The applicant is applying for amnesty in terms of section 18 of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 1995 (Act 34 of 1995) hereinafter referred to as the "Act".

The offences which he is applying for are the following:-

All these charges were heard under case no. SH488/93.

The applicant made his application by way of filling in the prescribed application form. This form was signed, duly attested to and received before the cut-off date. In the application form the applicant stated that he was also applying for two counts of robbery. This error was rectified and the application form was amended to read two counts of kidnapping. The application was not opposed and none of the victim's families were present at the hearing.

The applicant testified that he was a member of the African National Congress (ANC). He was an elder in the community and was a member of the Self Defence Unit.

He testified that on the 20 March one ANC comrade by the name of Msebenzi was killed. This man was the secretary of the ANC Youth League. He was also the son-in-law of the applicant. This murdered comrade also had parts of his body removed.

On the 21^st March the applicant together with a large crowd of comrades went to the victims' houses. They took the victims from their houses, assaulted them with sjamboks and took them to the sports ground. The victims were assaulted because the comrades believed that they collaborated with the police. This was because each time the comrades had a meeting, the police would be after the comrades. Furthermore the victims, after being assaulted, admitted that they had indeed collaborated with the police.

When the comrades found the victims, they discovered firearms and knives that were smeared with blood. The victims admitted that they were responsible for the ANC comrade's killing. The applicant stated that the deceased comrade was seen with the victims on the Friday preceding his death.

The victims who collaborated with the police were taken to the stadium. At the stadium they were further assaulted with sjamboks and iron bars. One of the members of the Street Committee, who has since died, issued an order that they must be burnt.

Petrol was brought and they were doused with it. The victims were still alive when they were burnt. The person who lit the fire was one Samuel Nigene. The applicant was present at all times and fully associated himself with this act.

The kidnapped victims were not burnt because they merely hosted the collaborators. They were also not involved in the killing of the deceased comrade. In order to be granted amnesty, the Committee, after considering an application for amnesty must be satisfied that:-

Insofar as section 20(1)(a), the Committee is satisfied that the applicant has met the requirements of the Act.

Insofar as section 20(1)(b) the Committee is satisfied that the act which the applicant is applying for is an act associated with a political objective.

Section 20(3)(b) states that one of the criteria used to determine whether an act is associated with a political objective is:

It is our view that the circumstances do meet this criteria.

Further section 20(3)(d) states that one must also took at whether act was "primarily directed at a political opponent or state property...". It is our view that this criterion has also been met because the victims were perceived to be collaborating with the police who were opposed to the ANC.

The main question is whether or not the applicant has made a full disclosure of the facts as required by section 20(1)(c). The applicant was requested to supplement his application and submit further particulars to the application. In his replying letter he stated that he did not know how the victims were murdered. He stated that he was unjustly convicted.

In another letter dated 11 May 1997 he stated that at the time the crime was committed he was not present. He was in Pietersburg on duty as a traditional doctor.

He was extensively cross-examined on this aspect. He explained this saying that he did not went to reveal the truth at that stage. He wanted to reveal the truth before the Committee. Further he stated that he lied in the criminal trial because he wanted to escape conviction.

Other than this aspect, the Committee is satisfied that the applicant has made a full disclosure of the role he took in the killing of the victims and has therefore met the requirements of section 20(1)(c).

Amnesty is therefore GRANTED to the applicant in respect of all the incidents he has applied for.

The victims are to be referred to the Reparation and Rehabilitation Committee for consideration.

Signed at Cape Town on the 5th day of April 2000.