MR MTHEMBU: Mr Chairman I will proceed now and call Mr May.

MISHEK MAY: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR MTHEMBU: Mr May is it correct that you have applied for amnesty in respect of your conviction for murder and robbery?

MR MAY: Yes Sir.

MR MTHEMBU: Is it further correct that on the 12th of February 1992 you accompanied Mr Leeuw, and Mr Nkgwedi, as well as Magoda to Stormberg Farm in Verkeerdevlei, and on that date you participated in the murder of Mr Fourie and the robbery of Mr Fourie as well as a Mrs May?

MR MAY: Yes it's true Sir.

MR MTHEMBU: Now in your own words Sir would you tell this Committee about this whole incident?

MR MAY: We arrived at Stormberg Farm, the farm belonging to Mr Fourie. Reaching that place we stopped at the gate just in front of the house on that farm. The gate itself was in a place, sort of a bush, there were a lot of trees around there. We stayed there for about, a short while, but it can be about two hours if I estimate. But before that, before we reached the gate that I am explaining about, we saw his car moving out of the yard. He seemed to be a person going about his business. He came back and found us there at the gate, together with his wife in that car. As he arrived there he alighted from the car trying to open the gates. That is where he was attacked, I mean shot. He was shot by comrade Leeuw. After having shot him it was necessary that we take him into the bush that I've explained about next to the gate as you enter into the farm yard. After pulling him off the road I was with comrade Magoda. I participated by searching his pockets and I found a wallet in his pockets. After that I went back to the car where it was still - where inside this car there was this lady who was in his company. We took this woman along and went to the house.

As we arrived at the house comrade Leeuw opened the door by the keys he found from this woman. He found the keys in her handbag. The fact is we went inside and we searched Mr Fourie's house. We found what we were instructed to get there. Things that might be necessary for the organisation according to the command that we received from the person who was responsible for the task force.

So we found the car, clothing, money that we could not use and the rest we could use. We were able to get some goods ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: What was the last word you said, money we could not use and something we could, I didn't hear it?

MR MTHEMBU: Could you clarify ...(intervention)

MR MAY: I am saying the money that we found there we could use some of it, however, the rest of the money we could not use it for buying purposes.

JUDGE WILSON: And what did you say after money? What I heard you say is, we found the car, the clothes, money we couldn't use and something else that I didn't hear what you said next

MR MAY: We found money, clothing, inside the house and

some guns that were from the safe, two guns.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Sorry, just - isn't it so that you said you found two types of monies as it were. You found the type of money that you couldn't use or could not be used and you also found the type of money that could be used. I think that is what my learned brother wanted to clarify.

MR MAY: I meant the money that we could use is this old type of money that were referred to as coins. From there there was money that didn't look like those old types of money.

From there we took the car and everything that was in the car. We went back to Botshabelo. We arrived at comrade Leeuw's place where he stayed with comrade Sibelayi. Then comrade Sibelayi was left behind there, then we left, the three of us, and left Mr Magoda at his place. The car was driven to D Section. As we arrived in D Section comrade Sparks was the one who had to return home at K Section, the car was left there. Then I had to look after the car until it was to be driven off, because it could be taken at any time according to his instruction.

MR MTHEMBU: Sir who is comrade Sparks?

MR MAY: Comrade Sparks is Hendrik Leeuw.

MR MTHEMBU: Please refer to him as such.

MR MAY: Thank you, I will do so.

MR MTHEMBU: You say you left, the vehicle was left at Section D?

MR MAY: Yes it is so.

MR MTHEMBU: Then what happened thereafter?

MR MAY: After about two days the car was confiscated at that place, in that yard where we left it.

MR MTHEMBU: At Section D whose yard was it where the

vehicle was left, do you know?

MR MAY: Briefly I would say that yard was belonging to a widow, but I related to her because she was my mistress.

MR MTHEMBU: Yes, after two days the vehicle was recovered and what happened from there?

MR MAY: Yes it is so, the car was found. It had all the goods inside.

MR MTHEMBU: The car was found by whom?

MR MAY: The car was found by Mr de la Rey and the others who were in his company.

MR MTHEMBU: Are you referring to members of the South African Police Services?

MR MAY: Yes I am referring to the members of the SAPS.

MR MTHEMBU: Proceed Sir. After the car was found or recovered what then happened?

MR MAY: Thereafter there were Black policemen who were Mr Junkie, however I cannot recall his surname and Mr Steve. That is where they said to me this car has been involved in the killing of Mr Fourie and then I found that I have to answer what they would enquire from me about the car. They asked me of two names, I didn't know, they were the names of the comrades that I was with at the Stormberg Farm at that time and then I asked them whose names are those. They explained about the two names as they investigated from the farm where they came from where this incident took place, from their parents.

MR MTHEMBU: Sir do you know what happened or what did you do with the articles that you mentioned earlier on that you removed from Mr Fourie's farm?

MR MAY: The policemen confiscated the asset that we took from Mr Fourie's place.

MR MTHEMBU: Do you know where the police found them, other than the vehicle?

MR MAY: The assets I am referring to, except this I am talking of.

MR MTHEMBU: You said the vehicle was recovered in Section D. Now the rest of the articles or items that were removed from Mr Fourie's farm, do you know where the police found them?

MR MAY: No I know of the assets that were in the car.

MR MTHEMBU: Do you know what happened to the firearms?

MR MAY: About the firearms as per as arranged before we parted with Comrade Leeuw, the firearms were supposed to have been taken by him, all three firearms. However, when the policemen arrived there was a firearm that was found in the car.

(The speaker's mike is not on)

JUDGE WILSON: You said a moment ago all three firearms, did you take three firearms?

MR MAY: We took two firearms, when we did have a pistol in our possession.

ADV DE JAGER: How much money did you find in the wallet of Mr Fourie, when you took it out of his pocket?

MR MAY: I believe the money within the wallet was not taken out of the wallet.

ADV DE JAGER: Well what did you do with the wallet?

MR MAY: That wallet with money was found within the car.

ADV DE JAGER: And the other money you found in the house that could be used, what was the sum of money you found, the money that you could use, not the ancient money?

MR MAY: I don't think there was anybody who managed to count it. We just mixed it together with the coins and made a parcel.

ADV DE JAGER: How big was that parcel?

MR MAY: It was a hand purse belonging to this female who was in the company of Mr Fourie.

ADV DE JAGER: The coins, how many coins did you find, those that you couldn't use?

MR MAY: Well I don't know the number, but it was a bundle of coins. They were in plastic bags.

ADV DE JAGER: So it was quite a number of them, 20 or more than 20?

MR MAY: There were about 15 plastic bags.

ADV DE JAGER: 15 plastic bags.

MR MAY: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: And how many coins in each bag?

MR MAY: There was in small groups. There could be five in a plastic or one or two in one of the plastics. The plastic bags were not full with coins.

MR MTHEMBU: And the items of clothing?

MR MAY: Are you referring to the clothes?

MR MTHEMBU: Yes.

MR MAY: Could you explain what about the clothing?

MR MTHEMBU: That what happened to the clothing?

MR MAY: The clothing in the car and everything that was in the car the policemen seized them as they were, all of them. The clothing was still in the car.

MR MTHEMBU: And the money that could be used, was it also found in the car?

MR MAY: Yes it was found inside the car.

MR MTHEMBU: Sir are you a member of the PAC?

MR MAY: Yes it is so.

MR MTHEMBU: When did you become a member?

MR MAY: If I recall in 1990. I think it was in January.

MR MTHEMBU: Were you also a member of its military wing, APLA?

MR MAY: I did endeavour to be in this military wing of APLA, if I can recall I think it was about 1991. I think it was in '91 towards October or September, October/November.

MR MTHEMBU: Sir have you received any military training and if so when and who trained you?

MR MAY: I received military training. However, it was not complete according to military training. I have undergone military training in November. The training at the township where we stayed, towards the periphery there's an open space, it's a big open space leading far away from the township. That training lasted for about three nights or two. It so happened that comrade Showa who was the person responsible for this military training of the task force training, however, there were some APLA members who came around. It so happened that he had to leave us. That is the kind of training we received which was not that complete.

MR MTHEMBU: That very same incomplete training, did you receive it on a one-off occasion or not?

MR MAY: That is the only time I received for military training.

MR MTHEMBU: Now I see in paragraph 7(b) of your application, "state capacity in which you served in the organisation or liberation movement concerned, if applicable and membership number if any". Now you say you are a PAC task force member. Could you explain to this Committee how this task force links up with the PAC and/or APLA?

MR MAY: The objective of task force that I'm referring to

there was this call made by Comrade Pama. I think this call, mostly here in Africa was heeded because it was done over the radio. He was referring to Operation Great Storm. The objective being to establish Operation Great Storm which was linked with these task forces and APLA as it is because it was APLA's responsibility, it was to be used by task force. This was the call that was made over the radio, so that it's operations focus on the farms only, against the farmers, the reason being, or the other reason was what we tried to achieve as the organisation explained of the outcry of Africans that the land must go back to its rightful owners. That is why it was necessary that this kind of operation receives this kind of response. It was an example even to APLA members who would join Great Storm Operation.

MR MTHEMBU: Now prior to the attack on Mr Fourie, have you been on that farm before?

MR MAY: No Sir.

MR MTHEMBU: Who selected Mr Fourie's farm and do you know for what reason, if any?

MR MAY: Mr Fourie's farm, according to the instruction that we received from comrade John Showa, he didn't mention any farm, but he emphasised that Operation Great Storm is responsible and it's up to us to strengthen it by attacking the farms. He didn't consider what address we would furnish for our attacks, but we would take out the command as we received it. We would just go to any other farm. The four of us, one of them was comrade Leeuw, and Mr Nkgwedi, we decided that we can attack Mr Fourie's farm.

MR MTHEMBU: But no the question was, amongst the four, five or so of you, who decided that Mr Fourie should be attacked?

MR MAY: It was comrade Hendrik Leeuw.

MR MTHEMBU: Did Mr Leeuw give any particular reasons why he was singling out this farm of Mr Fourie?

MR MAY: Briefly he didn't give out the reason for choosing this farm where we could take out this operation. Afterwards he did give out reasons.

MR MTHEMBU: What you are telling this Committee now is that on the 12th of February 1992 when you went to Stormberg Farm you didn't know any reason why Mr Fourie was going to be attacked. All you knew was that it was a perpetuation of the principles as enunciated in Operation Great Storm or not?

ADV DE JAGER: Mr - are you giving the evidence or should he give it?

MR MTHEMBU: With due respect Sir, what I want the witness to say is that if he went there with a vague mind ...(intervention)

ADV DE JAGER: Ask him to give the answer but don't tell him what you want him to (Speaker's mike is not on)

MR MTHEMBU: Sir are you saying when you went to Stormberg Farm in the day in question you were vague inasfar as why in particular Stormberg Farm should be attacked?

JUDGE MGOEPE: No he's not saying that. He's not saying when he went there he was vague as to whether the farm was being attacked. He said at that time Mr Leeuw did not give a reason why Mr Fourie was selected. Maybe if you want to know what was in the witness' own mind, ask him as to why, in his own mind, he wanted to attack Mr Fourie, what he willingly went there to attack Mr Fourie.

MR MTHEMBU: Very well Sir. Mr May, if Mr Leeuw didn't give any reasons why this particular farm had to be

attacked, in your own mind, what were you thinking?

MR MAY: The objective of the four of us was to carry out the instruction of our commander. As we went to these farms we didn't attack the farms. When Mr Leeuw singled out this farm I went into that farm because that is where the operation was to be carried out. Then we just have to carry out the instruction as the order was given to us.

JUDGE WILSON: What reason did Mr Leeuw give you later?

MR MAY: When I enquired from Mr Leeuw he told me of his knowledge in the past. If he did mention that beforehand we could not have agreed. He grew up on that farm, he worked there for about 15 years and what kind of a person was this White man. Those were the reasons he gave for us having done that kind of action.

MR MTHEMBU: Sir can you tell this Committee ...(intervention)

ADV DE JAGER: Could you kindly explain, he said what kind of a person that man was, what did he in fact tell you what kind of a person was he?

MR MAY: When he referred to Mr Fourie he said Mr Fourie had cooperation with his workers only. Then he complained as to the long time he served on this farm working for Mr Fourie until he left without peace at heart. However, I discovered that it was not because of that reason that he could tell us he didn't understand Mr Fourie and tell us to attack Mr Fourie based on those reasons, because he knew we were not going to concur with him on that point.

JUDGE MGOEPE: No sorry, I just want to clear this up. Do I understand you to say that, firstly Mr Leeuw did not give you the reasons as to why Mr Fourie was specifically singled out, he only told you later?

MR MAY: Yes Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: And the reasons that he gave you later would not have been the reasons for you to single out Mr Fourie, you would not have agreed to single out Mr Fourie given the reasons that Mr Leeuw had given?

MR MAY: Yes they would not agree.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Because you felt that the reasons that he was giving you were more-or-less, one can describe them as reasons relating to his personal relationship with Mr Fourie?

MR MAY: I did understand his reasons but I felt that I wouldn't have done this if he had told me about these reasons, because it would - it seems that he did this because of his personal reasons, but we had to go there in order to satisfy ourselves collectively.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Thank you. Just a minute.

ADV DE JAGER: It's not clear yet to me then, did you in fact disagree with Mr Leeuw's reasons?

MR MAY: There was no point in disagreeing with his reasons because the operation was already done. I didn't want us to argue over what he told me.

ADV DE JAGER: And so you didn't argue with him, but in fact he told you that he went there because of his own personal reasons, do I understand you correctly?

MR MAY: I am not saying that we went there because of his own personal reasons, but what I am trying to say that if he did stop us - if he did explain to us before with his given reasons, I don't think we would have agreed with him because he would have distorted the order that we were given originally.

JUDGE MGOEPE: While we are still on that point you must

have heard this this morning when Mr Nkgwedi, I think he said that he was the one who had taken the decision that Mr Fourie be attacked.

MR MAY: I would not disagree with him but his decision was not very clear to us, what he was saying was just to concur with comrade Leeuw, maybe that is what he is trying to explain, that's why he chose the reason he was concurring with Mr Leeuw by choosing that specific farm.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Before agreeing to go and attack Mr Fourie, did anybody, be it either Mr Nkgwedi or Mr Leeuw describe to you what sort of person Mr Fourie was?

MR MAY: Are you referring to before?

JUDGE MGOEPE: Yes.

MR MAY: No Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You didn't even know that you were going to attack a farmer?

MR MAY: We were going to attack farms and their farmers, but we never specified which one will we start with.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Yes, that's what I am trying to get from you. I asked you whether anybody described to you Mr Fourie in advance, did anybody say to you, the person we have in mind is a farmer, was a White person, was a male person, did anybody describe that, that's what I want to find out from you?

MR MAY: No Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: So when you left you did not know whether you are going to attack - now if I may use South African terminology as existed then, you did not attack a Black person, an Indian, a Coloured, a White, you did not know that?

MR MAY: What I knew is we were going to attack farms. I

knew that there was a need to attack a farmer in order to pursue our struggle, the operation. Mr Fourie, as I have said, the people that were with knew him and we went into his house.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Thank you.

JUDGE WILSON: I think we will have to take an adjournment at this stage. I have been waiting for a more suitable moment, but I think in regard to the people who have been working since 9 o'clock this morning we should take an adjournment now. We will take a short adjournment.

MR MTHEMBU: Mr Chairman I just mention that Mr Khotle has arrived.

JUDGE MGOEPE: While we are taking an adjournment Mr Mthembu it may be that you should consult with him and then decide whether you want to call him as a witness. Though of course if you don't call him as a witness, we may, on our own initiative still decide to call him. But it is important for you to decide whether you call him as a witness because it has got certain implications as you know. If you call him, which I think you would do, if you call him without consulting with him, you call him as a witness, you must know that you are not going to be allowed to cross-examine him. So you must consult with him bearing that in mind and then decide whether you want to call him as your witness.

JUDGE WILSON: There is one other point which I would like to raise before the adjournment, and that is in the light of the very detailed evidence we have had about goods being taken, left in the car, what was recovered, I trust that there will be information available to us as to what goods were stolen and the nature of the goods that were not

recovered. R8 000 worth of goods were not recovered. I trust information will be available which undoubtedly was available at the trial. The indictment would have contained a list of goods stolen and as it appears on the record, the police record, there was R8 000 worth of goods missing, I take it that that evidence was also available to the prosecution and I trust it will be available us. We will take the short adjournment.

MR MTHEMBU: ....I have Mr Chair.

JUDGE WILSON: Is there anyone from the Prison's Department in the hall now? Nobody.

MR MTHEMBU: I think there is Mr Chair.

JUDGE WILSON: Where is he?

MR MTHEMBU: At the back in the second row.

JUDGE WILSON: I would like on behalf of the Committee to express our thanks and gratitude to the Prisons Department and to the head of Prison for their great speed with which they have acceded to our request to bring a certain witness from prison to the hearing. We are very grateful to the prison and would you express our thanks to the head of prison when you return. Thank you.

MISHEK MAY: (s.u.o.)

EXAMINATION BY MR MTHEMBU: (cont)

May I proceed Mr Chairman. Mr May you were still testifying. Sir would you tell this Committee what political objective did you seek to achieve by participating in the murder of the late Mr Fourie and as well as in the robbery of Mr Fourie and Mrs May?

MR MAY: The objective was to carry out the policy as

outlined by Operation Great Storm. From there PA  were from its military wing believed that these farms, the farm owners, if they can be attacked by using the operations of Great Storm this would make this - and hence the attacks on the farmers and we were referring to this land where they farmed on, we tried to acquire this land so that when they leave these farms the Africans could take over the farms. However, they didn't have the right to own farms at that time.

MR MTHEMBU: What term of imprisonment are you currently serving?

MR MAY: I was sentenced to death in 1992, on the 11th of September and sentenced for 15 years.

MR MTHEMBU: Sir is there any further thing that you wish to add?

MR MAY: What I would say on to this Committee is that my participation in the struggle for freedom, forgive me, let me explain in this manner. The struggle that we carried on under APLA, the objective was to attain freedom because everybody was under oppression and let them attain all human rights that were in existence. We didn't mind how we attained freedom here in South Africa as the oppressed people. We would do anything to attain freedom in this land of Africans.

MR MTHEMBU: And is that your case?

MR MAY: Yes that is as far as I can go.

MR MTHEMBU: Thank you Mr Chair.

JUDGE WILSON: I am not sure that I understand you completely correctly, but the impression I have from your evidence is that the policy of the PAC or its military wing was against farmers in general, and it was not the purpose to pick individual people whom you had a grudge against, is

that so?

MR MAY: It is not so Sir, it is not so. The objective was not to single out those that we had a grudge with.

JUDGE WILSON: No, that's what I am saying, it was not to sort out those you had a grudge with, it was a general policy? It was not to be used for matters of personal vendetta or vengeance, is that correct?

MR MAY: Yes it is so.

JUDGE WILSON: And that is what you meant when you said you would not have concurred with Leeuw because he had a personal relationship and feelings with Mr Fourie, and you felt that that was not in accordance with your policy, is that so?

MR MAY: Yes it is so.

JUDGE WILSON: Thank you.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Who was in charge of this operation amongst the four or five of you?

MR MAY: The person who was in charge for this operation, as he was a unit commander, was Mr Hendrik Leeuw.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You never stayed at the farm isn't it?

MR MAY: I did not.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You lived in Botshabelo?

MR MAY: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Thank you.

JUDGE WILSON: Thank you. Re-examination?

ADV DE JAGER: Do you have anything there that you want to point out?

ADV THABETHE: No.

ADV DE JAGER: Sorry could you obtain any information about the R8 000 missing articles, missing rands?

ADV THABETHE: I am making arrangements to get the indictment.

JUDGE WILSON: The indictment itself may not be sufficient. It may not explain what was missing.

ADV THABETHE: I will specify in the request.

ADV DE JAGER: Can't you get hold of the investigating officer perhaps?

ADV THABETHE: The one who was here around has gone to Welkom. He said he'll be back before lunch, so he's not here right now.

ADV DE JAGER: I see quite a number of police people here, perhaps they could assist you in getting information if you need to get information.

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