives as well as yesterday. Mr Lebea, do you feel better today?

MR LEBEA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you stand up? Could you once again give us your full names?

KING LEBEA: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson.

EXAMINATION BY MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Lebea you have heard the first applicant testifying yesterday. Do you confirm the contents of his testimony and do you also abide by that testimony as far as it relates to you?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now just a few aspects, Mr Lebea. Am I correct - is it correct that you were born on the 14th of March 1973?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And is it also correct that you grew up in the Free State?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Can you tell the Committee how far have you gone at school?

MR K LEBEA: I've gone until Standard 6.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now can you tell the Committee when did you join PAC?

MR K LEBEA: I joined PAC in 1989, the 19th of April.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Where?

MR K LEBEA: Right here in Bloemfontein at Pelindaba.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Who recruited you into PAC?

MR K LEBEA: My brother recruited me into PAC.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Who is your brother?

MR K LEBEA: Titus Lebea, the first applicant.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now were you at any stage a member of APLA - Task Force of APLA?

MR K LEBEA: I later joined the Task Force of APLA.

MR MBANDAZAYO: When was that?

MR K LEBEA: It was on the 27th of August 1990.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Who recruited you in the Task Force of APLA?

MR K LEBEA: My brother did so.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now did you undergo any training?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir, but it was a short training that lasted only a day.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Where was that and when was that?

MR K LEBEA: It was at Pelindaba in Bloemfontein on the 15th of January 1991.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now you have heard the testimony of your brother that it was a week after the 15th that you undergo training, which the Member of the Committee, the Chairperson of the Committee estimated to be around 22nd somewhere of January. Now you are telling the Committee that on the 15th of January you undergo training. Can you explain that?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, I think my brother may have forgotten some days, it seems he has been twisting the days there so instead of talking about what happened before, he brought it later in.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now, who trained you?

MR K LEBEA: Who trained me is the person whom I later knew as Temba Ncapai.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now what name did you know him about before you knew him as Temba Ncapai?

MR K LEBEA: I used to say his name is Sabata.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now let's come to the incident itself. Can you tell the Committee about the role you played in this whole incident?

MR K LEBEA: Actually the role I played in this incident, I was a gunman and I was tasked to shoot if ever it's necessary.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, continue. What did you actually do yourself?

MR K LEBEA: Actually on the event of the incident I was standing outside and after hearing noise inside which I didn't know what was the cause of the noise. I entered the room through a broken window and what I saw inside there, I saw the victim, Mr van Tonder, was being attacked by the Task Force members and the wife of Mr van Tonder was standing aside trying to stop what was happening there, but unfortunately she couldn't put her hands in there and then because of the noise that was going on, the noise from Mr van Tonder and his wife who was trying to save her husband's life. I shouted for this guy to stop because the noise was going too far and I decided to shout at them, so that they can stop what they were doing because it was not in the right manner, because it was causing noise, it might invite some uninvited guests. So they stopped after realising what I was trying to do to them and then because Mr van Tonder was having a shotgun which I didn't know the name thereof, by the time I ordered them to stop, they turned around, Mr van Tonder was having a gun in his hand and he fired a shot which I didn't know whom he hit and these guy they all go out running from the sound of that gun.

Then what happened there, Mr van Tonder pointed the firearm at me and he shot me in my right thigh and thereafter, because I was having a gun myself, I started chasing him in the house and Mrs van Tonder tried to close the sliding door and she was in front and Mr van Tonder was behind and I decided to shoot her because she was on my way, I was short, so I had to do what I wanted to do by that time, which was returning the fire to someone who shot me.

After that incident, I went out to look what was happening to these other three guys. I came to find my brother lying on the ground. Clearly he was shot and I testified he was shot at the back, so I took him to the room behind me, the back room which was said to be a rondavel and then I put him there and he lied there. I never knew what to do after that because I never experienced such a thing like that where somebody has been shot, especially in the back where the bullet was in the stomach. I never knew what to do. I ended up taking these other three guys and we went back, breaking the kitchen door, forcefully breaking it, opening it, entering the kitchen and I wanted something to help my brother. I never thought what could it be, but I wanted something. I opened the fridge. I didn't know what to do. I thought maybe ice can help, but I never thought it would. At last I end up entering the house in the passage and I said to myself, anybody trying to stop me I'm going to shoot him or her, whoever it can be.

Unfortunately I never saw anyone until I entered the room. In that room it was a bedroom of Mr van Tonder and Mrs van Tonder. What I did in there, the other guys were, by the time I entered, other guys entered the room too, so they were searching for what they were searching for, which was to be done there, but what I did, I opened the wardrobe, clothes wardrobe, because I was looking for one thing, a key to the car, so that I can rescue the life of the person who was shot. I opened the wardrobe. Luckily, I don't know maybe the spiritual God was there to guide me for what I was doing there, I raised my hand and reached right on top of the wardrobe. My hand fell right on top of the car keys and I took the car keys and I got out and the other guy by the name of Mokweti, Samuel, he showed me the safe which was in the corner. He said the safe is there and the gun is there and I said to him: "Leave those behind, because someone is injured, or you can take them yourself" and I go out of the door, went to the garage. Instead of opening the car first, I broke the car window with my fist and opened the car, entered and started the car and going to fetch my brother at the back of the rondavel, putting him back in the car and Abram Smith decided he will drive because I didn't know how to drive a car and we drove off from the scene there.

We went straight to ...(indistinct) hospital. Unfortunately Thaba N'chu was too far and we never knew how far could he make until the hospital so instead we decided to put him in ...(indistinct) hospital.

When we arrived there we took him to the reception where they wanted R20. Luckily for him, those goods which were taken by those other guys, there was money. I went back to the car and I took R20 to pay for him at the hospital and they admitted him. I was shot too, but I was still walking right, I was only full of blood. I went back to the car and then we went back home.

When we arrived home, I felt I was too weak and I was feeling like some kind of dizziness, so I decided that I have to go and see a doctor, so I told these other two guys that I have to go and see a doctor and then I don't know where everything can be stored, so I took there, I don't know whether it was a jewel box, because it was mixed, there was money and all those stuff inside, I took it and I put it in a safe place and I told them to look for the safe place for the car until such time that ...(indistinct) and I went to the private doctor who told me that I was too weak, I need to be put on the water, something like that and the right place for that is hospital, so I went to hospital. I was admitted at the hospital that same day and put on those drips, water drips, I don't know what kind of water is that.

The following day I felt better and insisted on the doctor that I'm feeling better so I have to go because I knew I have to go and do something about what has happened. So the doctor told me to wait until later. Later to find out I was taken out on the stretcher, taken to the other wards where it was under - guarded by the police. I was put in that ward and on my arrival I was chained on my legs and when I asked what was the cause, they said that I'm a suspect, so I slept there for about two days. After two days the cops came there to fetch me to go and answer me some questions and after that I was referred to the custody. That is how I went so far.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now, Mr Lebea, you heard your brother testifying that he told the Committee yesterday that he gave you instructions before he was taken to hospital what you should do with the goods that were taken and now you are telling the Committee something different to what your brother told the Committee.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, I heard what my brother said. What has happened is that maybe my brother, okay he did said something that he said but because of the something like the collapse that had happened there, I never listened anymore to what he was saying because I was concerned about one thing, the life that was to be lost by that day, so unfortunately because I was shot too, I would never have managed to do whatever it can be done, I did up to so far by holding some other items and then instructing the other guys to go and hide other things somewhere where they can because I was concentrated on my pain on my leg and the dizziness I was suffering.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Let me take you step by step. He told the Committee that on your arrival there, you put an AK47 in the vehicle which was there, is that correct?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, he told the Committee that he put the AK47 in the vehicle, but the AK47 was not in the vehicle by that time, it was near the vehicle because the vehicle was locked, so he might be mistaken there. Maybe he doesn't remember well and as far as I'm concerned, according to my knowledge, he's no more good in memories, he sometimes loses memories and sometimes when you ask him questions, it turns that he never heard it.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now are you telling the Committee that what your brother told the Committee, that is the first applicant, is not actually the way things happened on the day in question?

MR K LEBEA: Somewhere he's still right, somewhere he's still missing some aspects there.

MR MBANDAZAYO: So are you sure that what you are telling the Committee is exactly what happened that after he was shot and you were also shot your took him to the rondavel and you came back to the house?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: When you saw him hacking, attacking Mr van Tonder, you shouted for them to stop and at that time Mr van Tonder was still in possession of the gun?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: It was after they have moved away from him that Mr van Tonder shot at you?

MR K LEBEA: He fired a shot, by the time they were turning, looking at me he fired a shot. I don't know whether that is the shot that caught my brother and they ran out for cover and then Mr van Tonder pointed the gun to me and I was standing looking at him. I never even had any fear whether he will shoot me or what, I was looking at him and he fired a shot that caught me on the left - my right thigh, if I'm not mistaken, so it's the time then I decided that I should shoot him too.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Just tell us were there any electrical lights on in the house ...(indistinct)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Were there any lights on in the house?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

JUDGE DE JAGER: So you could clearly see what's happening?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

JUDGE DE JAGER: There was no darkness in the house?

MR K LEBEA: There was no darkness.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Was Mr van Tonder bleeding?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, he was bleeding.

JUDGE DE JAGER: From where? From which part of his body?

MR K LEBEA: From the head he was bleeding.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now can you - now there was also - he was asked about the rondavel and he said - was this rondavel in the farm or somewhere outside the farm, or was still within the premises of Mr van Tonder?

MR K LEBEA: In the premises of Mr van Tonder.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Was your brother, according to your observations, still conscious at that time when you took him there?

MR K LEBEA: No he was unconscious.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now there was a mention that you were five in this operation, this incident.

MR K LEBEA: What I knew is that we were four, I never knew the fifth man. The fifth man I started to know was at the law court which was by the name of Mr Paulus Masitsa, I never knew him before.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Perhaps then we could deal with that immediately because you've made an affidavit, you remember, before going to court?

MR K LEBEA: Yes.

JUDGE DE JAGER: In your affidavit you stated:

It's page 41 and then you say:

and this fifth person that was referred to was Paulus, so in your affidavit you mention his name and you say that you were five but that he was outside of the house. Can you explain to me how this happened?

MR K LEBEA: Yes. Actually after I knew him on the time of our appearance at the law court, I decided because there was a lot of confusion during our appearance and I decided that ...(indistinct) the same statement as the other guys, we were five, but I never knew that guy, maybe other guys knew him before, or maybe my brother knew him, I never knew him before that.

CHAIRPERSON: No but the impression gained reading this is that you were five at the farm.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, I said that but that was wrong.

CHAIRPERSON: Then where did this agreement come from that you should mention this Paulus, all of you mention Paulus? When was such an agreement made that in your confessions you make mention of Paulus Masitsa?

MR K LEBEA: It was during the discussion about the incident and they told me the police caught someone who was nearer to the farm by the name of Paulus Masitsa, so the guys, they said he should be involved in all this.

CHAIRPERSON: I want you to have regard to page 40, that's where the confession starts. Do you see that there is a date mentioned there, the 11th of February, 1991?

MR K LEBEA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And if I understood your testimony thus far, is that on the 11th you wanted to be discharged but instead of going out you were placed in this other cell where you were subsequently taken by police.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And according to this, it was made the next day. Where was this made?

MR K LEBEA: I don't know Sir, I never made such a statement because what I remember on the 11th of February, it was the day I was supposed to be discharged at the hospital, it was Monday that day, if I remember well, it was Monday, so it is the day they took me to the other words where it was under guard, so this whole thing is new to me. If you can go back to the calendar, the 11th was Monday.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, let me correct myself, actually it's not a confession, it's a statement made by you.

MR K LEBEA: I never made any statement that day, I just told the police that I knew nothing.

CHAIRPERSON: However, to say in your favour, that there is confusion, that is dated the 13th and if you look at the last page as well, 42, it's also dated the 13th of February, that's the confusion that arises now.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, Chairperson, I think the 11th is the date he was arrested in hospital, if you look at that. Date of arrest - Arrested on the 11th, so I'm sure it's the date of the arrest, that's 11th, the following day on Monday at hospital.

CHAIRPERSON: For how long did you stay in hospital after you had been taken to this ward where there were guards? How long did you stay there?

MR K LEBEA: Well, plus or minus because I went there on Sunday the 10th and on the 11th was the day I was taken to the other ward, plus or minus 3 to 4 days. I don't recall exactly the days, but I think maybe on the 12th or on the 13th I was discharged from hospital forcefully by the police, not by doctor's instruction and I went right out of hospital with the police.

CHAIRPERSON: Now if we have regard to page 42, look at point 42, it's written the signature there, King T. Lebea.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, I can see it.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that your signature?

MR K LEBEA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now my brother asked you about these 5 people. You recall what we asked your brother in respect of what we saw on page 5 or 6? Let me just find it for you. That on page 5, which is a response to questions asked by the Amnesty Committee of the TRC, that is your response starting on page 5 and if you have regard to page 6, down there it's written from Titus Lebea and King Lebea, do you see that?

MR K LEBEA: Yes Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And to be honest to you is that if you have regard to page 5, there are 2 emblems of the Pan Africanist Congress on both sides, that is left and right.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And somewhere there is an address, Titus Lebea, on the right-hand side, 19050 Bophelong, Rocklands, Bloemfontein. Do you see that?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And if you look at on the left-hand side, I'm not sure about what is on top, but it would appear to me, it's not very clear but I see there 262 Vermeulen Street, Carl Klein Building, 6th Floor, Room (it's not very clear), 602 - 697 Pretoria.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know were you author or co-author of this document which was a response to the questions asked?

MR K LEBEA: I was a co-author.

CHAIRPERSON: And it says on page 5, 2.1 in the middle there:

The 5 crops up again, unit of 5.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir, I can see.

CHAIRPERSON: Why wasn't it easy to say to the Amnesty Committee: "We were 4 after reconnaissance. We said 5, but we went as a unit of 4"?

MR K LEBEA: According to my brother who was the unit commander, he told me that he intended that we were about to be 5 when we attack, so unfortunately he didn't get the fifth guy, so what was he telling here, it was the intention and the whole plan, but during the commitment of the operation, we were only 4.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you told by your brother that after reconnaissance, he had realised that this operation could be carried out by 5 people?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And if I listen to your evidence and his evidence at least marry each other in this respect that you were trained on the last day, let's forget what he said, but you were trained on the last day when the weaponry was delivered.

MR K LEBEA: No, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You were trained before the weaponry was delivered?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And were you aware that reconnaissance had been done already?

MR K LEBEA: No by that time I never knew the reconnaissance had been done because I never heard of any plan for the attack.

CHAIRPERSON: When you went to the farm, what was told to you why you should attack that farm?

MR K LEBEA: When I went to the farm, what was told was that we go and repossess.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you told about the location of the farm and how many people lived on that farm?

MR K LEBEA: Actually I didn't told how many people were living there, the person who was having that information was my brother, how many were living there.

CHAIRPERSON: What were you to repossess on that farm?

MR K LEBEA: Whatever material that can be used to help further the struggle of the Pan Africanist Congress.

CHAIRPERSON: And you went purely on that basis, that you would take whatever is of value and would assist this struggle of the PAC?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You may continue, Mr Mbandazayo.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Chairperson, I think the Committee has covered what I wanted to cover during the time of the interjection. That's the evidence of the second applicant, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I think later we should talk about your fee because it would appear we've got a hand in it. Mr Kachelhoffer?

MR KACHELHOFFER: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KACHELHOFFER: As we're sitting here today, both you and your brother have already been released from prison, is that right?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Okay. That particular day during the early morning hours, how many shots have you fired with that 9mm pistol?

MR K LEBEA: Plus or minus, I remember I fired up to 3 or 4, if I'm not mistaken.

MR KACHELHOFFER: To whom did you aim at that stage?

MR K LEBEA: At the first stage to Mr van Tonder and then later it was when I was outside, before we broke the kitchen door, because I thought Mr van Tonder was inside so as the lights were on, on the curtain I saw something like as if it was somebody and I shot through the windows.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Did you at that stage realise that you hit Mrs van Tonder?

MR K LEBEA: No, I realised on the first occasion.

MR KACHELHOFFER: That she has been shot?

MR K LEBEA: That I was shooting him, I didn't realise but I shot him.

MR KACHELHOFFER: No, no, I'm referring to Mrs van Tonder, did you realise that you have shot her as well in the process?

MR K LEBEA: Well, it seems there is a little bit confusion here because what I wanted to stress out was that on the first occasion I shot Mrs van Tonder and then on the other occasions I shot through the window, so I never knew whom I was shooting.

MR KACHELHOFFER: So I'm asking, you didn't ..(intervention)

JUDGE DE JAGER: Perhaps clear that up. On the first occasion, how many shots did you fire?

MR K LEBEA: One.

MR KACHELHOFFER: And did you hit anyone at that stage?

MR K LEBEA: On the first occasion?

MR KACHELHOFFER: Yes, the first occasion.

MR K LEBEA: Yes.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Whom?

MR K LEBEA: Mrs van Tonder.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Pardon?

MR K LEBEA: Mrs van Tonder.

MR KACHELHOFFER: So you will agree to the fact that she was hit in the chest by a 9mm bullet?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Can you just repeat from your side what the actual order of your superiors was, regarding this particular attack?

MR K LEBEA: The order was to go and repossess.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Only that?

MR K LEBEA: Only as it is, to go and repossess.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Not to attack and injure any white farmers as well, in other words?

MR K LEBEA: That was not specifically named like that, the order was to go and repossess. When you go as a soldier, anyone who stands in front of you, you start with him or her.

MR KACHELHOFFER: So you have regarded it as a natural consequence, the fact that people might be injured in the process of repossession?

MR K LEBEA: If there is a need to.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Didn't you, during the reconnaissance process, consider the possibility to go to that particular farm whilst the people ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, no, Sir, he says he did not do that, he only went after the order was given that they must go and repossess, about the reconnaissance he knows nothing. I covered that personally.

MR KACHELHOFFER: As the Committee pleases. So I take it that you will concede that Mr and Mrs van Tonder were both very seriously injured during this attack?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

MR KACHELHOFFER: And from your testimony you clearly didn't bother about their well-being, but only about your brother's well-being at that stage?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

MR KACHELHOFFER: If one looks at the kind of weaponry used in this attack and the order as well and the measure of violence executed during this day on them, would you agree with me that they can regard themselves as lucky to be still alive today?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Thank you Mr Chairman, I don't have any further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Mtanga, any questions?

MS MTANGA: Thank you Chair, just one question.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Mr Lebea, what happened to the money and the jewellery that you said you put in a safe place at your house?

MR K LEBEA: The police retrieved the whole of them.

MS MTANGA: Then in your response to the request for further particulars when you said some items were discovered by the police, or recovered by the police, what did you understand to be the items not recovered by the police?

MR K LEBEA: Well, what I understood was that the information of the police played the role on that answer, because the estimation of what was taken, the estimation amount money and the estimation of the amount money of what was recovered, was differing, so there could have been the suspect that maybe one of us may have took something because it sometimes happens, so it's the way that word "some of items" came, so ...

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

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Lebea.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir?

CHAIRPERSON: Just to make a difference, could we say King Lebea, so that we don't refer to your brother?

MR K LEBEA: Okay Sir, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I hope you don't mind that.

MR K LEBEA: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: You say some might have been taken according to what the police said. Some might have been taken. Were you all arrested, I mean all the operatives?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir, but not on the same day.

CHAIRPERSON: How did - you said you stood at the door with your 9mm pistol, you recall saying so? You didn't enter the house immediately, you entered the house after there was a lot of shouting.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: The others who entered the premises, that is the house, because we know that you entered through the window, how did they enter the house?

MR K LEBEA: The same.

CHAIRPERSON: Through the window?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And according to you, the only time a door was broken, it was by you and that was the kitchen door?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: The front door, was it locked and it stood as it was? It was, in other words never interfered with?

MR K LEBEA: We never interfered with it, so I don't know whether was it locked or not locked, but it was closed.

CHAIRPERSON: Now this window where everybody gained entrance into the house, was it open when you arrived?

MR K LEBEA: No, it wasn't.

CHAIRPERSON: Could you open it easily?

MR K LEBEA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: How then did you - how then did they enter the house if it was not opened easily? Tell us what happened.

MR K LEBEA: I broke it.

CHAIRPERSON: And then what happened?

MR K LEBEA: And then I opened it and then they started to enter and I was waiting outside.

CHAIRPERSON: I understand that, from your testimony, you evidence, that you did not do any reconnaissance but you were told that you go to this farm to repossess. Now there's 4 of you, according to your evidence, what was each other's duty? At least we know for you at least, you were standing outside. What did you agree, who should do what? We know about you. What had Donosi to do?

MR K LEBEA: They were to enter and then attack and take whatever was to be taken.

CHAIRPERSON: Not mention made of who should do, for instance stand guard inside the house and the other one to collect the valuable items?

MR K LEBEA: No actually it wasn't like that. It happened automatically when we arrived there that we decided that I wait outside and then they enter and do whatever they should do inside.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what we know, we want you to help us out.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that you have a 9mm.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And the AK47 was placed next to the car outside.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And your brother, Titus, testified that he had a panga.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: What did Donosi and Samuel Mokweti have?

MR K LEBEA: What I remember while entering by the time Mr van Tonder was making that noise, I saw my brother with a panga, Samuel Mokweti with a knife and Donosi with a spade, shovel or something like that.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Where did he get the spade from?

MR K LEBEA: It belongs to Mr van Tonder.

CHAIRPERSON: Now tell us when you left, now that is the time going to the Mazelspoort farm, did Donosi have the knife with?

MR K LEBEA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: So if I understand you correctly, it's just you and your brother who were armed, you with a 9mm pistol and your brother with a knife, with a panga?

MR K LEBEA: With a panga and Samuel Mokweti with a knife.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't know if I got everything as you say. Let me repeat what I have here.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You had a 9mm pistol, Titus Lebea, your brother, had a panga.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Donosi had a knife. What did Donosi have?

MR K LEBEA: No, Sir, by the time - inside the building, inside the house or where, outside?

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, I say you are preparing to go to the farm, who had what?

MR K LEBEA: Okay. No, no, he never had anything, any weapon.

CHAIRPERSON: It's only the three of you?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Anything from you Adv Sandi?

ADV SANDI: No thank you very much, I've got no questions to ask.

CHAIRPERSON: My brother?

JUDGE DE JAGER: On your way to this farmhouse, did you visit people staying on the farm?

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Who were you visiting?

MR K LEBEA: Actually we didn't come there as visitors, the place where we arrived, it seemed to me it was a place like a tavern where liquor, cool drink was sold there, so we had to enter there to wait until the time.

JUDGE DE JAGER: While you were waiting there did you have any drinks?

MR K LEBEA: No, Sir, we just waited there, posing like we were drinking, but we were not drinking as such, we were just waiting for the time.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Now how do you pose to be drinking? have you got a glass before you filled with something and then you pose to drink?

MR K LEBEA: No, Sir, we bought only one quart of beer and then it was opened, but it just stayed there like that.

JUDGE DE JAGER: You never consumed any liquor?

MR K LEBEA: Never.

JUDGE DE JAGER: When you agreed all to make a similar statement.

MR K LEBEA: Yes, Sir.

JUDGE DE JAGER: One of you, I just want to make sure who, Abram Smith made a statement:

and then it's not quite clear but:

Is this correct, or wrong?

MR K LEBEA: No, it's not correct, Sir.

JUDGE DE JAGER: But you sat at this tavern for almost three hours, isn't that so?

MR K LEBEA: Pardon?

JUDGE DE JAGER: You sat at the tavern waiting for almost three hours?

MR K LEBEA: It might be Sir, but I never counted how long we sat there, but it's possible.

JUDGE DE JAGER: You knew nobody at that place?

MR K LEBEA: No, I never knew anyone, it was for the first time I go there.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And you were visiting this place, pretending to be drinking, but you didn't drink?

MR K LEBEA: Never as such, Sir.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And you didn't know the owner of the tavern and you didn't know anybody at the place there?

MR K LEBEA: I never knew anyone there.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And the tavern owner didn't object to you people sitting there without ordering anything?

MR K LEBEA: No.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Thank you.

MR K LEBEA: Thanks.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo, any re-exam?

MR MBANDAZAYO: None, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kachelhoffer, anything arising from what the Panel asked?

MR KACHELHOFFER: No thank you Mr Chairman, I have nothing to ask.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Mtanga, anything arising from what the ...

MS MTANGA: No Chairperson, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo, are you calling any witnesses?

MR MBANDAZAYO: No, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that your case?

MR MBANDAZAYO: That's the case for the applicant, Chairperson, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much Mr Lebea, you are excused.

MR K LEBEA: Thank you very much, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Sir, are you calling any witnesses?

MR KACHELHOFFER: Mr Chairman if I may, I would like to call Mr van Tonder to testify about the injuries suffered by him and his wife, that's the only aspect I want to cover, if it pleases the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: It does. The ball is in your court. Is he going to testify under oath or he's just going to make a statement about his injuries?

MR KACHELHOFFER: It depends what you would like him to do, Mr Chairman, whether you want it under oath. I think it is better if we do it under oath.

ANDRIES DAVID JACOBUS VAN TONDER: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr van Tonder, you may be seated. Thank you.

MR KACHELHOFFER: May I proceed, Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly Mr Kachelhoffer.

EXAMINATION BY MR KACHELHOFFER: Mr van Tonder, could you explain to us, we have heard the background of what took place that evening, just with regard to the injuries that you incurred, could you explain to the Committee to what extent you were injured?

MR VAN TONDER: Yes. In the first case when I entered the door, they overwhelmed me with a panga and I tried to prevent this with my hand and in the process my fingers were chopped at this point. They were chopped, my ear was chopped off, I was chopped in the skull, I also have chop marks on my shoulder. There was previous evidence of the spade, the one said that they didn't have a spade, but they did indeed use a spade because when they took the shotgun off me, they attacked me with the spade because they dropped the panga, I don't know why, and my wife tossed it underneath the fridge, very fortunately so, because we could have been killed.

They then hit me with the spade. You can see that they assaulted me to such an extent that this knuckle of mine has been hit away completely due to the assault with the spade.

My wife was shot through the chest with a 9mm pistol, she has the bullet to show to you. It was a very traumatic experience for us because we are not accustomed to such things, we are not accustomed to being attacked at 2 o'clock in the morning. One is sleeping peacefully and one doesn't expect something like this and all of a sudden you are woken from your sleep and assaulted, stabbed. I wasn't healthy at that point, I was quite ill. My wife supported me extensively and assisted me. For us it was traumatic. From our house she had to walk because they cut the telephone lines and we didn't have any telephonic contact with the outside world. They left there in one of my vehicles. I had the bakkie, but my wife walked in search of assistance. For her it was traumatic, because she had to walk through the veld in order to get to a place where she could get help and after they left, I went back to the house and found the place in complete chaos as they had scratched around and tossed things about, everything was topsy-turvy. I then found the keys to the bakkie and I struggled forth to Mazelspoort where I was looking for assistance from Mr Breedt, who then took me to the hospital.

When I arrived at the hospital, or at least when I arrived at Mr Breedt's place, I asked him whether or not my wife had arrived there and he said no, then I became very concerned but at least they found her, or at least I thought that they might have found her at the side of the road and further injured her, you can only imagine my distress.

I was taken into the hospital and they were giving me treatment because my ear had been chopped off, they were trying to fix my fingers, to reattach my fingers in the correct position, they were applying plaster of Paris. Later they assured me that they had found my wife and that she was also in the hospital and that the bullet with which they had shot her was against her arm, it had not been fatal and the bullet was removed.

I was in hospital for 14 days. She spent less time in the hospital. It was a complete disruption of our lives.

MR KACHELHOFFER: May I just ask you, after the incident, did this incident still haunt you?

MR VAN TONDER: Yes, of course, it is not something that one would forget about very easily. If you are facing the barrel of a gun or a panga which is so sharp that it could kill you, because if I had not defended myself with my hand, I would probably not be here today to tell my story.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Do you still have proper use of your left arm?

MR VAN TONDER: No, I do not, I cannot clench my fist properly, I can also not handle cutlery properly.

MR KACHELHOFFER: How old were you and your wife at the stage of the incident?

MR VAN TONDER: I was 66.

MR KACHELHOFFER: And your wife?

MR VAN TONDER: She was the same age as I.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Just with regard to the applicants, I would like to know what happened between you and the applicants after we adjourned yesterday.

MR VAN TONDER: I went out. They apologised to my wife and I. We are very grateful for that. We are glad that they have come to that point of realisation where they could tell us that they are sorry. We accepted their apology and outside they shook hands with my wife and I and they told me that they were very sorry about what had happened and I was very pleased that it came to that point and I thank them for this.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Is there anything that you would like to add regarding your injuries?

MR VAN TONDER: No, I think that that is sufficient.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mbandazayo, surely there are no questions to ask?

MR MBANDAZAYO: None, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Mtanga, surely?

MS MTANGA: No questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr and Mrs van Tonder, this Committee is indebted to you to have come forward as victims. This process is definitely made for that process that we reconcile with the horrendous past we all lived in and at an

advanced age like you are, to come and relive what obtained about 8 years ago, 8 to 9 years ago, it takes real courage because the events you have related to and the injuries sustained to you at such an advanced age, nobody would want to hear them again. The Committee is indebted to you that you were able to come forward and reconcile with these people. I think that's what we have, a better South Africa tomorrow and more especially for you and your wife, to know why this happened, why these people were attacking you, I think we are actually as a Committee overwhelmed by the courage you have shown. Thank you very much.

Mr Mbandazayo, any submissions?

MR MBANDAZAYO IN ARGUMENT: Chairperson, I would just like to highlight some few aspects about this case. Chairperson I will start first by saying that there is no dispute that the applicants were indeed members of the PAC. Secondly Chairperson, there is no dispute that indeed Temba Ncapai was the Commander of APLA and also a member of the High Command. Thirdly Chairperson, there is no dispute that the farm was attacked and as the victims have narrated that they suffered serious injuries and especially that they were of that advanced age at the time and they were unsuspecting during the

ungodly hours of the day. Now Chairperson, also there's no dispute that Temba Ncapai gave an order.

The aspect that I think I need to address is whether the applicants have made full disclosure before the Committee regarding the incident. I say so, Chairperson and Honourable Members of the Committee because of the testimony of the first applicant and the second applicant, but I would like to start by saying, Chairperson, the two applicants have nothing to hide, or there's nothing they fear. They were sentenced and they served their sentence. They were out of jail, so there was nothing which prevented them, which in any way would make them to mislead the Committee about the events of the day, of that day.

Chairperson, why I'm saying so is because I would like the Committee to take the time elapsed after the incident up to now that this matter has been heard and to take into account that the applicants of course were in jail and of course when one is in jail, it's not a very healthy situation, you know, a conducive situation for somebody to live in. Of course it's a place where people are punished, they have to serve their punishment.

Chairperson the applicants, in a way they tell the Committee almost the same thing that happened about the events of the day, except on crucial issues like the first applicant, what was told by the first applicant on this, that what happened, the events that took place on the day in question are totally different to what the second applicant told the Committee.

Chairperson, it's my submission that in as much as they are different, Chairperson, looking and assessing, in my view their evidence is that in giving testimony, there was no intention on their part, deliberate intention on their part, to mislead the Committee about the events of the day. I'm saying, I'm using the word intention, Chairperson, because there are instances where you can detect that people are doing it deliberately because they are hiding something or they are preventing some things to be known about what actually took place, but Chairperson, my assessment of their evidence is that there was no deliberate intention except that the first applicant, my assessment Chairperson is that he wanted to tell the Committee even about the events he did not experience, or see taking place, of what he thought what took place. Like for instance, I may mention that he gave instructions that the goods should be disposed - should be hidden somewhere but in different places, but he comes and tells the Committee that everything was recovered and at the same time he does not even know what goods were repossessed at that farm. He can't even tell the Committee what type of goods.

The testimony now of the second applicant shows that at the time everything that took place at the farm, at that time he was unconscious because he has been shot. Like for instance Chairperson he is denying that he was ever put in a rondavel, and which is clear that he was taken after he was shot, was put in a rondavel as the second applicant is testifying that he went back to the house to look whatever can help him to assist his brother.

So Chairperson, for him to hide that, Chairperson, I don't think, Chairperson, in any event one would say is deliberate because he wanted to hide something, there was nothing to hide, Chairperson, when somebody has been shot and he was put somewhere and they were trying to assist him, so definitely Chairperson, it is my submission that whatever the differences in their testimony are, it's not deliberate, that it was the intention to hide something or not to tell the Committee exactly what took place. You can detect from the second applicant the honest answers he gives that, you know, "You didn't even care about the victims." "Yes, we didn't care about the victims, I was concerned with my brother." Everything. The first applicant did not even tell the Committee that his brother was also admitted in hospital, maybe he did not know about that, that he was subsequently admitted or that also his brother was shot, which indicates that he was not in a position to be able to know what actually took place in the farm.

Now the other aspect Chairperson which I think is of concern is the question of - in their statements to the police which kept on there is this fifth person, Chairperson, who keeps on cropping up and also in their response to the further particulars to the Committee that, Chairperson, initially of course they mention that initially it was intended that it will be five, but it ended up being four people and also when they were talking to the police, when they gave statement to the police they said five. Chairperson, I wouldn't like to pretend as if I know the solution to this, but Chairperson it's my experience that most of the time you always find that the information given to the police is not always correct. It's not always correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo, what weight should be attach to it, that we find that they say in the statements given to the police that there is this Paul Masitsa and in the response to questions asked by the Amnesty Committee, they say yes, when we reconnoitred, we realised that we had to be five to execute this mission, what weight should we attach to that in our deliberations?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson, I'm just going there, I just want to tie in this sense, Chairperson. My submission rightly or wrongly Chairperson is that there should not be much weight Chairperson, taking into account that at the end of the day, even though in their statement they say they were five, Chairperson, at the end of the day the people who were charged and convicted were the four people, of this offence.

ADV SANDI: Can I just ask, if we find the explanation given in regard to this fifth person, if we find that unsatisfactory, is that necessarily fatal for the application? In other words, would that constitute a failure to give a full disclosure on the relevant facts of the matter?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson, Honourable Members of the Committee. Chairperson, it depends, Chairperson, whether, if the Committee finds that there was a fifth person or there was a deliberate intention Chairperson, the question that would be asked if there was a fifth person, why this fifth person has not been mentioned. Now, definitely Chairperson, it depends on what perspective one sees, one would say why is this person being always sheltered, no one is wanting to come up with this fifth person, why are they hiding this person? What information maybe can come up to light if this person is known? Maybe ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: But is it not for you, Mr Mbandazayo, to tell us, look there is this fifth person who didn't come to light here and why we should disregard him, not that we should take a perspective, but you assist us in your submissions why we shouldn't - why we should look at it in a different - or persuade us and say: "You look at it this way."

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson ...(intervention)

JUDGE DE JAGER: Ja, perhaps we could still get clarity on that. Mr Kachelhoffer, were only four accused charged? Can you establish this from your clients? Were there four or were there five?

MR KACHELHOFFER: Chairperson, my instructions are that he is aware of four.

JUDGE DE JAGER: The fifth person who has been referred to apparently resided on the farm. Do they know this person who has been referred to?

MR VAN TONDER: I do not know Petrus.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Do you not know of a shebeen or a tavern which was there on the farm, because or at least on a neighbouring farm where such a Petrus could have resided?

MR VAN TONDER: There was a Sam who lived there. I heard that these persons were on the neighbouring farm before they attacked us, that is what I heard.

JUDGE DE JAGER: And on the neighbouring farm, where would they have been, with whom, do you know?

MR VAN TONDER: No, I don't know with whom they were because there are various huts there and I don't know who they were visiting.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson. Let me be blunt, Chairperson. My contention and my submission is that the Committee should not attach weight on this fifth person, Chairperson, because this fifth person, Chairperson, in as much as he's mentioned, Chairperson, there is no role which comes up even in court Chairperson, definitely if Chairperson, this person was part of the attack on the victims' farm, definitely he would have been charged, he would have been the fifth person, so it's clear Chairperson that this fifth person was never part of this attack. So Chairperson, it's my submission that this fifth person should not be taken into account with regard to this incident.

Chairperson, without wasting time, Chairperson, it's my submission that therefore Chairperson, in terms of Section 20 (1) and also (ii) the applicants have met the requirements of the said sections and that the Committee should grant them amnesty as applied and as such, Chairperson, unless the Committee would like me to address it on any other specific point, that's my submissions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo. Mr Kachelhoffer, any submissions?

MR KACHELHOFFER IN ARGUMENT: Chairperson, just in short, as the Committee realises, the victims in this application don't make any objection to the granting of amnesty to these applicants. Concerning the point of the four or five members who took part in the attack on the farm, I can just mention that my submission in this regard is, if it was four, five, or ten who had attacked this farm, it wouldn't have made a difference. The incident has been described I think from my side objectively and also was done in a very open manner, I think especially applicant number 2, if you have to look at his evidence objectively, it was very open. So in short, we do not have any problem with the granting of amnesty and I think concerning the victims, I think it would be apt to refer it to the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, just when you are there, I see we've got a postal address for Mr and Mrs van Tonder. Do they have a physical address?

MR KACHELHOFFER: Mr Chairman, can you just repeat, sorry, about the postal address?

CHAIRPERSON: I have a box postal address, do they have a physical address so that if we referred them to the Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation, they would be easier to be found?

MR KACHELHOFFER: Mr Chairman, they're staying on a farm outside Glen known as Safier, the farm Safier, that is the only physical address which is known to me. I don't know whether the Committee can work through our office address maybe, my firm's address, I don't know whether that is appropriate?

CHAIRPERSON: We will do that if it's easier to do that. ...(indistinct - mike not on), but your colleague there, McIntyre and van der Post, 12 Baum Street, Bloemfontein.

MR KACHELHOFFER: That is indeed my physical work address. My postal address is P O Box 540 Bloemfontein, 9300. I don't know whether you need my work telephone number as well, that is (051) 5050200, if that would be of any help.

CHAIRPERSON: Anything would be of help that we could conduct some communication, thank you Mr Kachelhoffer. ms Mtanga, any brief submissions?

MS MTANGA: No Chairperson, I would like to leave this matter in your hands.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo, you don't have a reply?

MR MBANDAZAYO: None, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. This brings us to the conclusion of the applications of Mr Titus Lebea and Mr King Lebea. We are going to reserve our decision. It will be delivered within the next three weeks in writing and all parties involved would be advised, but before we adjourn for lunch, I wish to thank the legal representatives in this matter, that you have been of great assistance to us and what you have been doing will definitely be taken into consideration to come to a just decision. Thank you.

Ms Mtanga, I don't think the other matters are ready, are they?

MS MTANGA: No, Chairperson, the next matter that we are to move on is the Thejane application and as discussed in chambers, the representative of Mr Thejane will only be here after lunch, so I would like to request the Committee to allow Mr Mbandazayo to consult with Mr Pudumo, who is also supposed to come next on - today, on today's role.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's take the important business of adjourning and excusing those who would not be involved in the coming matters. Thank you very much Mr Kachelhoffer. Thank you very much Mr and Mrs van Tonder. Go well. We shall adjourn for lunch. We shall resume at 1.30.

CHAIRPERSON: I think we're ready to hear the next application. I see before me Mr Mbandazayo, it's the application of Samson Zongizile Tuis.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson. Correct Chairperson, that's the application ...(indistinct - speaking simultaneously)

CHAIRPERSON: I think let's do the formalities and place ourselves on record. I am Motata from the Transvaal Provincial Division. I will be chairing these hearings. On my right I have my brother Judge de Jager, also from the Transvaal Provincial Division. On my left I have our colleague, Adv Sandi, from East London, Eastern Cape Province. Will the legal representatives do the same? I will start with the legal representative of the applicant.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson and Honourable Members of the Committee. My name is Lungelo Mbandazayo and I'm representing the applicants in this matter. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo.

MR COETZER: Honourable Chair and Members of the Committee, I am Mr Coetzer from Vermaak and Denis a legal firm in Bloemfontein and I am appearing on behalf of the victims in this matter and I would like to address the Tribunal after everyone has been introduced.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Coetzer. Ms Mtanga.

MS MTANGA: Thank you Chairperson, I'm Lulama Mtanga, the Evidence Leader for the Amnesty Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mbandazayo, in which language is your client going to testify?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Sotho, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - mike not on) I believe somebody wants to say something from my left.

MR COETZER: Honourable Chairperson, I thank you for granting me the opportunity. Before we commence the proceedings there are two points that I would like to address you on. I have been given instruction on behalf of the TRC to appear for the victims in this matter. However, no victims have arrived and I do not have any further instructions, therefore I would like to request to be excused from these proceedings, but I would like to address you on the following matter which I also have before the Commission.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed.

MR COETZER: Thank you Chair. Chairperson, I have also received instructions in the application of Mabanu Ernest Malunga Pudumo, to represent the victims. Who has arrived is Jane Tjali, a victim. The applicant has however not applied for the incident in which she was involved because they were already found innocent in the criminal trial and thus she has been incorrectly notified that she should be present today. Therefore, there are no further instructions from any other victims to take this matter any further and I would then request that you excuse me from these proceedings. I will however provide you with my contact number at my office, so that you can contact me if necessary. As it pleases you.

And then Jane Tjali, I would also request that she be excused because she is not involved in the proceedings then. As it pleases you.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Mr Coetzer, I would just like to know from you, you have spoken to Jane Tjali. According to your judgement as you discussed the matter, they may have been found not guilty then, but would you say that she was the victim of a crime which was committed with a political objective, or was it simply a regular crime?

MR COETZER: Chairperson and Members of the Committee, I would not be able to make any statement regarding that. It would appear from the documents in my possession, that it was simply a regular crime and it would appear that there was no political objective involved. I know that is to the detriment of my client at this stage, but that is how it appears to me from the documents. As it pleases the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Coetzer for informing us about the instructions you received and the status of those instructions at this juncture, that no victims have come forward and quite honestly, we don't see any cogent reason why we should detain you here and not recuse you. You are well recused, Sir. Thank you very much for having attended and heeded the instructions from the TRC, they are very valued and your co-operation is highly appreciated.

MR COETZER: Chairperson, Members of the Committee, I thank you.

SAMSON ZONGIZILE TUIS: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson and Honourable Members.

MR TUIS: For a moment, I want to make a request to the Committee. This is my request. We filled the applications for the amnesty and we were three, with people whom I committed this operation with. Those forms were returned and then when they returned, I was the only one who received receipt of acknowledgement, the third one appeared as a person who would appear here as a witness, so I'm asking as to whether, Chairperson, how are you going to deal with this matter?

CHAIRPERSON: Firstly, Mr Tuis, what happens in this process is that we regard every applicant individually. Firstly. And we are enjoined by the Act that if the incident which we deal with, relates to more than one person, we shall have all persons who were involved in that incident. I am aware of what you are saying and I made inquiries last week Thursday at our offices in Cape Town because I was there at present and they told me that they cannot find any of those applications because I wanted them all and they could find none. The result is that you come before us and we have your application. We shall hear you and the one who comes as a witness, we shall deal with that problem when we get to that witness of yours, is that okay? Because it's not your personal problem, is it, that their forms have not been received?

MR TUIS: No, Chairperson, it's not my problem, it was just a question.

CHAIRPERSON: And looking at my documentation, the contents of my documentation here says there is an application, I don't know whom it relates to, I can find that out quickly, is that that one has been refused and that has been referred as the one on page 19, Mologwai, that one has been considered and refused, but it is still in our possession here. I don't know when that was heard and refused. Look at page 15 Mr Mbandazayo.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, Chairperson I'm looking at page 15.

CHAIRPERSON: And I'm also looking at the index. It will come as 4, saying application of refused co-applicant, do you have that?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: But to nip that problem in the bud, let's ask Ms Mtanga what the status is.

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, the status of the application of Mr Mologwai is that it was refused and the letter was sent to the prison where he is and it has been merely filed in this bundle for the Committee's reference on the facts that were submitted by Mr Mologwai.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand about Mologwai?

MR TUIS: I don't understand, Chairperson. A form appeared in regard to Mr Mologwai. What did not appear is ...(indistinct) application. The prison authorities told us that they found Mologwai's application but they could not find Peleku's application. I don't understand clearly what is happening.

CHAIRPERSON: Please repeat yourself.

MR TUIS: The form which was found, I was told it was Mologwai's application form.

CHAIRPERSON: Told by whom?

MR TUIS: It is the person who was arranging our papers in prison.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, proceed.

MR TUIS: Peleku's application was not found, he appears as a witness, not as an applicant in this incident because we were three.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I'm saying I did make those inquiries and they said there is no such form with our offices, in other words what it meant is that it was not received.

MR TUIS: It's okay, Chairperson.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson, just to add, I'm not sure whether this application which is here relates to the same incident, I don't know.

CHAIRPERSON: You mean having regard to the application of Mr Mologwai?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, Chairperson, I don't know whether it relates to the same, this incident which Mr Tuis is applying for, when I looked at it, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Because the first thing we notice is that the incident of robbery and housebreaking, which Mr Mologwai is applying for, occurred on the 10th of the 10th, or the 1st of the 1st, I'm not very certain, but the year is definitely 1993 and the one Mr Tuis now is applying for is of the 3rd February 1993, which is murder and robbery.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, Chair and furthermore it happened at Brandfort, this one is at Clearspruit in Rogaie at Mount Pleasant farm and also when I look at the people who were involved are different from Mr Tuis, it does not come on the picture with regard to Mr Mologwai's application. He was involved with Paulus Makuvu and Jackson Ntozini and one person was injured in this one, Jacomina van Tonder and this was two people were killed, two whites were killed, that's why I'm saying Chairperson I'm not sure whether ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Why I made inquiries Mr Mbandazayo is that if we look at page 6, 2.3, this is what Mr Tuis says when he was asked for further particulars:

According to them they did apply for amnesty, but they have not heard anything up to now. What is not clear from what you are saying Mr Tuis is that it was the same incident, merely that they have applied for amnesty but whether it's of the same incident, you are not also clear about that and I did research through Ms Mtanga on that basis. You applied whilst in prison, wasn't that?

MR TUIS: Correct Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see their applications handed in? Did you see their applications, that is of Peleo and Mologwai. Well let's talk of Peleo.

MR TUIS: Adv Mothembo helped us to fill the application forms and we were three in 1995 in prison. We were three when we were preparing our application.

CHAIRPERSON: And who was to submit those applications?

MR TUIS: I did not know, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps let me ask you this way. After Mr Mothembo assisted you, to whom did you give those applications?

MR TUIS: He's the one who filled these forms on our behalf, then he informed us that he will hand them over.

CHAIRPERSON: So it compounds the problem, isn't it so? Because we definitely have heard of Mologwai and yourselves. We don't have that one, we've cross-checked on Thursday when I was first given these documents to read.

MR TUIS: I explained that I was informed that Mologwai's application is there, then how do you work if Mr Peleo's application does not appear? He appears as a witness in this incident.

CHAIRPERSON: We will hear him as a witness and I suggest to you and you suggest to Mr Peleo that he once again takes it up with the Amnesty Committee, but it is not for you to do so because your application is before us. Do you follow?

MR TUIS: It's okay Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, as an applicant you cannot speak on behalf of the other applicant about his application, you speak about your application.

MR TUIS: I'm not saying I was speaking on their behalf, I'm just saying we were three, therefore I was just asking about that, not that I was speaking on his behalf. It was just a question to get clarity on the issue. It is clear now, it will come when it comes, therefore I will go on with my own application.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me inform you this way, that I have a discretion. Let me hear you and because now we all know that the application is not before us, this Committee or this Panel will take a decision after we have heard you, how we take it forward with Mr Peleo after he has also testified on your behalf. Okay? I have that discretion. Mr Mbandazayo will explain further to you what I mean by that discretion. Are we ready to proceed Mr Mbandazayo?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, Chairperson. Chairperson, for purposes of this hearing, I will use the affidavit at page 6.

EXAMINATION BY MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Tuis, do you confirm that this affidavit was made by yourself and you abide by its contents?

MR TUIS: Explain to me what is an affidavit, please explain to me what an affidavit is. I would not say yes, I agree to the contents and yet not understanding what an affidavit is.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Tuis, I'll request your legal representative to show you page 8, 9, 10, 11 up to 14, that is the hand-written portion of what is contained on page 6. Do you see that? And if you look at page 13 there's your signature there, is that your signature rather?

MR TUIS: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And this was done before a Commissioner of Oaths, in other words like I did to you now and say you swear that what you would tell us is the truth and nothing else is the truth and what the Commissioner of Oaths would do is to say to you: "Are the contents of this affidavit true and have you read through them?"

MR TUIS: That is correct Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: That's how it happened when you wrote these pages or whoever wrote them for you and you signed them?

MR TUIS: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: That constitutes what we call an affidavit and if you can have regard to page 8, you'll see right at the top, it's written affidavit, that is the contents of this now for easy reference, Mr Mbandazayo is going to page 6, which is typed, so that we don't further diminish the value of my glasses by going through this handwriting.

MR TUIS: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: So what is contained in page 6 is word for word of the hand-written, do you agree with that, or at least believe me because I've looked at it closely and hence it's put in this bundle for everybody to see and read if it corresponds, so it's word for word, I give you my word for that. Okay?

MR TUIS: I believe you Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: So you know what an affidavit is now, I believe?

MR TUIS: I now know what an affidavit is.

CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed Mr Mbandazayo.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Tuis, do you still remember then making this affidavit or statement to the member of the TRC investigating unit?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: So do you confirm that this then affidavit was made by yourself and you abide by its contents?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson, I will begin to read the affidavit. The affidavit reads thus:

Now Mr Tuis, I've read your statement for the record for the Commission. Now I would like - do you want to add anything to this statement?

MR TUIS: Yes. There is something I want to add. The people who arrived when I was at Stofberg after I received a document requiring further particulars was Mr Mbatha. He was together with another one. These people were speaking Zulu, they do not understand Sotho and some of the things here in the statement, they did not put them according to the way I wanted them to be put. I was actually trying to explain to them in Xhosa, but I'm now becoming aware that in this statement there is somewhere where they wrote something not mentioned by me, even though it's not bad, but they did not put it straight as I told it to them.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now, can you mention those things you think that they were not put the way you wanted them to be put?

MR TUIS: You see I was here in Bloemfontein, I was never in Brandfort. I was out on duty. You see the situation is, you are taken as prisoners and you are taken to different places. The white people will take you and they will make use of your services to cleaning town and so on, so I was working at Tempe, it was on the 10th of January 1993, between the 10th and the 16th of January. Pitso arrived when I was at work in Tempe. He was together with Tabiso and Dlogodlo. He called me and I went ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Tuis, just hold it for a second, let me address your legal representative. Mr Mbandazayo, instead of getting how the story was told, let's get it paragraph for paragraph. Does he agree with paragraph 1? Just like that and where it's not clear, which paragraph it's not. I think we will make better progress in that fashion.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson. Thank you. Let me start, Chairperson, then at paragraph 2.1.

Is that correct?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO:

Is that correct?

MR TUIS: No. Dlogodlo told us that we should kill the farmers in the Free State and we were at 1910 when he told us this and Pitso said: "Yes, there is a target that I know, we can start with that today". That day was the 3rd of February 1993.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps let's put it in perspective. To which political organisation did you belong?

MR TUIS: I was a member of AZANYU.

CHAIRPERSON: Since when?

MR TUIS: From 1990.

CHAIRPERSON: Where did you join AZANYU?

MR TUIS: I joined AZANYU in 1990 here in Bloemfontein.

CHAIRPERSON: Bloemfontein is wide. Where in Bloemfontein?

MR TUIS: In an area called Tinpoint.

CHAIRPERSON: In your application form you speak of a Task Force, what were you saying - what were you referring to when you say, "Political organisation - Task Force"? What did you want to convey by Task Force?

MR TUIS: On the issue of the Task Force, I explained already that these people were speaking Zulu, they did not understand Sotho and I told them at some instances I recall I had to make them rub off what I told them and I said: "No listen, you have to write this one." I told them that I joined AZANYU.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I'm just speaking of your application form now, I'm just speaking of your application form. Let Mr Mbandazayo show you what I'm talking about. You see 7 (a) it is written Task Force and something else, on towards the end, right-hand side has been rubbed off, you see that?

MR TUIS: Yes, I'm aware of that.

CHAIRPERSON: And what did you want to convey by Task Force? That's what I'm asking you.

MR TUIS: I wanted to explain my shift from the Youth Organisation into the much bigger organisation.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't follow. Your shift from?

MR TUIS: I can't hear you Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm saying here they asked you with regard to the organisation and you say, you have written here Task Force, I want to know from you, what is it that you wanted to convey by the use of the word Task Force? They asked you the organisation in which you belonged.

MR TUIS: Yes, Sir, I'm explaining that I wanted to tell you how did it happen that I moved from the Youth Organisation into the Task Force. They did not ask me anything, they only asked me as to the Force, where were you in the Force and then I explained to them.

CHAIRPERSON: You are repeating it again Sir. 7(b), you repeated that. They asked you, State the capacity in which you served in the organisation and then again you wrote Task Force.

MR TUIS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: They asked you, were you an officer or what were you? You say here: "I was a Task Force."

MR TUIS: Yes, that's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what is the difference, because you wanted to tell them that you were in this organisation and you moved from that organisation to the next one.

MR TUIS: No, I wanted to give them full details, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words you're saying the organisation that you belonged to was AZANYU?

MR TUIS: Yes, I was in AZANYU and I was recruited into the Task Force.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Tuis, what would be the difference then if I were to say to you: "I am a member of the Pan Africanist Congress" and they ask me the next question: "What was your position in there?" and then I respond by saying I was the member of the Azanian People's Liberation Army, is there a difference there?

MR TUIS: No there wouldn't be a difference.

CHAIRPERSON: Because it's one organisation?

MR TUIS: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: The others are political leaders and the others are the fighters?

MR TUIS: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what I want you to explain for me is, you say you wanted to give them the full details but you only wrote Task Force.

MR TUIS: No, they did not want to know anything about other organisations, they only asked me about this Task Force and I gave them this Task Force.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on Mr Mbandazayo.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson, in view of the fact that you have already asked, I was going to come to that, can I follow where you have left, because I was going to ask him about organisation and all such things.

CHAIRPERSON: I said that because you apparently owe me.

MR MBANDAZAYO: So that I can also follow it up Chairperson, I wanted to finish the statement, but in view of the fact that you have started with this point. You indicated to the Chairperson that you joined the organisation AZANYU in 1990.

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now, can you tell the Committee, when you were in prison you were visited by Dlogodlo, what sentence were you serving?

MR TUIS: It was 2 years sentence, Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: When were you sentenced?

MR TUIS: I was sentenced in October of 1991.

MR MBANDAZAYO: What you were - did the sentence you were serving had anything to do with politics, that is the offence you committed before you were sentenced, had anything to do with politics?

MR TUIS: No, it was not connected to politics. I ended up in there because I was inquisitive. The car that I was found in was hijacked by my friends and I met them in town and I got in the car and we went for a nice time, not aware that this was a stolen car.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Okay, thank you, I just wondered whether it has to do ... At that time when you were arrested for this offence, did you know Dlogodlo before that?

MR TUIS: I did not know him Sir. I first knew him in 1993 on the 10th of January, the 10th or the 16th of January. He arrived with Pitso to me and Tabiso, I was at work at Tempe, that's when I first knew him. He came to ask me whether ...

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now, you were in prison at that time, am I correct?

MR TUIS: Yes, I was a prisoner at that time.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now the place in which they visited you, were you not at work and you were guarded there, am I correct?

MR TUIS: I was at work, I was guarded, that's correct.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Were you allowed visitors at that time?

MR TUIS: I was not allowed to have visitors, but the way they arrived, they were driving in a private car and I requested the person who was guarding me, I said to him: "There's my brother, can I please have a word with him?" And he allowed me. I got into the car, I spoke to him and he asked me when was my release. I told him when I was going to be released and he told me not to go anywhere, they will arrive.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And Dlogodlo did not know you and you did not know him?

MR TUIS: That is correct. Pitso introduced me to him.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson, can I then go back to the statement? Now, I would like to summarise the statement. So is it correct that Dlogodlo visited you whilst you were still in custody and told you that you should not go anywhere on the 3rd, you mentioned the 3rd of February, am I correct?

MR TUIS: Yes. I was not in prison when he came to me. He did not go to the prison, he came with Pitso and Tabiso, I was at work at Tempe.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, we understand that but you were still in custody at that time, whether you were not inside the building or the prison walls, but you were still in custody, that's what I'm trying to say. Now can you tell the Committee did you mention the name - who's William Verulam Nkosana?

MR TUIS: He's a member of the PAC.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Lebohang May?

MR TUIS: He's a member of APLA.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now, did they know about this operation?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: When did you meet them before this operation?

MR TUIS: May and Tabiso trained around the 1990's and taught me how to handle the firearm, that was in January. He was together with Tabiso when he taught me how to handle a firearm. He did not know about the attack, the persons who knew about the attack were Tabiso and Dlogodlo.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Let's go to paragraph 2.4. Now is it correct that on the 3rd of February Dlogodlo came with Tabiso, Makwala, Pitso and Donald Mologwai to you?

MR TUIS: At home, yes and I was release, I was at home, they arrived at home, yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And they were driving a private car?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: They took you to Bloemfontein at 1910 Bar, is it correct?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: You sat outside in a car outside a parking - on a parking?

MR TUIS: We were inside a car parked at 1910 Bar.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Is it correct that you swear Dlogodlo gave you instruction to kill the whites in Free State, take the money if it is enough, bring guns and weapons?

MR TUIS: That is correct.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Can you tell the Committee at what time was it?

MR TUIS: I think it was around 11 o'clock Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: In the day, in the morning.

MR TUIS: That's correct, in the day.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And is it correct that it was there that the operation was decided upon and Pitso also identified it as a farm he had knowledge about?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And after this discussion, you returned to Bloemfontein?

MR TUIS: Who went back to Bloemfontein Sir?

MR MBANDAZAYO Okay. What happened after the discussion?

MR TUIS: After being given an instruction and after Pitso told us that there's an identified farm, Pitso said yes we have a place and we were ordered to go and find the guns and myself and Tabiso went to hike and we went for Brandfort.

MR MBANDAZAYO: You left about 7 o'clock, each of you was armed with a Rambo knife, dagger type, is it correct?

MR TUIS: We arrived in Brandfort, we went to Pitso's home. Pitso took three knives, big knives. After that we went to his friend's home, we bought dagga and we went to sit by the curve on the tarred road. We took our weapons, we hid them. I'm sorry, I'll try to speak a bit slow.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, continue.

MR TUIS: After buying dagga, we went to sit next to the tarred road and we took the weapons, we placed them a little bit further and we sat down. There were trees. We prepared our dagga and we smoked. When it was dark, we left for that farm.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Okay and you arrived at the farm about 11 o'clock?

MR TUIS: Around 10 o'clock.

MR MBANDAZAYO: You jumped over the fence and proceeded to the mielie plantation, towards the house?

MR TUIS: We jumped the fence, we walked in the mielie field and we sat next to the cow shed and the farm house was quite distance. We did not go straight to the farm house, we sat next to the cow shed and then Pitso gave us dagga again, he said we should smoke. We did smoke and then thereafter we left the cow shed and then we proceeded to the house. We moved around the house just inspecting the house.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Okay. Pitso produced a handgun and you then realised that he had a firearm?

MR TUIS: You see I want to give you this statement. Yes, this is the right statement but the person who wrote the statement ...

MR MBANDAZAYO: I agree with you, but I want to confirm whether there was a gun or not, did Pitso have a gun or not?

MR TUIS: Yes, he had a gun.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Is it correct that you found an open window through which you entered the house?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Is it correct that you searched the rooms but you did not find anyone?

MR TUIS: Yes, two of the rooms, but two had people.

MR MBANDAZAYO: You saw in one of the rooms a white woman, in a bed, reading her Bible?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: You entered, you grabbed her and tied her hands and demanded money?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: She denied that there is money in the house, is it correct?

MR TUIS: She did not deny. We went into this room and Pitso went into the other room. When we grabbed this woman in this room, I was with Thebogo and she screamed and we grabbed her, we tied her and when I left this room, that was with Thebogo and I went to the other room to look for Pitso, Pitso said: "Gentlemen, do the work" and we killed this woman and then we searched in the room with no hurry.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And you searched the room and at the end of the day you found a revolver with six bullets?

MR TUIS: After finishing searching this room with Thebogo, we went back to the room where Pitso was. He had already killed this woman and there was a purse on the bed, red in colour and a bank bag and a revolver.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Okay. What did you eventually manage to get in the house? Was it a gun and what else did you find? Money and how much money?

MR TUIS: The money that was in the purse was three R10 notes. In the bank bag was a few silver coins, I do not know how much they were and a firearm.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And you eventually killed the two ladies by stabbing them several times, is it correct?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Did you drag the old lady back into her room and left her there?

MR TUIS: No. We killed her in her bedroom and we left her in that bedroom. The young one, we also killed her in her bedroom and we left her in that bedroom.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And eventually you drove, you took the Isuzu and you drove away?

MR TUIS: Yes. I asked Pitso where the car keys were because we had searched and I told them: "Guys you are now aware we have a firearm and now can we go?" He gave me the keys and I drove.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Okay and you left Pitso on the way and you gave him some share and you drove with Macdonald, is that correct?

MR TUIS: You see on our way, when we left the farm joining the road, we drove, but then along the way Pitso said he saw a miracle before he killed this young woman. On the curve next to Brandfort I stopped and I said: "Pitso, these guns will be left in your custody and after two weeks we will come back" and he said: "Guys, take this R30 because you are aware the petrol is not enough and please pour petrol and with the silver you can buy some food to eat. You are aware that we did not get enough money." So myself and Thebogo got into town, we bought diesel and then we drove to Bloemfontein.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Okay, if you had enough money, were you going to share this money amongst yourselves?

MR TUIS: The money was going to be handed over to Pitso and the car - I was going to drop the car where I was ordered to drop it off.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Where were you ordered to drop it off?

MR TUIS: There's a block of flats next to Tempe, that's where I dropped the car off, according to Dlogodlo's instructions.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And how was he going to get the car?

MR TUIS: He knows how he was going to get the car. He informed us that many cars have been received that way, so we just parked the car there and we locked the car. There was a - I put the car keys underneath a tyre and we left for the taxi rank.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Did you take the cassette, the radio cassette?

MR TUIS: Yes, I took it.

MR MBANDAZAYO: What were you going to do with it?

MR TUIS: I was taking it home.

MR MBANDAZAYO: What were you going to do with it?

MR TUIS: I was going to listen to it Sir, so that I could get a report as to what happened, in other words the incident that we've just committed. When we arrived at the taxi rank with Thebogo, we arrived at somewhere around to 6 at the taxi rank. We waited there for a while until past 7 and we took - I took a taxi to Pelindaba. Thebogo took a taxi to Malay Camp and the rest of the day I was at home and around 10 o'clock of the next day, I was listening to the same radio then and I heard that the police are conducting an investigation because the people who committed the murder managed to run away. I closed the room and I went to the public phones to inform Pitso - to call Pitso and I told him: "Pitso, the police are busy with the investigations". He asked me: "Listen, the tape that was in the car, did you leave it behind or did you take it?" I told him I took it, it is the same tape that informed me and he said to me: "Destroy it please" and I destroyed it.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Okay. Now Mr Tuis, is it correct that you gave evidence in Court when you were subsequently tried for this offence?

MR TUIS: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Was it the evidence you are giving before the Commission today, the same that you gave in Court?

MR TUIS: No, Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Why is it different? The evidence that you are giving today is a different one to which you gave in Court, which I think was the same. You also admitted in Court that you did this thing. Why is it different now?

MR TUIS: I told the Court that there is nothing I can say to them and that was a black Judge and we were fighting in the Judge's office, we were smoking dagga, there is actually nothing of progress, we were not even begging him with anything really.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Was it a black Judge?

MR TUIS: No Sir, I'm saying it was a white Judge, we wanted a black Judge.

INTERPRETER: The interpreter is requesting apology Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: I understand that, but what I'm saying is that why your evidence is different to what you gave in Court regarding the incident as to what happened there.

MR TUIS: We did not want to talk to them because they did not have a black Judge.

MR MBANDAZAYO: That's the evidence, Chairperson, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo. Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: I have about two questions, Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: In your evidence you've stated that if you had received more money, you'd have given it to Pitso. Why would you have given this money to Pitso?

MR TUIS: Dlogodlo said everything should be given to Pitso because he said he will visit our group first.

MS MTANGA: Why didn't you give Pitso the tape cassette that you got, the tap?

MR TUIS: I think I've explained when Mbandazayo asked me. I said I took the tape so that I could listen as to what transpired after we committed this act, so I took this radio cassette and the next day, as I switched it on, it resounded when the report was given out that things have happened and I left to inform Pitso. "Pitso the police are now investigating, I heard on the radio" and he asked me: "What happened to the tape that was in the car?" I said: "It is the same tape that actually informed me when I switched it on that the police are investigating" and he said to me: "Please destroy it" and that I did.

MS MTANGA: On page 7 of the bundle, paragraph 2 on the 6th line, you state that:

Is this correct?

MR TUIS: I don't hear you well Ma'am.

MS MTANGA: In your affidavit on page 7, paragraph 2, line number 6, you stated that:

that is yourselves, Pitso and yourself used the money, or yourself and Mologwai used the money that you got from the victims, what I'm asking you now is, is this correct, did you use this money?

MR TUIS: Yes, I explained that the R30 was given to us by Pitso. He said we should pour diesel and the diesel in the car was not enough to take us to Bloem. Now the silver was a few amount, he gave us those few silver coins and he said we should buy something to eat. We spent it in the shop and that was it.

MS MTANGA: I have no further questions, Chairperson.

ADV SANDI: Mr Tuis, can you explain, is there anything political about this incident? What has this got to do with politics?

MR TUIS: We were ordered by Mbandazayo - we were sent by Dlogodlo to attack the whites in the Free State. I am sorry for saying Mbandazayo, I'm really sorry, the name that I keep on hearing today is Mbandazayo, I'm really sorry for that. We were sent by Dlogodlo to destroy the farmers in the Free State so that the Africans could get back their land and through their elimination we were supposed to get firearms and vehicles and the vehicles retrieved would be taken to a place where we were ordered to drop them off. The firearms and the monies were to be given to Peleo and then he would go get them from Peleo.

ADV SANDI: But according to the papers, one of these women was sexually assaulted, do you know about that?

MR TUIS: You know how this came to my knowledge, it was - we were being sentenced by the Judge, a doctor arrived and he explained that the young white woman, it appears that she was raped, but what the doctor actually told the Court was that she was not raped at all. The doctor said he conducted or she conducted a research and there was a rubber in her vagina that he or she discovered and due to that rubber, the rubber was still in tact, it was not ...(indistinct), so it means the woman was not raped and even inside the doctor could not find blood.

JUDGE DE JAGER: He found Pitso's semen on her. How did that come about? What was Pitso doing? How did his semen come on the woman?

MR TUIS: Yes, the doctor said he or she discovered a little blood but how the blood got in there, I don't know. Pitso is here, he will explain how the blood got there.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Perhaps you could explain why you told the Court the following:

and then you said:

Did you tell the Court that?

MR TUIS: I explained earlier on that I did many things in the Judge's chamber, there are many things that I told the Judge. Yes, that I mentioned to the Judge. That I stabbed her on the private parts, no, I did not, I just stabbed the body, not the private parts, I did not stab her there. It is true, I did mention that had we found the son and the daughter, we were going to kill them all, because they were always with their mother. Had I found them in the house, I would have killed them all, we were not going to leave them, we were not going to spare them. Unfortunately God was with them and God said to them: "Don't go home, you are fine where you are, you'll only hear what happened." Truly speaking, had they been there, I was going to kill them all. I was actually out routing the tree.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Ja. And the old lady who was killed was 87 years old. Didn't you kill this young lady, or the younger one of 57 because you said that she once served you food in a dirty dish?

MR TUIS: Let me explain this. The issue of the dog's dish was seen by Pitso. We were having our lunch and we were smoking and Pitso saw here when she went to fetch the dish from the dogs. We did not see her because we were just chatting among ourselves, but Pitso saw her, but afterwards when she brought the food, Pitso stopped her and said: "Missus, but I saw you going and get that dish from the dogs, I did not quite understand what you were doing, but I saw you approaching the dogs. This is a dog's dish." Yes, that happened, but that was not something to disturb me that much, up to a point of taking their lives. What I was trying to say by referring to that issue, I was hiding the instructions that were given out.

CHAIRPERSON: Wasn't that said by Pitso? But in any event, you worked at this farm whilst you were incarcerated for the car theft, that is in other words you had to work on this farm after you had been found guilty of this car theft.

MR TUIS: We were alternating, we are many prisoners. today we work here, the next day we work there.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is simple, Mr Tuis. You worked on this farm, you worked there at some stage? Did you not, or did you work at this farm?

MR TUIS: I did work once.

CHAIRPERSON: With Pitso Peleo and another person?

MR TUIS: And other people, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Why do you say:

Doesn't that suggest that because of what obtained, the dog's dish, that you had to get Dutch courage to take revenge, doesn't this sound like that, or would I be mistaken?

MR TUIS: That is not so. You know, this is the situation Sir. When I say I'm a person protecting the organisation and the community, I'm referring to the blacks only. The whites to me are an enemy and I killed them according to the instruction given to me. From that day when I was given an instruction, I just told myself, I'm going to kill them until nothing stops me.

CHAIRPERSON: When you got the instructions, you thought of this lady, or this white lady where you worked at? When you got the instructions to repossess you thought of this lady who gave you food out of a dog's dish, or what is the reason?

MR TUIS: After been given the instructions, she was a target because we once worked there, we noticed that we'll find the guns and we'll manage to carry forward the other operations.

CHAIRPERSON: What is this reason, you'll find it on page 39, the last, 31:

MR TUIS: Yes. You see at that time in prison, you were not allowed to sit, you had to do any work, in other words we were being sold to the farms, the white farmer would not just come, he would buy you and after that he would make use of you in any way and there are many things really before this dog dish issue that happened to me, now who didn't I have the idea of revenging myself with the others? I recall one day I had to work at Human's place. Human went to the prison to ask for prisoners to work at his yard. I recall one afternoon in knocking off, I said to him: Mr Human, please can you give me R2?" and he said: "What are you going to do with that R2?" and I said to him: "No I want to buy sweets" and he said: "Undress so that I can give you just one lash on the buttock" and I really undressed and he gave me the strongest lash and he gave me the R2 afterwards. Now why didn't I have the idea of going to revenge myself against Human. You see, that one was pure assault, pure abuse and I did not go to revenge myself. He was living together with his wife and his child, it was easy for me to go and revenge myself against him, but you see, it was because of the decision that the woman was bad luck. The instruction was given out and Pitso said: "We have a target, we already know the target, let's go, finish the job, get the firearms and carry on with our mission". Had we been successful, who knows, we would have even got to a stage of getting a chance to go to the Human's and destroy them as well. There are many things really that happened to me. I did not have that idea of revenging, just on the basis of a dog's dish.

CHAIRPERSON:

Was that still by instructions of the Task Force?

MR TUIS: Those were not the instructions, but then I was defying the white rule at that time. I ended up saying that because I said: "Judge, you are a boer and I'm telling you that I do not want a white Judge, I want a black Judge. You can do whatever you like with me, but I am certain that I will go wherever you send me, but I will come back and on my coming back, I'm going to look for you in South Africa, I will even go to your grave and dig you out and see as to whether it is true you are dead." That's what I told the Judge, I was actually defying their rule.

CHAIRPERSON: Why didn't you tell them: "Look, I've got instructions from the PAC", because you felt strongly, sorry: "from the Task Force, I feel strongly against whites. The first white person I get out, I'll murder", why refer to specific individuals and individuals you have worked for? Why not the Task Force says: "One bullet, one settler", I'll get the first settler and kill the settler, why mention specific people here?

MR TUIS: You see, I would not be given an instruction and upon arrest I take out everything. No, I did not want to pierce the bladder. In other words, I would be revealing the secrets of the organisation.

CHAIRPERSON: Just before you forget, this is not a secret, everybody knows that "One settler, one bullet", one organisation was preaching that quite openly, it's not a secret, why would you be revealing a secret which is no secret, known to everybody?

MR TUIS: I would not expose myself to my enemies. They were going to kill me in turn, so I was right by doing away with my tracks. They were not supposed to know my political affiliation.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mbandazayo, any re-examination?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Just one aspect.

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Tuis.

MR TUIS: I'm listening Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now you have heard that one of the women there was sexually assaulted, would you say if that happened as it was the case, the Judgment, was that part of the instructions or order?

MR TUIS: No.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Also, would you say that when you took the tape and you went with the tape to your home, was it part of the instructions?

MR TUIS: No.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Was the using of the money to buy food and pour petrol, was it part of the instructions?

MR TUIS: From Pitso, yes, from the Commander, no. I now want to clarify this issue of rape. The doctor explained in Court, the doctor said the rape did not take place. I want you to get that one clear. The doctor explained in Court that this person was not raped at all, but how the blood got there, the doctor explained yes, it was Pitso's blood, but how, he said Pitso was one of the weakest men, who would even ejaculate by just seeing the woman and the doctor explained that so weak is Pitso that upon seeing a woman, he just ejaculates. What he did we did not see, but the doctor mentioned that it did not happen.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Tuis is it not correct that Pitso was convicted of rape?

MR TUIS: No, he was never arrested for rape.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Tuis.

MR TUIS: Thank you Chairperson Motata.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo, are you calling any other witnesses, because the applicant indicated that he's got a witness.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson I don't know whether it will take our case any further, that one, but if - because it's his feeling that Pitso, who I understand was commanding in this operation ...

CHAIRPERSON: I would advise you to switch the mike off and get the applicant's instructions in this regard.

MR MBANDAZAYO: ...(inaudible - mike not on) is to call Pitso, because he was commanding, according to the first applicant, he was commanding in this operation and the instruction, the order was given direct to him and they were taking orders to him. He's going to testify that they were indeed given an order by Dlogodlo and testify about Dlogodlo.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Peleo, is that your surname?

MR PELEO: That is my surname, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I saw somewhere in the papers there's Petrus, you don't use that name? I want to get your full names like you would have them in your identity document.

PITSO PETRUS PELEO: (sworn states)

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson.

EXAMINATION BY MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Peleo, can you tell the Committee to which organisation do you belong, political organisation?

MR PELEO: It's AZANYU.

MR MBANDAZAYO: When did you join AZANYU?

MR PELEO: In 1990.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Before that, did you belong to any political organisation or did you follow politics?

MR PELEO: I was a member of the Self Defence Unit.

MR MBANDAZAYO: When was that?

MR PELEO: In 1985 until 1988.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now who recruited you into AZANYU?

MR PELEO: It's Comrade Lebohang Mehi.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now, there is a person mentioned by Mr Tuis by the name of Dlogodlo. Can you tell the Committee about Dlogodlo?

MR PELEO: Dlogodlo was an APLA Commander here in the Free State.

CHAIRPERSON: When did you first meet him?

MR PELEO: I first met him in 1993. He was together with Tabiso Makwala asking for accommodation on his behalf.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Exactly when in 1993?

MR PELEO: It was in January, but I do not recall the date.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Okay. Then what happened?

MR PELEO: Tabiso said he wanted me to accommodate him and he told me that he was the Commander of APLA in the Free State. I welcomed him.

On the second or the third day he explained to me that he was here, he came to see me on a purpose, he wanted to send me out with two or three comrades to go and attack the farmers and he said my Task Force - I should choose two Africans from the Task Force who would go with me to attack. I chose Samson and Macdonald because there were the Africans I know and they were with me in the training of the Task Force and I told him that it was Samson and Thebogo.

He asked me to introduce him to them and I told him the other one was in prison and the other one was outside. So we left with him, together with Tabiso Makwala and we went to Macdonald Thebogo. I showed him Thebogo. He told Thebogo that he wanted to meet us on the 3rd of February. He left to where Tuis was working and we met with Tuis and he asked when Tuis was going to be released. Tuis informed him. He told Tuis that he wanted to meet us, the three of us on the 3rd.

It happened then that Tuis was released from prison on the 3rd. He arrived, Mr Makwala, he was together with Mr Dlogodlo. We went to Thebogo's place. We found him and we took him and we left for Samson's place. When we arrived he was there and he got into the car and we all left for town.

We stopped at a place called Nineteen Ten, that's where Dlogodlo informed us that there's work that he wanted to give us and this was the attacking of farmers and he said he wanted money and firearms and we should destroy. He said we should eliminate, not even to leave a baby behind, that's what he told us. Those are the instructions he gave us.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Did you carry out the instructions?

MR PELEO: Yes, we carried them out.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now there is evidence that a woman was raped in the process and it is alleged that you are the person who raped that woman. Was it part of the instructions?

MR PELEO: No, I'm sorry, it was not part of our instructions. This woman was not raped. She wanted to protect herself. I got into that room where she was sleeping. On me entering the room, I produced a firearm, I pointed her, she was lying on top of the bed and I searched the bed and a firearm fell from underneath the mattress. I searched and there was nothing. I left - I left her - I told her to sit on the bed and I sat on the dressing table and whilst sitting on the dressing table, waiting for Samson and Macdonald, Samson came in and he told me: "We have found another one and we have tied her up already" and I said to him: "Why did you leave her? Kill her and this one will tell us everything". Samson went back into that other room. This woman told me that they did not have money and the money that she had was all in the bank. She pointed at the wardrobe. She said: "Open that door and there is a bank bag inside there but it only contains silver and a purse". I opened the wardrobe and I discovered that bank bag and I took it out. I put it on the floor.

When I was searching further, I heard someone knocking the door and it was this woman knocking the bedroom door and she was naked and she told me, she said: "Man, don't kill me, I will give you whatever you want". I said to her: "Dress, why do you undress?" and I don't know what happened, I just got blank and she was walking at a distance from that table and I don't know what happened thereafter. She was close to me and she caressed me. While I was a bit drowsy, she hit me with a knew on the stomach and I nearly fell and she wanted to grab the firearm and I managed though to quickly grab the gun and pointed it at her and I told her to dress. That she was raped, no, she was not. I am still asking myself how it came about that my blood got into her, but I'm sorry, please I left a few words, I did not include them, allow me. As she was caressing me, she pulled down my pants up to the knees and I think, as she was caressing me, we might have touched each other and that's how my blood got to her, but that I raped her, that is not true. That's the end of my story.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now finally, my last question would be to you, now if I got you correctly, I'm subject to correction that your order was that you kill those people there, I did not- was there any order to take anything in that farm, because you mentioned that the order was to kill those people?

MR PELEO: The order was to kill and to take firearms and to take money. No any other order was given to us.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Why then did you take the vehicle?

MR PELEO: Oh yes, we were told not to leave the vehicles behind because a vehicle was one of the things that assisted the organisation, it was known that the PAC organisation was a poor organisation and it was an organisation without any international monetary assistance. Now we were taking the vehicle - the vehicles that were taken, were taken to Transkei, Lesotho and Botswana to - we were swopping them, we left the vehicles in those countries and we would be given money or firearms, so that the arms struggle could go on.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now why was, in terms of the instruction or order, why were these things not handed directly to Dlogodlo, why did they have to be left somewhere?

MR PELEO: Dlogodlo said the car should be left at Tempe. If there is money and firearms, those should remain in my custody and he will come get them. Now the firearm was with me. Unfortunately the money, the silver was about twenty-something rand. We used it and the next day, on the third day, he sent Tabiso Makwala to me to get a report as to how we performed the duty. He was in Transkei. He unfortunately did not personally meet me, he had gone to Transkei, due to other reasons.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Did you eventually know who Dlogodlo was?

MR PELEO: Yes, Sir.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now finally, why did you not in Court, tell the Court what you are telling the Commission today?

MR PELEO: Sir, I believe I'm a soldier, I'm an African soldier and you are given an instruction. No matter what the circumstances, you do not tell the truth. Rather than telling the truth, you rather kill yourself. I was now hiding the secret of the organisation. Had I opened the case, had I opened my mouth that I was fulfilling and carrying forward the operations of APLA, I would have let the cat out of the bag and the Government of oppression was going to protect the farmers and our intentions would never be furthered. Now I was protecting the organisation by not telling what I am telling here today.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson I know I said finally but there is one point I would like to canvass and it will be the last point. You indicated that you joined PAC in 1990, am I correct?

MR PELEO: Yes, you are correct.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Around when did you join PAC in 1990?

MR PELEO: On the 23rd of August, here in Phahameng, Bloemfontein.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Am I correct that you were well-versed with the leadership of the PAC? You knew the leadership of the PAC well?

MR PELEO: Yes, I knew that.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Do you know who was leading the PAC then?

MR PELEO: Yes.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Who was leading the PAC?

MR PELEO: It was Mr Mofishli Dikotsi, he was the Chairperson of the PAC in the Free State.

MR MBANDAZAYO: No, I didn't ask Free State, I'm asking the PAC national leadership.

MR PELEO: Yes, I knew.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Who was the leader of the PAC?

MR PELEO: It was Clarence Makwetu, his deputy was Motsoko Pheku, Secretary-General was Benny Alexander, those are the people I still remember.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Do you still remember the founding President of the PAC?

MR PELEO: Very well so.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Who was he?

MR PELEO: It's Robert Sobukwe.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Chairperson, that is all.

CHAIRPERSON: Surely you don't have questions?

MS MTANGA: No, Chairperson, no questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much Mr Peleo for having come forward to testify.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that your case Mr Mbandazayo?

MR MBANDAZAYO: That's the case for the applicant, Chairperson, that's all.

CHAIRPERSON: I would request short submissions.

MR MBANDAZAYO IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Chairperson. Chairperson, I'm in a difficult position, I must say so.

Firstly the incident itself, that unfortunately myself as I normally know some of the names used in the liberation movements, unfortunately the one Dlogodlo I couldn't come up with. Secondly I know Tabiso Makwala, luckily he was one of the applicants in one of the incidents, who subsequently died, but the problem I'm faced with is the question, the timing of the whole thing. The applicant was in jail when this whole thing was planned and it was hardly three days when he left prison and he was given an instruction to go and - on this mission. Now I don't want to put my neck on a block. I know that the Committee will come and ask me questions because I used to make submissions on how the operations went and how APLA was operating. Well definitely, I have to concede that this one, definitely Chairperson, was not in terms of what I understand and what I know and Chairperson, as well that there is this element of sexual assault, rape, in this matter, which of course, Chairperson, that puts me in a very, very difficult position to argue anything on that.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Ja, I understand your position and we've heard his explanation about it and it's whether we accept it or not, but we understand your position. No I don't thinks it's necessary for you to further address us on the issue of rape, we follow your submissions in that regard and we've heard his evidence and his explanation.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson, thank you. Chairperson, mine is to say to the Committee, you have heard the evidence and have listened to the applicant and the witness and the Court records and everything, mine is to say that I think, Chairperson, without adding anything or diluting what has been said by the applicant and the witness and what the records are saying, this information is enough for the Committee to reach a fair and just decision in this matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo. Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, I have no submissions to make. I leave this matter in your hands.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. The Committee reserves it's decision. It shall be given as soon as possible. I would give an undertaking personally that a decision shall have been reached by the end of this month, a written one for that matter. You can hold me to that Mr Mbandazayo. Thank you very much. Thank you for your assistance. Mr Peleo, the applicant, Mr Tuis, would be informed in due course, that is two weeks from hence about the decision of this Committee. We shall have to deliberate about it. You are excused and he is also excused. Anything further on our role, Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson, our next matter is the application of Mr Thejane and I have noticed that both representatives are here.

Would the Committee consider excusing the prison officials?

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying the people from Correctional Services, whom they've got to take back.

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson, unless the Committee is of the view that we will be able to hear Mr Pudumo after this matter and by looking at the time, I don't think that it will be possible.

CHAIRPERSON: It doesn't look possible. Thank you very much. We would commence at the same time tomorrow, that is 9 a.m. and we'll start with Mr Pudumo immediately. Thank you very much, Gentlemen. We'll give you time to take the applicants back to the various places of safe custody.

INTERPRETER: Chairperson, can the interpreters have a 5 minutes break please?

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon. We are commencing with the application of David Thejane and the Panel that would hear the same, it's myself, Motata chairing and my brother Judge Chris de Jager on my right. We are both from the Transvaal Provincial Division in Gauteng. On my left is our brother Adv Sandi from East London in the Eastern Cape. I would request the legal representatives to place themselves on record. I'll start with you Mr Johnson.

MR JOHNSON: As it pleases the Committee. I'm Henry Johnson from Henry Johnson Attorneys in Zastron Street here in Bloemfontein.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Johnson. For the victim?

MR SAMUEL: As it pleases the Honourable Committee. My name is S H Samuel, Hamilton Samuel, I'm from the firm N W Palat and Partners in Bloemfontein and I appear on behalf of the victims, Abel Coane, Norman Choane as well as well as Moiketsi Jikila.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Samuel. Mr Johnson, are you ready to start with the applicant and my I ask you ...

MR JOHNSON: I am ready Mr Chairperson. I will lead the witness in English, or the applicant in English as it seems as if it will be easier for everybody.

CHAIRPERSON: I'll ask my colleague here to swear the applicant in.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Is he Afrikaans or English speaking?

MR JOHNSON: The applicant can indeed understand English, Mr Chairman.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Will he give evidence in English?

MR JOHNSON: He's going to give his evidence in Sotho.

SELLO DAVID THEJANE: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR JOHNSON: Mr Thejane, you are indeed the applicant in this matter, is that correct?

MR THEJANE: Correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: I'm going to lead the evidence of the applicant, Mr Chairperson, in connection - by the guidelines set in page 4 of the bundle, marked Annexure B, it is not a proper affidavit, but it is a statement made by the applicant. Mr Thejane, you were a member of AZANDLA, is that correct?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Is it also correct that you left South Africa during 1985?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson, that is in 1986.

MR JOHNSON: And at that stage when you left South Africa, where did you go?

MR THEJANE: I went to Botswana.

MR JOHNSON: What were you supposed to do there?

MR THEJANE: I was seeking political asylum and going for training.

MR JOHNSON: What training did you go for?

MR THEJANE: Military training, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: How long were you then in Botswana undergoing military training?

MR THEJANE: From 1986 until 1989.

MR JOHNSON: Where did you undergo this military training?

MR THEJANE: I started in Botswana, refugee Camp.

MR JOHNSON: Could you again say what is the name of the camp where you underwent this training?

MR THEJANE: Dukwe Refugee Camp.

MR JOHNSON: At what stage did you then return to South Africa?

MR THEJANE: I returned in 1989.

MR JOHNSON: In what manner and where did you then enter the Republic of South Africa?

MR THEJANE: I was arrested at Zeerust border gate.

MR JOHNSON: Why were you arrested there?

MR THEJANE: Because I entered illegally, I entered Botswana illegally.

MR JOHNSON: Do I understand correctly that at that stage you did not have any form of passport or something like that?

MR THEJANE: I had a repatriation papers.

MR JOHNSON: At the stage when you were arrested at Zeerust, where were you held in custody?

MR THEJANE: I was arrested at Zeerust police station by the South African Defence and the South African Security Police.

MR JOHNSON: At some stage you were also then recruited by the Internal Security Unit known as Askari, is that correct?

MR THEJANE: Some black members came from Welkom and Sasolburg and then they came to me.

MR JOHNSON: And where did they approach you? Where were you at that stage when they approached you to recruit you?

MR THEJANE: They were not coming to recruit me, they were coming to take me, to arrest me at Welkom police cells and then give me papers of Section 29, of Internal Security Act.

MR JOHNSON: Do I understand correct that at that stage you were held under Section 29 of the then Internal Security Act?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Could you describe how did it happen that you were then recruited to Askari?

MR THEJANE: They detained me for a year and some months under Section 29 and they were interrogating me. Thereafter I was detained under Section 31, to testify against those who came from AZANDLA who were detained at Klerksdorp.

MR JOHNSON: At the initial stage when you were then recruited, first of all did you then indeed join Askari?

MR THEJANE: They recruited me after I testified. I was told by Gramor to come to Welkom after I was released to go and testify at Klerksdorp. I was informed that people from Bloemfontein would come and fetch me there.

MR JOHNSON: After you were recruited, what was your rank in Askari?

MR THEJANE: I was not issued with a rank, I met with the Commander of Askari, that is Capt Venter.

MR JOHNSON: Is it correct then Sir, that in the initial stages you were only a normal troop, if you want to call it that?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Is it then also correct that at that stage by being a member of Askari, your force number was one of 0450085-7, is that correct?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson. I went to police college for training in Hammanskraal.

MR JOHNSON: Is it also correct that at some stage you then occupied the rank of Constable?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Can you remember in which year it was which you received the rank of Constable?

MR THEJANE: It was between 1991 and 1992.

MR JOHNSON: What were the objectives of this group known as Askari, at that stage?

MR THEJANE: The objective was to gather information and again to track down people who had been trained outside.

MR JOHNSON: At that stage, who were you commanders?

MR THEJANE: My first Commander was Sgt Barnard and after that it was Haberon. Another one was Capt Venter and Sgt Botha came later.

MR JOHNSON: In which area were you supposed to operated and then gather information?

MR THEJANE: I was working in various places, in Transvaal, Lesotho, Transkei and Free State as a whole.

MR JOHNSON: The information which you then gathered, who were you supposed to give this information to?

MR THEJANE: We'd hand over that information to Sgt Barnard and then he would take it to Capt Venter and then he will take it to Col de Kock or to any person whom it is desired to be given to.

MR JOHNSON: During 19 - apparently during 1991 there was an incident in Zulu Street in Rocklands where some shots were fired. Would you please explain to the Committee what was this incident and what happened there?

MR THEJANE: It was at night. I don't remember as to whether it was Friday or Saturday, I was having on my person a Makarov pistol. There were people who were following me, there were about 14 to 15 people. I produced the firearm and warned them, then I shot at them with the whole magazine. I did not observe what happened thereafter.

MR JOHNSON: Can you remember approximately in which month in 1991 it would have been that this incident took place?

MR THEJANE: I don't recall very well, but it was ...

MR JOHNSON: Can you remember if it was in the summer or in the winter?

MR THEJANE: It could have been during winter time.

MR JOHNSON: Now at that stage you say there were plus minus 14 persons. What were they doing and what made you suspicious about this group of people?

MR THEJANE: I was disembarking an Opel Rekord car, they were following me.

MR JOHNSON: What did you think they were going to do?

MR THEJANE: They ...(indistinct) me as whether they were armed with knives and ...(indistinct)

MR JOHNSON: What did you think they were going to do to you?

MR THEJANE: I thought they were people who were instructed to come and kill me, or to kidnap me.

MR JOHNSON: Why did you think that?

MR THEJANE: I saw the way they were approaching.

MR JOHNSON: Now at that stage when you shot ... (inter-vention)

ADV SANDI: Sorry. Sorry about that, can I just come in for a moment? How were they approaching you? In what manner were they approaching you which made you suspicious?

MR THEJANE: They were running.

ADV SANDI: You said these were about - how many people, 14, 15, did I follow you correctly?

MR THEJANE: Approximately 15, 14 to 15 people.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Mr Johnson I just want to have clarity on this. Are you applying for amnesty in regard to this incident?

MR JOHNSON: Chairperson, the amnesty application is indeed for this incident as well because he does not know if he at any stage, he injured anybody.

JUDGE DE JAGER: At this stage, I don't want to prejudge the issue, but it seems as though he's telling us now that he acted in self-defence. He doesn't know whether he wounded anybody. Is he admitting that he committed an offence here, because if he doesn't admit that he committed an offence, we can't give him amnesty.

MR JOHNSON: Indeed, Chairperson, but this forms part of his affidavit which he gave to the Amnesty Committee in the first instance and that would form part of certainly a full disclosure, what he should be making to the Committee. If the Committee does not wish to hear this evidence, I can skip that part and go indeed to the ...(intervention)

JUDGE DE JAGER: No, I don't know whether he's asking for amnesty for assault on people or attempted murder on people, or whether he's saying: "well, I've done nothing wrong, I acted to protect myself." If he's saying: "I've only acted to protect myself", he could say that and we could leave it because then it's irrelevant as far as amnesty is concerned. If he says: "Well I exceeded the bounds, I'm asking for amnesty", then it's another matter.

MR JOHNSON: I understand, Chairperson, and I will take it up with the applicant then.

ADV SANDI: You know, also in the same vein, I'm not sure if one can say there was any political motive on the part of these potential attackers on the applicant, it may have been a group of robbers who saw a potential victim and were about to attack him, we don't know.

MR JOHNSON: I understand.

JUDGE DE JAGER: On the other hand whether he had a political motive or whether he only wanted to protect himself, because if there was no political motive apart from whether it's an offence, it's irrelevant as far as amnesty is concerned.

MR JOHNSON: Indeed Chairperson. Mr Thejane, first of all I want to clarify one specific aspect. At that stage you said you were in possession of a Makarov pistol. This Makarov pistol, where did you get it?

MR THEJANE: It was issued to me from the Security Branch Office by Sgt Barnard.

MR JOHNSON: Concerning this specific incident further, did you indeed then act in self-defence or is it something that you wish to apply for amnesty?

MR THEJANE: I don't know what happened after my shooting because I just returned to fetch the cartridges at night and early in the morning, so therefore it shows that no person was injured or killed.

MR JOHNSON: I'm proceeding then to the further incident. At some stage you were located or relocated to a farm outside Bloemfontein. Can you remember in which year it was that you were located there?

MR THEJANE: Yes, I remember.

MR JOHNSON: In which year was it?

MR THEJANE: Somewhere between 1990 and 1991.

MR JOHNSON: Concerning this specific farm, what was this farm used for?

MR THEJANE: We used that farm as our office base.

MR JOHNSON: During your connection, or during your period which you were one of the askaris, at some stage there would have been some tortures involving certain people, is that correct?

MR THEJANE: Correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Can you remember when this would have been?

MR THEJANE: During that period when I arrived from 1990, 1991 to Sgt Barnard.

MR JOHNSON: At some stage you were involved in the torture of one person by the name of Abel Choane, is that correct?

MR THEJANE: Correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Can you tell the, or inform the Committee who is Abel Choane?

MR THEJANE; I learned that Abel Choane was one of those who were working at a particular unit and white members were not treating him well, then he ran away.

MR JOHNSON: Is it correct that he was indeed - also formed part of Askari at that stage?

MR THEJANE: Correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Could you inform the Committee how did it happen that Abel Choane was captured in the first instance?

MR THEJANE: The information came when we were in Ficksburg, when we were handling APLA members. We received information around that Abel Choane is around Bloemfontein and Botshabelo. We left Ficksburg and came to Botshabelo searching for him.

MR JOHNSON: What happened then?

MR THEJANE: There was a certain member called Jack Baloi who left with an informer with Toyota Corolla, blue Toyota Corolla, to introduce Jack Baloi to that informer's uncle, that Jack is his uncle. I did not know the content of that information. Jack Baloi went with that particular informer and then we didn't receive further information but we followed that information day and night up to a point where, that is to say they had a photo album about people who we were supposed to identify. We went to a particular teacher in Botshabelo together with Jack Baloi. They went to a tavern which was called Peter's Tavern, it was a Friday night. That informant introduced Jack to other people who were with him. It happened that there was somebody who was sought for by Bloemfontein people, Then Jack went outside to look for the photo and then he came to a kombi which was tinted. I, Victor Gadi and Patrick Ngamela were sent to identify that particular person in the tavern. We were given money to buy alcohol. We drank about two to three bottles. We produced the firearms and instructed all the people to lie down in the tavern, that's Peter's tavern, that is where we arrested Abel Choane's brother, who was known as Abel Choane, I don't remember his name but that person is from Welkom. Abel Choane was not present there. We took them and put them in that kombi which was covered with curtains.

MR JOHNSON: Is that now Mr Abel Choane's brother which was arrested?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Where did you go to with them?

MR THEJANE: We brought them to Fountain building at 5th floor.

MR JOHNSON: Is that here in Bloemfontein?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson, that is the Security Branch offices.

MR JOHNSON: Was he brought here?

MR THEJANE: We took him because so that we will torture him so that he will tell us the whereabouts of Abel Choane because he was sought by Barnard and Company.

MR JOHNSON: At the stage when he was then interrogated, were you present during this interrogation?

MR THEJANE: Yes, I was present Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Were you also then involved in, or first of all this brother of Abel Choane, was he tortured as well?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson, he was tortured and I was present.

MR JOHNSON: In what way and how was he tortured?

MR THEJANE: He was interrogated first then thereafter he did not co-operate, Luit Landman instructed us to torture him, that was myself, Jack Baloi and Patrick Ngamela We tortured him, we tied him with a bandage, his hands were at the back, we tied him on the legs. We took a blanket, a sealing blanket which was used by detainees at the cells, we made him to lie down and we covered him with the blanket. We rolled him so that he will face upwards. Then somebody would sit on his legs. I had a small tube. I would cover him on the face with that tube up to a point where he would tell us the truth.

MR JOHNSON: You covered his face with this tube. Do I understand correctly that this person would then suffocate?

MR THEJANE: Correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: How many times, or - yes how many times was this person, this brother of Abel Choane, how many times was he tortured in this way, by putting this tube over his face?

MR THEJANE: I would say we did it five to six times.

MR JOHNSON: And in each period, how long would this tube be over his face?

MR THEJANE: It would depend, because you'd feel as to whether that person is suffocating and those signs would tell us when to move the tube. It may be some seconds to a minute. We will see some sings, when you see him that he is suffocating, and then we'll move that tube quickly.

MR JOHNSON: For how long in total did this period of torture go on on this person?

MR THEJANE: We started around 2 in the morning up to 4 o'clock in the morning.

MR JOHNSON: And is that ...(intervention)

JUDGE DE JAGER: When did you start? How long did it last? From 12 o'clock till 4 o'clock, or from what hour to 4 o'clock?

MR THEJANE: Approximately three hours.

MR JOHNSON: Did you receive the necessary information that you were looking for from this person who was tortured?

MR THEJANE: He informed us that he was together with his brother, but he did not know as to whether he went to Welkom, but he knew that he was around because he was with him.

MR JOHNSON: Who gave you the instructions at that stage to torture this person?

MR THEJANE: We received the instructions from Luit Landman and Barnard.

MR JOHNSON: And were they also present during these tortures?

MR THEJANE: Landman would be present, but I'm not sure about Barnard because we were many.

MR JOHNSON: Is there any other way, except the tube which was used, which this person was tortured with?

MR THEJANE: Even by slapping him and hitting him with the fist. Maybe other methods were used in my absence, I'm not sure.

MR JOHNSON: After this person was tortured, do you know what happened to him?

MR THEJANE: I did not know what happened to him, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: At which stage, or is it correct so that this person which you were looking for at that stage, Abel Choane, was also arrested later on, is that correct?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson, we learned that he was arrested later.

MR JOHNSON: And were you also then present during his interrogation?

MR THEJANE: I was present when he was interrogated and then again when he was tortured.

MR JOHNSON: Were you also involved in torturing this Abel Choane?

MR THEJANE: Correct, Chairperson, I played a role.

MR JOHNSON: What did you do?

MR THEJANE: We were slapping him. If I remember well, we used the tube method to him.

MR JOHNSON: Did you personally hit Abel Choane?

MR THEJANE: No, Chairperson, I did not but I used the tube. I covered his face with the tube.

MR JOHNSON: Now can you remember the date on which this incident would have taken place?

MR THEJANE: No, Chairperson, I don't remember the date.

MR JOHNSON: And on whose instructions was Abel Choane tortured?

MR THEJANE: By Landman and by Matsisa's instructions.

MR JOHNSON: And were they also present during this torture of Abel Choane himself?

MR THEJANE: Correct, Chairperson, they were present, they came in and out.

MR JOHNSON; Can you remember approximately at which time this torture would have started and at which time they would have finished?

MR THEJANE: I don't remember Chairperson, but it took a longer time.

MR JOHNSON: Would you say it was longer than his brother's torture?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: The method that was used on him, if I understand you correctly, he was hit with hands and with fists and you again used the tube on his face to suffocate him.

MR THEJANE: The person who was hitting him has since died, he was shot and killed, that is Oupa Mashile.

MR JOHNSON: Now at that stage whilst he was tortured by being hit, did you do anything during that stage?

MR THEJANE: No, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Can you remember how many times did you put the tube over his face?

MR THEJANE: It was not only me who was tubing him but that was done four to five times.

MR JOHNSON: But can you remember how many times you did it?

MR THEJANE: I tubed him many times, but I recollect only two to three times.

MR JOHNSON: Can you remember if Mr Abel Choane at any stage during or after this torturing actually bled?

MR THEJANE: No Chairperson, I don't remember.

MR JOHNSON: After Mr Choane was tortured, do you know what happened to him?

MR THEJANE: I don't remember, I don't know Chairperson what happened to him but he was handled by people who were at ground floor.

MR JOHNSON: You mentioned a person that was also present during Abel Choane's torture, by the name of Oupa Mashile, is that correct?

MR THEJANE: Correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Concerning Oupa Mashile himself, Oupa Mashile was actually murdered later on, is that correct? He was shot dead.

MR THEJANE: We learned that he was shot dead in Welkom.

MR JOHNSON: Do you know how or by whom he was shot?

MR THEJANE: He used not to come to duty and then on the pay day he had a fight with Luit Landman telling him that he did not come to work regularly, he's going to deduct some money from his salary, then they had a problem, then Oupa Mashile said he's leaving the unit. He did not stay for a long time because he had four to five taxis, so it seems they did not trust him. After that we were informed that he was shot dead by MK members. When we were preparing to retaliate, we were told not to go there.

MR JOHNSON: Do you know if Luit Landman or anybody from askari itself, was involved in the killing of Oupa Mashile?

MR THEJANE: I did not know because I was scared by the dispute they had, but I had that suspicion.

MR JOHNSON: The only thing you had was a suspicion, you did not know, you did not have any knowledge that anybody was involved, is this correct?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson, it was a naked suspicion.

ADV SANDI: Sorry, can I just come in there? You say as you were about to go and retaliate someone told you not to go there, who was that?

MR THEJANE: Landman and Barnard informed us that they said we should not go even to his funeral.

MR JOHNSON: I'm carrying on to a matter where another person was tortured, a person by the name of Jikila. Do you remember this incident?

MR THEJANE: I do remember this person, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Can you remember when this took place?

MR THEJANE: I remember Chairperson when it happened.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Just before we step off the previous one, how long after Choane left the police was he killed, six months, a month, a year, or what?

MR THEJANE: Approximately three to four, four to five months. He was a taxi owner.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Thank you.

MR JOHNSON: I'm carrying on with the matter of Jikila. Can you remember when this torture took place, the date and the year?

MR THEJANE: I don't remember the exact date, it was somewhere in 1993.

MR JOHNSON: This person Jikila, do you know if he was a member of any other political organisation at that stage?

MR THEJANE: I did not know him. The people who came with information were those who were working ...(indistinct - mike not on) and one of them is Booysen Motsamai.

MR JOHNSON: Now this person Jikila, where was he tortured?

MR THEJANE: He was tortured at Fountain Security Branch office.

MR JOHNSON: On whose instructions was he tortured?

MR THEJANE: Luit Landman's instructions, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Can you remember what form of information you wanted to extract from him?

MR THEJANE: He was not alone, there were many people. There was information which we received whilst we were working in Transkei, looking for Happy Mphahlele.

MR JOHNSON: And is that the nature of the information which you wanted to extract from this person called Jikila?

MR THEJANE: It was not only about that particular issue, but it was also in regard to the people who were involved in the burning of the farm houses.

MR JOHNSON: At that stage, can you remember how long Mr Jikila was tortured for, what period of time?

MR THEJANE: He was tortured approximately, or he was detained at Botshabelo police station. He was fetched four times, then all those four times he was tortured.

MR JOHNSON: Were you present at all of these incidents all four times?

MR THEJANE: That is correct Chairperson, I was the one who had gone to fetch him from Botshabelo Police station and bring him to Fountain police station.

MR JOHNSON: And in what way was Mr Jikila tortured?

MR THEJANE: He was tortured by being hand cuffed and leg cuffed and covered with a blanket and hitting him with fists and being slapped.

MR JOHNSON: Was he also tortured by means of this tube that was put over his face?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson, I was the main role player in the tubing effort, so I did that to him.

MR JOHNSON: Can you remember how many times did you put this tube over his face so that he suffocated?

MR THEJANE: Six to seven times, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: After Mr Jikila was tortured, do you know what happened to him, was he released or not?

MR THEJANE: I don't know what happened to him because they were detained under Section 21, I think there were approximately 20 to 25 people.

MR JOHNSON: Do you know if Mr Jikila at any stage suffered any physical injuries during these tortures?

MR THEJANE: I did not know Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Did you speak to Mr Jikila after this incident?

MR THEJANE: Yes, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: When was that?

MR THEJANE: It is somewhere in 1994 and 1995.

MR JOHNSON: Did he recognise you as the person who tortured him?

MR THEJANE: That is correct Chairperson because he knew me even before.

MR JOHNSON: Did you apologise to him concerning these incidents where you tortured him?

MR THEJANE: Yes, I met with him whilst I was going to the bank, then we had a discussion with him, then he said there's no problem. We went to a radio interview. He's a friendly person.

MR JOHNSON: And did he accept your apology?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson, he accepted my apology.

MR JOHNSON: I refer the Committee to pages of the bundle, pages 11 through to 13, which would be the typed and hand-written statement of this person named Jikila in which he confirms that. As it pleases the Committee.

Mr Choane, have you spoken to Mr Choane after this incident?

MR THEJANE: No, Chairperson, I did not.

MR JOHNSON: Is that indeed Mr Choane sitting across the room?

MR CHOANE: Choane, Abel Choane.

MR JOHNSON: Sorry, Mr Choane.

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Do you wish to apologise to Mr Choane about what happened to him?

MR THEJANE: That is correct, Chairperson. I wanted to meet him but I did not know where he was.

MR JOHNSON: Would you apologise to him now whilst he's sitting there?

MR THEJANE: Correct, Chairperson.

MR JOHNSON: Do that please. Tell him that you're sorry.

MR THEJANE: I want to tell Abel Choane that I am sorry. May you please forgive me? This was the political situation, we were forced and there was nothing to do. Things have changed now and I am sorry.

MR JOHNSON: Now then at what stage, or how did it happen that you were not a member of this unit Askari at the end of the day anymore?

MR THEJANE: There was a meeting at Vlakplaas where Eugene de Kock addressed us and he told us that the unit was being dismantled and they will organise that we get the packages.

MR JOHNSON: And did you then receive such a package?

MR THEJANE: Yes, I did.

MR JOHNSON: Is there anything else at this stage that you would want to bring under the Committee's attention concerning any violations of Human Rights which you want to apply for amnesty for?

MR THEJANE: Yes, I just want to know whether it's possible for the Committee to go to the farm where we used to work, just to point it out. There is no farmhouse anymore, all the stores that were there have been broken down, but the farm is still there.

MR JOHNSON: If the Committee would want you to show them, they will ask you to go and show them the farm, but is there anything else that you want to make public to the Committee concerning any violations of human rights? Other people which you remember which were tortured or whatever?

MR THEJANE: Yes, there are many of them, I do not even know their names, as far as Transkei.

MR JOHNSON: Were these all people that were tortured whilst you were a member of Askari?

MR THEJANE: Yes.

MR JOHNSON: Do you remember any other specific persons except Choane and Jikila, do you remember the names?

MR THEJANE: I do not recall their names, but I could identify them.

MR JOHNSON: Can you remember approximately how many other people were tortured during your stay at Askari?

MR THEJANE: Many people of the PAC who were in Ficksburg and those who were here in Bloemfontein.

MR JOHNSON: Concerning your application, I just want to make sure about certain points. On page 1 of your application which I will show to you at this stage, you make mention in paragraph 8(b) that you were a constable from 1989 to 1993 with your force number, the date of 1989, is that correct Sir?

MR THEJANE: No, it is not correct. We were still Askaris at that time, we had not yet been appointed.

MR JOHNSON: Yes, but if I understand your testimony correctly, you only were recruited by Askari in plus minus 1991, around there, is that correct?

MR THEJANE: That is correct.

MR JOHNSON: Those are the only questions to the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Johnson. Mr Samuel, any questions at this juncture?

MR SAMUEL: Mr Chairperson, yes I do have a few questions, thank you.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR SAMUEL: Mr Thejane when was Abel Choane arrested by the Security Forces?

MR THEJANE: I do not know when was he arrested. I don't know what do you mean by his arrest.

MR SAMUEL: If I understood you correctly, you mentioned that you tortured him, or you were present during the torture after he was arrested and if my understanding is correct, that according to your testimony is after his brother had disclosed his whereabouts to be in Welkom.

JUDGE DE JAGER: I don't think he said his brother disclosed anything. They tortured his brother for hours on and his brother said: "He's somewhere around, I don't know where."

CHAIRPERSON: Probably in Welkom, but he never disclosed.

MR SAMUEL: I beg your pardon Mr Chairperson. When you tortured Mr Abel Choane, where had he been arrested prior to the torture?

MR THEJANE: I do not know what happened. Information came up that Abel Choane was present. We had been looking for him and we could not find him. Who caught him, I do not know, who arrested him, I do not know.

MR SAMUEL: Where did the torture take place on Abel Choane?

MR THEJANE: It was at Fountain where I was present, I do not know whether he was tortured anywhere else where I was not present.

MR SAMUEL: Okay, let's concentrate on the time that you were present. Can you remember the date that you administered this torture where you were present at Fountain Street?

MR THEJANE: I do not recall the date. He was not the only person we handled, we handled many people. I do not recall the date therefore.

MR SAMUEL: Could you perhaps give us an indication which year was it?

MR THEJANE: If I recall, it could have been around 91,92, if I remember well.

MR SAMUEL: Are you sure, this is the question I'm asking now, I'm asking on you know the request of Mr Abel Choane, are you sure you were ever involved in torturing him especially in the method that you described earlier on, that of tubing him?

MR THEJANE: I was present, yes and we could have been six, if not seven, some - together with white people and some were just standing not torturing.

MR SAMUEL: You said it was around 1991 thereabouts that you tortured him?

MR THEJANE: Yes.

MR SAMUEL: Could I just confirm something with my client?

JUDGE DE JAGER: Mr Samuel, we would like to know, if you could assist us, do you agree with - does your client agree with what he is saying or is there any dispute and if so, what are the disputes?

MR SAMUEL: That is what I'm trying to establish right now. I've got a statement from my client, I'm trying to reconcile that with the evidence that has been given by the applicant. He says he was tortured by the Security Police, although he cannot remember if you were present or not, but he denies every being tortured by way of tubing. What do you have to say about that?

MR THEJANE: The people from the Security Branch did not use the tube method, the Askaris, we Askaris used that method. Maybe he does not remember me because my hair was permed on that day.

MR SAMUEL: Would you say the extent and the severity of the torture on that day could have affected him in such a way that even given the fact that he was the recipient of this torture by tubing, he wouldn't recall the person administering that?

MR THEJANE: He did not know us. During that tubing he even mentioned the name of Oupa Mashile, he said Oupa Mashile saw him with his colleague in the kombi when they were going to Welkom. He was telling those white people that Oupa saw him and Oupa never arrested him at the time when he was wanted, because I did not know him, I only knew him from a photo.

ADV SANDI: Mr Samuel, just for my own clarity, does the victim, your client, does he remembered being tortured by a person with permed hair?

MR SAMUEL: That doesn't appear from the statement so far, but I can quickly establish that.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Was Mr Choane ever tubed by anybody, because he won't forget that if he had that horrible experience?

MR SAMUEL: Well my instructions are that he was never tubed, but he would like, with the permission of the Committee, to explain the nature of torture he was subjected to by the Security Forces.

JUDGE DE JAGER: We are at the moment hearing an application from this applicant about what he did wrong, so we're not hearing evidence about what other people did wrong, that was heard by the HRV Committee, but this man confesses that he's done something wrong and now it seems that he's confessing about something he never did, or never did vis a vis your client.

CHAIRPERSON: And again he's under cross-examination so we wouldn't allow that.

MR SAMUEL: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Chairperson, since my instructions are that my client does not - denies, it's not a question of not recall, he denies ever being tortured by that method of tubing, I cannot take this case any further, or this line of questioning any further than that.

CHAIRPERSON: I suppose this is a question that is outstanding. Mr Thejane said that whilst he was tortured, he even mentioned that Oupa Mashile saw him, but never arrested him. Would he confirm that or deny that, that he said that whilst he was tortured?

MR SAMUEL: Well that particular statement is denied by the victim. There is another statement that he said, but not that specific statement, but it is not quite relevant at this stage to these proceedings.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Samuel.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Mtanga, any questions?

MS MTANGA: I have a few questions Chairperson, thank you.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Mr Thejane, you have testified that you also tortured the brother of Mr Abel Choane, am I correct?

MR THEJANE: Yes, you are correct.

MS MTANGA: Are you also applying for amnesty in respect of his torture?

MR THEJANE: Yes, I am.

MS MTANGA: What was the political affiliation of the brother of Abel Choane?

MR THEJANE: I did not know him. The person we sent infiltrated them and I was told that, or I learned that this person was a teacher. Which organisation he belonged to I did not know but I knew that he was Abel Choane's brother.

MS MTANGA: What was the reason for torturing him?

MR THEJANE: The reason for torturing him was to tell us the whereabouts of his brother, because we had already arrested a person who was going with Abel Choane.

MR MTANGA: How would you say the torture of the brother of Abel Choane was politically motivated if you did not know his political affiliation?

MR THEJANE: I don't know, two or three of them were arrested from the tavern and we were told to torture him to tell us where Abel Choane was because Sgt Barnard and them wanted him.

MS MTANGA: Who arrested them?

MR THEJANE: I was present when they were arrested in the tavern.

MS MTANGA: Who identified them for the arrest to you?

MR THEJANE: I mentioned that one of our members infiltrated Abel Choane's brother and the other teacher and they introduced each other, "This is Abel Choane's brother, this is so-and-so, this is so-and-so." Now this person went outside and he took a thorough look at a photo. We had Abel Choane's photo and a photo of the other Welkom chap, so he went outside to take a thorough look at the photo and this person who was working with us then came to us to tell us. Luit Landman said we should then go and verify. We should buy a beer and we should be satisfied. We should actually look where Jack Baloi was sitting and verify as to whether the person in the photo is the person who is inside. We went inside, bought some beers, pretended to be drinking, we took our guns and we made them to lie on the ground and we arrested them. We took them into the kombi.

MS MTANGA: You are also applying for the torture of Jikila, am I correct?

MR THEJANE: You are correct.

MS MTANGA: Can you give us all the methods that you used in torturing Jikila, what was done to him?

MR THEJANE: Jikila was arrested at his house. We took him to the office. We then moved them to the police station in Botshabelo. The next day we took him to the fifth floor of Fountain building. He was interrogated but not by us. People from the ground floor asked him questions and afterwards they brought him to the fifth floor. We wrapped him in a blanket and we tubed him.

MS MTANGA: Is that the only method you used to torture him?

MR THEJANE: He was assaulted with hands in between, like he was being slapped, but that was the main method of retrieving information from a person, that is the tubing method.

MS MTANGA: According to Jikila's affidavit on page 11, he states that he was severely assaulted by your group and that, to an extent that he suffered a broken rib. Do you know how he sustained a broken rib if he was just slapped and covered with a tube on his face?

MR THEJANE: I do not recall a rib being broken, but he was severely assaulted, yes and even when I was out, I had left the room, the tubing would continue, but I do not recall the broken rib issue.

JUDGE DE JAGER: In his evidence-in-chief ...(indistinct) he was also hit with fists, I don't know whether - slapped and hit with fists.

MS MTANGA: I did not get that evidence Chairperson and he also has not mentioned it now because I was going to go further and ask him. Mr Jikila, I've just been - sorry, Mr Thejane, I've just been corrected that you did mention that Mr Jikila was also hit with fists during the torturing. What I also want to know, besides using fists and slapping a person and a tube method, how else would his rib have been broken?

MR THEJANE: I would not believe him when he says that. The people who were being tubed would be wrapped in a blanket and they would be pressurised, they would be pressed down.

MS MTANGA: Did you kick him at any time? Was he kicked?

MR THEJANE: I do not recall being kicked, but I recall the tubing.

MS MTANGA: Did you apply any electrical shocks when you tortured your victims, or your detainees?

MR THEJANE: We did not use the electrocution methods.

Maybe the other floors used that method, but we used the tube method.

MS MTANGA: I have no further questions Chairperson thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Mtanga. Anything?

ADV SANDI: Just one factual issue. Mr Samuel, does your client know whether his brother was assaulted and tortured as alleged by the applicant, does he know about this?

MR SAMUEL: Thank you Chairperson, my client does know that his brother was tortured, in fact I did consult with his brother myself and he did disclose a few things to me when I took down his statement. Unfortunately due to work commitments, he could not be present today and he indicated that he would only be present tomorrow. Some of the evidence that is coming forth now from the applicant, is contrary to what my client, the brother, indicated to me earlier on. I do not know whether I would get another opportunity perhaps tomorrow to continue with my cross-examination on his part, you know, on the part that is contrary to what my client said to me earlier on.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Why don't you put it to him now? You've got an affidavit or a statement by your other client, put it to him where they differ.

MR SAMUEL: With the leave of the Committee, I will proceed to do that. I thought I was still on the floor when the Evidence Leader was given a chance. What I indicated earlier on ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry, I didn't understand, I understood you to say you are finished, I'm terribly sorry.

MR SAMUEL: Thank you Mr Chairman.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR SAMUEL: Before I move to Norman Choane, let us just go back to Abel Choane. It is my instructions to put to you that my client Abel Choane was never an Askari, what is your comment on that?

MR THEJANE: When I had just arrived here in Bloemfontein there was a Sergeant called Selai. They were working together. They used to go together to Klerksdorp and the white people from the Special Branch did not - the conditions under which he worked were not nice and he disappeared, but he told Sgt Selai about the girlfriend that he had in exile, he had an AK47 that he left outside the country. Mr Selai explained all this to me, I did not know him, but he was telling me about him.

MR SAMUEL: So you were only told that Abel Choane is an Askari, or was an Askari?

MR THEJANE: Yes, I was told.

MR SAMUEL: Let's go to the torture of, because I have a few questions just on that one, the torture of Mr Jikila. You stated that the only method that you used was the tubing and that is on the fifth floor where you were and you said you do not know about the other floors, what type of torture they used. Are you then saying that the torture did not only take place on that floor, it took place throughout the whole building, from you know - at different angles?

MR THEJANE: Yes, I think so because that was a big building. It's not only us who took him. People like Booysen Motsamai also had a chance to take him.

MR SAMUEL: So the fact that he had a broken rib after one of these tortures, you wouldn't deny that, save for denying that you administered that type of torture?

MR THEJANE: Yes, it could happen, but I do not recall during our torture his rib breaking.

MR SAMUEL: Could you just help me? After the torture on Jikila, where was he taken?

MR THEJANE: He was still under Section 29, we took him back to Botshabelo. It's possible that he might have broken his ribs because during the time we would fetch him from the cells, he tried to escape and he was hitting against the bars of the cells.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Surely you can't see when a rib is broken. It could happen with the hit of a fist. It could happen and you can't see it, it's not obvious like a tree being broken, you can see it's broken, it's inside the person's body, you don't know whether he had a broken rib so you can't dispute that.

MR THEJANE: It's true, I did not see it break.

MR SAMUEL: Looking at Jikila's affidavit or statement, and I quote. He says: "I sustained a broken rib. Among the members of the Security Police who assaulted me, David Thejane who is the applicant in this matter, was present."

Would you agree with me that what he suggests there is that during the assault where he sustained this broken rib, you were present and you could have administered that type of an assault?

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, it doesn't suggest that. He says when he was assaulted, he was present, but he would have said he lifted a hand, or something like that. He doesn't say that. I don't in any event read that into that sentence you have just read.

MR SAMUEL: I will refrain from the question then because Mr Chair, that was looking at the paragraph, that was my understanding of the implication created there, but I will then move to Norman Choane.

CHAIRPERSON: Before you ask the question, how is it spelled? C-H-O-A or E?

ANSWER: A.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR SAMUEL: Could you briefly discuss or just explain to me to refresh me, how Norman was tortured?

JUDGE DE JAGER: Surely he shouldn't repeat his whole evidence-in-chief. He's told us that already, it's on record. Didn't you take notes?

MR SAMUEL: Mr Chair I did take notes but I'm trying to come to the discrepancy that it is the type of torture that he describes and the type of torture that my client ...(intervention)

JUDGE DE JAGER: Well put the difference to him and let him answer.

MR SAMUEL: Mr Norman Choane instructs me that when he was tortured, during the torture that you claim to have been present, he was kicked and whilst lying on the floor, some of you and your colleagues were jumping up and about on his body. What's your comment on that?

MR THEJANE: We were on the ground floor with Norman Choane. He was tortured. He was placed on a seat, as I am sitting now. If I remember well, his hands were tied behind the chair and he was being slapped.

MR SAMUEL: Where exactly was that kind of torture that you're describing, where did it take place, on the ground floor or on the fifth floor where you used to administer yours?

MR THEJANE: I don't recall but I think it was on the ground floor because we were waiting for Col de Kock to come and tell them under which circumstances they were arrested. We were still on the ground floor and the offices on the other floors were closed because to gain entry one had to use numbers.

MR SAMUEL: Could you tell us specifically yourself when you administered this torture, where were you, on the ground floor or any other floor and if so, which floor?

MR THEJANE: I am explaining that the other floors had code numbers to gain entry so we were on the ground floor.

JUDGE DE JAGER: ...(indistinct - mike not on)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

JUDGE DE JAGER:

He was interrogated by Landman and Landman ordered you to torture him.

and I think you then described about rolling him in the blanket.

Now you're talking about something on the ground floor. We're interested in what you did, because you're applying for amnesty, so tell us what you did.

MR THEJANE: I'm saying, if I recall well, it was not on the fifth floor, it was on the ground floor because he had two torturings. He was tortured while he was sitting on a chair, that was the torture and the other torture where I was involved, was when he was covered or rolled in a blanket. I made a mistake by saying it was in the fifth floor.

MR SAMUEL: So are you saying that that torture when he was covered with a blanket happened on the ground floor?

MR THEJANE: Yes, all torturing, the torturing happened on the ground floor, I don't know whether there was any other torturing because we left them there.

MR SAMUEL: When you say "we left them there", who is the we you're talking about?

MR THEJANE: We left them at the office with Landman.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Samuel wants to know, you are using the royal pronoun "we", you and who?

MR THEJANE: It was around four, five o'clock in the morning, so we were knocking off, we were going home, so we left and behind we left Landman and them. The Security Branch of Welkom was also here, they brought that information.

MR SAMUEL: Well, Mr Norman Choane says that the torture on him took place, he cannot recall for how long, but he says it went on right through until the sun came up, around 7 or 8 in the morning.

CHAIRPERSON: That would accord with the applicant's answer. He said we did it until round about 4 a.m. I don't know what happened to him thereafter, whether he was further tortured, he doesn't know.

MR SAMUEL: I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Samuel. Any re-examination Mr Johnson?

MR JOHNSON: I've got no re-examination Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you going to call any other witnesses?

MR JOHNSON: That is the case for the applicant as well. There's no further witnesses.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Johnson. Mr Samuel, are you calling any witnesses?

MR SAMUEL: Mr Chairperson, I will first start with Mr Jikila. I will just put some factors on record here. When I received instructions here ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, firstly, are you going to call anybody, firstly?

MR SAMUEL: I'm not going to call any witness at this stage, but save for the fact that I did not consult with Mr Jikila, I do not know whether he is aware of his appearance today. I have been to his place on two occasions and my fear is that if he does come about at any time between now and tomorrow, you know the story could change, but then I noticed in his affidavit he does mention that he discussed the matter with the applicant and he forgave him. I do not know what to deduce from that. My suspicion is that because he did not come forward and consult with me and even make his appearance at this hearing, the only inference I can draw is that he does not intend opposing the application. In the premises I do not have any witnesses to call and I do not intend calling the victims as well. They do not in principle have any problem with the application except for the statement that I've put forth to the applicant. Thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Samuel. I'll start with Mr Johnson t make just short submissions why we should grant amnesty, even though they do not oppose, it's still within our province to grant or refuse.

MR JOHNSON IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Mr Chairperson. First of all it is my submission to the Committee that the applicant has indeed complied with the requirements for amnesty being full disclosure and that it was politically motivated. The applicant in this matter was at that stage working for a group by the name of Askari. Now that was a government institution and ...(intervention)

JUDGE DE JAGER: That was part of the police force and he received instructions from his superiors Landman and he acted on their instructions, isn't that so?

MR JOHNSON: That is exactly my point Judge, that he indeed acted on instructions at that stage. Although Mr Choane denies being tortured by the applicant, the applicant still says that he indeed did torture Mr Choane.

Now concerning the torture itself, the applicant has made a full disclosure and it is my submission that he should qualify for amnesty concerning all the incidents of torture. As it pleases the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Johnson. Mr Samuel, is there any other thing in respect of submissions which you want to bring to our attention?

MR SAMUEL IN ARGUMENT: I believe I have made the view of the victims clear. I would then submit that the Committee has the discretion to grant or not to grant the amnesty. My clients do not want to in any way saw, or influence, the decision of the Committee because they basically do not have any interest in the matter. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Samuel. Ms Mtanga.

MS MTANGA: I have no submissions to make, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. This brings us to the conclusion of the application of Silo David Thejane. The Act requires that we give a written decision and we would reserve our decision and we'll give that very shortly, but may I thank you, Mr Johnson, you Mr Samuel and you Ms Mtanga for the assistance in this matter. That is highly valued and appreciated. Thank you very much. The Committee adjourns for the day. We'll commence at nine tomorrow, Ms Mtanga.

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.