TRC Final Report

Volume 2

Chapter 6

Part Part6

Subsection 9

Killing of Maxwell Madondo and attempted killing of Sibusiso Chili and Lerotodi Ikaneng

71 Mr Maxwell Madondo was killed on 13 February 1989. Several members of the Chili family, Mr Lerotodi Ikaneng and two others were charged with murder. Central to their defence was the assertion that Madondo had been killed in self- defence and that he had been sent from the Mandela house with two others to kill Mr Sibusiso Chili and Ikaneng. In somewhat unusual circumstances, the State accepted a statement from Mr Katiza Cebekhulu in which he claimed to have accompanied Madondo on a ‘mission’ to kill Chili and Ikaneng on the instructions of Ms Madikizela-Mandela.

72 The assertion that the MUFC wanted to kill these two was supported by an alleged hit list found on the Mandela property during a police raid on 19 February. This list contained the names of Chili, Ikaneng and other youths, including Ms Albertina Sisulu’s nephews, who had also had problems with the football club. Inexplicably, no subsequent investigations were conducted into this admission. The court found Sibusiso Chili guilty of murder, but accepted the mitigating circumstances that his life was under threat at the time. He was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment.

73 Testimony from several witnesses, including a statement from a former MUFC member who warned both Ikaneng and the Chili family about the impending attack, supports the allegation that they were targets of the MUFC.

74 Several witnesses testified that Ms Madikizela-Mandela came to the scene after Madondo’s death. Her former driver, John Morgan, testified that he drove her to the scene.

75 Ms Madikizela-Mandela acknowledged that she knew Madondo, but denied any knowledge of this incident, the circumstances surrounding his death or the identity of the killer.

THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT MADONDO WAS KILLED AS A RESULT OF ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE MEMBERS OF THE MUFC AND OTHER ASSOCIATES OF THE MANDELA HOUSEHOLD TO ABDUCT AND/OR KILL SIBUSISO CHILI. THE COMMISSION CANNOT CONFIRM THAT MS MADIKIZELAMANDELA WAS DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE DECISION THAT RESULTED IN THE ACTIONS TAKEN TO APPREHEND CHILI.

THE COMMISSION FINDS, HOWEVER, THAT ON A BALANCE OF PROBABILITIES MS MADIKIZELAMANDELA DID GO TO THE SCENE OF THE MURDER AS ALLEGED BY THE WITNESSES.

Killing of Finkie Msomi

76 On the evening of 22 February 1989, the home of Ms Dudu Chili (mother of Sibusiso Chili) was attacked and burnt down. Her thirteen-year-old niece Finkie Msomi was shot dead in the attack. Mr Katiza Cebekhulu alleged that he was present at a meeting at which Ms Madikizela-Mandela said that Madondo’s death had to be avenged and that the Chili family were ‘sell-outs’.

77 An internally trained MK member and associate of the Mandela household, Mr Charles Zwane, was convicted for the killing. He denied any involvement in the incident and claimed that members of the Soweto Murder and Robbery Unit tortured him into a confession.

THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT FINKIE MSOMI, A MEMBER OF THE CHILI FAMILY, WAS MURDERED BY AN MK COMMANDER AND MEMBERS OF THE MUFC IN A RETALIATORY ATTACK FOR THE KILLING OF MAXWELL MADONDO. THE COMMISSION FINDS FURTHER THAT THE HOUSE OF MS DUDU CHILI, THE MOTHER OF SIBUSISO CHILI, WAS PETROL-BOMBED AND SET ALIGHT BY MEMBERS OF THE MUFC AND THE AFORESAID MK COMMANDER, ALSO IN REVENGE FOR THE KILLING OF MAXWELL MADONDO BY MEMBERS OF THE MUFC AND /OR ASSOCIATES OF THE MANDELA HOUSE.

78 Although the club was theoretically disbanded at this stage, a number of youths associated with the club and MK remained close to the Mandela household. Although one cannot discount the possibility that Zwane was tortured by members of the Murder and Robbery Unit, he was not convicted for the killing of Finkie Msomi on the basis of a confession alone. In mitigation, Zwane’s advocate accepted that the attack on the Chili house was motivated by revenge and that Zwane was heavily influenced by the dominant personality of Ms Madikizela-Mandela.

79 Ms Madikizela-Mandela denied any knowledge of the circumstances surrounding or involvement in the decision to attack the Chili home. All she knew, she said, was what she read in the newspapers. She denied any conflict between herself and Ms Dudu Chili.

80 Ms Madikizela-Mandela’s apparent ignorance about the circumstances and people involved in the attack on the Chilis’ house, as well as the fact that it was related directly to the killing of another person who stayed at her house, is improbable. It is not feasible, in the context of the community condemnation of her club and the close proximity of a number of community leaders as a result of these problems, that she could have been so isolated from the events of mid- to late February. Although it is quite possible that she had little control over the actions of some of the youths associated with her and her household, it is improbable that she was as unaware of the events and circumstances as she claims.

Assault and murder of Themba Mabotha

81 Mr Themba Mabotha was allegedly an askari who absconded from Vlakplaas in 1988 and subsequently became an associate of the Mandela household. He was allegedly involved in the assaults on the youths abducted from the Methodist manse and also a potential witness in the Seipei murder investigation.

82 Following his arrest and assault by members of the Soweto Security Branch and Vlakplaas, Mabotha was detained for a period of almost eight months. According to available detention registers, Mabotha was detained in April and released in October. Security policemen involved in his arrest, however, have testified that he was arrested in February. No explanation has been given for the six- to seven-week period between the time of his arrest and his registration as a detainee.

83 According to Captain Jan Potgieter, Mabotha was to have been used as a State witness against Ms Madikizela-Mandela in a pending treason trial for which he (Potgieter) had been conducting investigations for over two years. He testified that the failure of the Witwatersrand Attorney-General to make a decision regarding this prosecution had left him in a dilemma, as he was unable to obtain an extension on Mabotha’s detention. He wanted him to be available should a subsequent decision be made to prosecute Madikizela-Mandela, and said that he requested Colonel Eugene de Kock to keep him at Vlakplaas. He claimed that, at the time, he had no idea of the nature of Vlakplaas operations.

84 Eugene de Kock testified, however, that he had been contacted by Potgieter and had inferred, from the tenor of their conversation, that Mabotha was to be killed. De Kock reasoned that Mabotha had been involved in shooting two policemen and that "it would happen again and had to be prevented". De Kock explained that he did not receive an order from anyone to kill Mabotha, but that Potgieter’s intentions were clear. They had worked together in Koevoet in South West Africa and he said that he and Potgieter "understood each other well".

85 Both Potgieter and De Kock applied for amnesty for Mabotha’s death. Their versions are conflicting and no finding had been made at the time of reporting as the matter was still be heard.

Death of Sizwe Sithole

86 Mr Sizwe Sithole died in police custody at John Vorster Square on 3 February 1990. A Judicial Commission of Inquiry found that Sithole had committed suicide. Evidence before the Commission showed that Sithole had admitted his involvement in several murders (including the murder of Mr Thole Dlamini) and had also implicated Ms Madikizela-Mandela and Ms Mandela-Hlongwane. Details of these allegations were written down during five hours of interrogation on the day of Sithole’s death. The notes taken down by Jan Augustyn, the policeman involved in the interrogation, were never made public. The Commission has not been able to gain access to these notes.

87 Mr Katiza Cebekhulu alleged that he had been instructed by Ms Madikizela-Mandela to tip off the police regarding illegal weapons in Sithole’s possession.

88 Ms Madikizela-Mandela has categorically denied Cebekhulu’s allegations.

THE COMMISSION FOUND NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT CEBEKHULU’S ALLEGATION AGAINST MS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA. WITHOUT THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY, THE COMMISSION WAS UNABLE TO MAKE ANY FINDINGS REGARDING THE ADMISSIONS AND ALLEGATIONS ALLEGEDLY MADE BY SITHOLE.

Abduction of Katiza Cebekhulu

89 Mr Katiza Cebekhulu, a co-accused of Ms Madikizela-Mandela at her trial for kidnapping and assault, disappeared shortly before the trial and re-emerged in a Zambian prison, where he was detained without trial for almost three years.

90 Ms Madikizela-Mandela has denied any knowledge of or involvement in the abduction of Cebekhulu.

91 Katiza Cebekhulu was taken out of the country and placed illegally in a Zambian prison at the request of the ANC with the assistance of the Zambian authorities. Former Zambian President Kenneth Kaunda admitted that the ANC requested his assistance with Cebekhulu. Although he indicated that this was done for his own safety, it is more likely that it was done to protect Ms Madikizela-Mandela from his possible disclosures and avoid the embarrassment that he would cause to the ANC. The ANC had good reason to believe that the authorities would try to use any information disclosed by Cebekhulu, as evidenced by the disclosure of STRATCOM documents revealing the dissemination of disinformation regarding the ANC by the SAP during this period.

92 The ANC has never taken responsibility for its actions regarding Cebekhulu. Ms Madikizela-Mandela’s assertion that she was not directly involved in at least the initial hand-over of Cebekhulu is contradicted by the testimony of both Morgan and Cebekhulu. Advocate Semenya attempted to discredit Cebekhulu’s version on the basis that he said ‘Shell House’ instead of ‘Sauer Street’ – a relatively minor detail, considering that there is no other version available as to how he was placed in the ANC’s custody. Madikizela-Mandela’s contention that she had nothing to gain from Cebekhulu’s incarceration is not credible, as her interests would appear to be the very reason that he was taken out of the country.