DAY: 8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: ... and then we will follow it with the application of Mr Ntuli. Mr Mchunu?

MR MCHUNU IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Mr Chairman and members of the Committee, the applicant herein seeks amnesty in respect of acts committed between the dates in 1990 to 1993.

I will list the incidents as follows: An aborted attempt to assassinate Mr Matthew Phosa, which goes only as far as a conspiracy which never went beyond just a conspiracy. Two, an assault of Mr Cele, a school teacher. Three, an attack on young men at Nombete. Four, an attack on plus minus seven males at Mona Lisa. Five, an attack on taxi owner which can only be said to be attempted murder, and a killing of an unknown person at Songombo.

The first incident or act which I have referred to as an act of attempt to murder or to assassinate Mr Matthew Phosa, on that act, it does appear very, very clearly from the facts, that the applicant had during his time in 1990 whilst he was in Barberton town prison, associated, or had associated himself with the IFP and had been working in close association with prison warders who had proclaimed themselves to be members of the AWB.

He therefore, in the performance of this act which came to nothing at the end, acted within the direct instructions of those he held in high esteem. As I said who proclaimed themselves to be members of the AWB, without expectation of any gain whatsoever, despite the fact that there is evidence to the effect that there was a reward which was never explained, what type of reward it was.

But be that as it may, the applicant reconciled himself with those instructions, and clearly the applicant in his evidence too, did state quite categorically that in answer to a number of questions posed to him, whether he would have done, he would have committed the act, he would have killed Mr Phosa, his answer was in the affirmative, whether or not there was any reward, placed on the head of Mr Matthew Phosa.

This Chairperson, I believe is also covered by the provisions of Section 20(3)(e), of the Act, in that those are acts committed under direct instructions. If I may just read the provisions of the Act quickly, the relevant provisions of the Act - whether the act, omission or offence was committed in the execution of an order of or on behalf of, or with the approval of the organisation, institution, liberation movement or body of which the person who committed the act, was a member, an agent or a supporter.

This is supposed to define an act associated with a political objective. Without any further waste of time Chairperson, I will go straight to the next act, that is the next incident.

The incident relating to the assault on Mr Cele, the school teacher. It does appear also from the evidence of the applicant, that the applicant on joining the IFP when he was at Ndwedwe, became a member of the IFP, not only became a member of the IFP, but also became a bodyguard of Mr Mfayela.

When he saw a fight breaking out between Mr Mfayela and Mr Cele, he saw it fit as a bodyguard, to execute his duties, to fight against a person who was fighting against his leader, and two, he was also acting under the direct instructions of Mr Mfayela to assault Mr Cele.

Incident number three and four, are similar. They are quite similar in that in both incidents, the applicant and Mr Mfayela were in a car and that includes also incident number six as well. I will refer to them as follows: Incident number three and four relates to the incident of the shooting of men found in the street, and incident number six, relates to the killing of an unknown person, also found in the street.

Both, or all these three incidents, it does appear that the applicant was in the company of a superior or of other people he regarded as his own comrades, and in execution of a mission which was tabled or which was agreed upon between the members or was the instructions, the direct instructions of the leader.

I believe that this is also covered by the provisions which I have already elaborated on, which I have already covered, which I have already read before this Committee.

Incident number five, that is the assault, that is the attack on the taxi owner, which I have said, can only be said to be an attempted murder, because it also has appeared that Mr Cele died subsequently, as a result of something else, other than ...

MR LAX: You mean Mr Gumedi, sorry? You have said Cele?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Gumedi yes. That was put on that he died of natural causes, not as a direct result of any injuries that he may have sustained in the attack described by the applicant.

MR MCHUNU: I am highly indebted for the correction, thank you very much. Mr Gumedi, actually yes. The taxi owner, Mr Gumedi, was seen by the applicant and his comrades at that time, as a person who was working in close association with the members of an enemy organisation.

In fact he was labelled at that time, as a transporter of comrades, of people belonging to the ANC, and therefore he was as the applicant has also elaborated in the background, that this was also agreed upon in a discussion as one of the people targeted to be killed, to be eliminated.

It is clear from the evidence of the applicant in all these incidents, particularly in the incidents relating to his stay at Ndwedwe and the acts committed during that time, that the applicant did not act for any specific gain. He has also explained that at many instances, or in instances which can be counted to two or three, he did receive payment, but which was only, which only served as pocket money.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think it is from the evidence of the applicant in any event, the payment that he received was more in the form of subsistence payment rather than reward for specific jobs done.

MR MCHUNU: Thank you very much. It is on that basis Mr Chairman, and members of the Committee, that I believe that the applicant has been able to satisfy the requirements of the Act in that, the basic requirements of the Act, in that (1) the applicant did indeed act for a political objective, (2) that the applicant has made a full disclosure of all relevant acts. Let me just explain just briefly to that.

The provisions of Section 20(1)(b) and (c), (c) in particular, states that the applicant has made a full disclosure of all relevant facts, and all relevant facts here means relevant, acts relevant to his application. Any other acts, would in my mind be peripheral, it would no longer really matter, whether or not he did disclose them, but in any event, the applicant did state during his testimony that, he is willing to disclose any other acts, but then he cannot because his application is grounded on the acts which he has disclosed before this Commission.

On the basis of that Chairperson, I ask that the applicant be granted amnesty.

MR LAX: Mr Mchunu, just so that I can be clear in my own mind. You have mentioned five specific incidents, and you have described them as follows: the aborted attempt to assassinate Mr Phosa.

MR MCHUNU: Six actually.

MR LAX: Correct. The assault of Mr Cele, the young men at Nombete, Mona Lisa, that is three and four, the attack on the taxi driver and the killing of this unknown person.

In your client's evidence, he dealt with the conspiracy to kill Cele subsequently. Is he not applying for amnesty for that and having been part of that?

MR MCHUNU: Chairperson, I think that was, I believe, just an omission on my part. That was also explained in his evidence, that there was such a conspiracy. Even though he did not participate in the act or the murder of Mr Cele, at the end, but it also did appear that Mr Cele was finally killed, he was finally murdered.

But he also did participate in the act of conspiring against Mr Cele.

MR LAX: The other aspect that I was just wanting you to clear up for me is, in relation to the taxi driver, there was an attempted robbery of that vehicle and your address hasn't covered that at all.

MR MCHUNU: The attempted robbery, thank you for that Chairperson ...

CHAIRPERSON: One could even call it a robbery really, because he did get control of the vehicle, although not for a long time.

MR MCHUNU: Thank you. Thank you for that Chairperson and members of the Committee. The robbery actually or the attempt to do so, by the applicant and other members, was also in the furtherance of their objectives, in that - of their main objective actually - in that it was meant to take them to a specific point, where they would get a get away car. They were using this vehicle, the taxi, to run away from the scene.

Unfortunately, it capsized before it could get anywhere, and (2) there is another point which I also need to mention. I believe that the member of the Committee, wants to get straight into it, that is the robbery of cash which was put to the applicant by my learned friend.

The applicant has also explained in his evidence, that he knows nothing about this, but he has also not excluded the possibility of this having happened. In a situation like that, and in many instances, it is not uncommon to find others who would take that opportunity, who would be opportunistic enough to in the process of executing any particular mission, to further their own personal objectives in robbing and I believe that this is the case here.

The applicant does not know of that incident of the taking of cash, but he does not exclude that possibility because they were many.

CHAIRPERSON: And it wasn't part of the original plan or intention to steal cash?

MR MCHUNU: That is correct Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mchunu. Mr Falconer, are you going to address us.

MR FALCONER: I believe so, thank you Mr Chairman.


MR FALCONER IN ARGUMENT: Mr Chairman, with your leave, I would like to open with the preliminary matter which is not addressed to the merits of the application. It does however relate to what in my submission is a grave injustice which has emanated from these proceedings, and I believe that it is incumbent upon me to put it before yourself.

Mr Chairman, as you aware part of the statutory objects of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is exactly to achieve as true a picture as possible, of the past unfortunate history of this country.

Ultimately to hopefully end up with some form of reconciliation. It is for that very purpose that my understanding is the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is open to the public and to the media, the mass media, to enable the country to benefit from this process. Only under very extreme circumstances will the public and the media be circumvented from attending.

Mr Chairman, it has been brought to my attention that following the application proceedings in this matter the other day, various articles were carried in amongst others the Daily News publication on the 21st of October, entitled politician named as hit-squad boss, IFP hit-man confesses. I am also given to understand that there have been similar publications in the Mercury and also that there have been broadcasts to this effect on the SABC.

Regrettably Mr Chairman, what is contained in all of these broadcasts is an implication of someone who was never ever mentioned, by the applicant in his papers, or in his viva voce evidence before this Commission. Mr Senzo Mfayela, a member of Parliament in Cape Town, has been unlawfully implicated in the so-called alleged hit squad activities, and it is also suggested that he "was a killer" and it goes on to state that he essentially had hand in giving instructions which resulted in the deaths of persons in Ndwedwe.

As you are aware Mr Chairman, Mr Dinkiziwe Mfayela an MPP of the Provincial Legislature of kwaZulu Natal, was implicated and so too, was a Mr Semo Mfayela. No evidence whatsoever has implicated Mr Senzo Mfayela.

I have been instructed by Mr Senzo Mfayela, to place his feelings before you in the hope that, and I implore you Mr Chairman, if there is a means at your disposal, to please urge the mass media, to be more responsible in the manner in which it reports.

We all know the law relating to public liability in respect of the law of deformation. It is for that very reason that we've got very strict doctrines that apply. In most cases, the damage that has been done, is irreparable. Once there is a slur made on a person's name, it is very difficult to repair that.

In the circumstances Mr Chairman, I bring this to your attention under instructions of my client, and he obviously has remedies at civil law, which he will pursue.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, sorry I interrupted you.

MR FALCONER: On that point, I am finished, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Falconer, yes the evidence before us related to Mr Dinkiziwe Mfayela and the son, Senzo Mfayela. I certainly can't recall Mr Gwamanda mentioning Mr Senzo Mfayela and we certainly don't know how the name of Mr Senzo Mfayela came to appear in the reports.

I agree with you that there is a huge responsibility on the media to report accurately in regard to such matter, particularly matters of such a sensitive and important nature. Thank you.

MR FALCONER: I thank you Mr Chairman. If I may now address to proceed you briefly in respect of the merits of this application.

Mr Chairman, I commence by stating that I believe the applicant is faced with severe difficulties in discharging the requirements of the Act and primarily I would submit that his first difficulty is discharging the requirement of identifying a clear political motive for his actions.

If we look firstly at the allegations relating to Barberton and the alleged plot to assassinate Premier Matthew Phosa. I know that my colleagues to my right, are going to deal more extensively with this issue, but just to make an observation.

On the applicant's evidence, during or about the time that he left school in 1976, he claims to have been affiliated to if I understood him correctly, some form of liberation movement, in the country.

We now have a quantum leap, where at Barberton, he, on his evidence, is coerced into collaborating with members of the AWB, to ultimately carry out this act.

Unfortunately, coercion does not constitute a political motive. On that basis alone, I submit that his application falls down.

Mr Chairman, if one also then has regard to the evidence relating to the alleged activities in Ndwedwe, I submit that that evidence has got to be considered within the context of the other evidence of the applicant which was extracted under cross-examination, namely that and it is a very sad picture, since the tender age of 15, the applicant has been involved extensively in crime, serious crime, crimes relating to armed robbery amongst others, and sadly he has spent most of his adult life in custody.

It was established that there were eight previous convictions on the record, which we were furnished by the Commission, and in addition to that, besides all of the other activities, there are at least two incidents which would appear to be unrelated to politics, namely the pension robbery which was planned and in addition, the other robbery for which he is presently incarcerated.

It is also interesting to note Mr Chairman, that his release during March 1993, he finds on his evidence, his way to Ndwedwe, and then during or about December on his evidence if I recall correctly, the 6th of December, he is arrested for further serious crimes.

It seems that these crimes which took place on his evidence, took place within a very short space of time during or about November, and the crimes which he claims were politically motivated and which he claims, were carried out under the instruction of certain of my clients, were interspersed by crimes which he committed clearly to obtain pecuniary benefit for himself.

Mr Chairman, if we look briefly at the matter pertaining to the murder of the taxi owner, Mr Gumedi, well the attack on him I should say, not the murder, it is clear that their intention was to make off with one of the taxi owner's motor vehicles.

It is also, evidence has been put before us by Mr Gumedi's son, that money was stolen during that incident. I would submit that it seems to be highly improbable that in a so-called political attack, people are going to go there with a motive of stealing to put it more stronger, property. I would submit that the probabilities point very heavily in the direction that that attack also forms part of the other criminal activities, that the applicant refers to where he was going to obtain pecuniary benefit.

He also in his evidence stated that it was very difficult to not execute the orders in Ndwedwe, given the fact that if you didn't do so, you would fall foul of Mr Mfayela and essentially you were obliged to obey his command. There is absolutely no evidence that he was forced to remain in Ndwedwe. There is absolutely no evidence that he was forced and coerced into conducting these crimes.

He on his own admission, is now an ANC member and prior to this, he was also an ANC member. I submit that it is really pushing the probabilities to the extreme to try and suggest that he through a political motive, on his evidence, was involved in these activities, given those particular aspects.

Getting back to the monetary aspect, it was clear and with respect to my learned colleague for the applicant, it was clearly established Mr Chairman, that the applicant understood the reward for the attack on Mr Matthew Phosa, would be monetary. He even said in answer to one of my questions, what other form of reward could there possibly be?

I would say in submission Mr Chairman, that the probabilities point overwhelmingly in the direction of the fact that his actions were motivated for pecuniary gain whereby he would achieve and further himself in that regard. I would say he falls down in establishing a political motive.

Mr Chairman, in conclusion also, in passing mention that the applicant's evidence with respect, was far from adequate and given the fact that the papers which he submitted in support of his application, together with his viva voce evidence before us, does not provide a full disclosure as would be required, particularly in respect of establishing his alleged political motivation.

Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Falconer. Mr Nel?

MR NEL IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Members of the Committee, if I may quote to you from the preamble of the Act, the functions, one of the functions of this Commission is to establish the truth in relation to past events, as well as the motives for the circumstances in which gross violations of human rights, have occurred, and to make the findings known in order to prevent a repetition of such acts in the future.

Now, I submit with respect that before the amnesty application of Mr Gwamanda could be considered, this Commission must make a decision whether he is to be believed, in what he is saying.

In order to believe that Mr Gwamanda has told this Commission the truth during his evidence, the Commission must believe certain things like that the AWB and the IFP has worked hand in hand, it must believe that the AWB planned and plotted an assassination on Mr Matthew Phosa and that the AWB in fact, wanted to kill Mr Phosa in 1993.

It must also believe that prison warders would train a man with an atrocious criminal record in the handling of AK47's, R1 rifles and various assault weapons, it must believe that the AWB will use somebody to assassinate Mr Phosa who has never even seen Mr Phosa, who does not even know from his own evidence, at the time that he went to Nelspruit, what Mr Phosa looked like.

It must also believe that an assassination of this nature is planned without giving the assassin any concrete instructions. It must believe that an assassination is going to take place in the middle of broad daylight, where the members of the so-called hit squad or planners, are clad in full AWB uniform, there is a congregation of 4 x 4's planning this assassination in the middle of Nelspruit, in front of the post office.

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Nel, that wasn't the evidence. The evidence was that they were going to go to another place where Mr Phosa would be addressing some sort of a gathering, and it would happen there, but anyway.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think Lebisi or something.

MR NEL: Be that as it may, thank you Mr Chairperson, it must also believe that Lieutenant Venter who is today the Head of the Barberton prison, would way back in 1991 if my memory serves me correct, way back in 1992, February 20th, already fabricate an official document where the applicant was charged for possession for dagga. That is what this Commission must believe before his amnesty application can be considered.

Now, turning to the Act, the applicant must satisfy this Commission that his offences relates to acts associated with a political objective. Now, from the applicant's own evidence, with respect, I submit he did not have any political objective in taking part in planning the assassination of Mr Phosa.

Even if it is to believe that there was such a plot, even if the AWB and these members implicated here, were involved in an act which they have strenuously denied, then the applicant himself says that he did this for a reward and he did not have any political motive in taking part in such a plot to assassinate Mr Phosa.

It is mainly on that basis, that I must object to Mr Gwamanda getting amnesty for what he has applied for. That is my submissions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Nel. Mr Mukadam?

MR MUKADAM IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Mr Chairman and members of the Committee. Mr Chairman, my instructions are not to oppose the application of amnesty by Mr Gwamanda. I submit that we are satisfied in so far as his association with a plot to assassinate Mr Phosa, the surrounding facts, he has disclosed to this Committee.

We submit further that there was no reason for him to make the application, he was not standing trial for it. There was no obligation, known to anybody that he would be indicted of a crime of conspiracy to murder. He has come to this Committee we believe because he wanted to speak the truth.

The role Mr Chairman, of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, is a difficult one in that truth in itself, is never an easy commodity to handle. In speaking the truth, allegations that may appear to be far fetched, are made. Consideration Mr Chairman, must be given to the time that we have come through in this country.

Hopefully the truth and sometimes it may appear far fetched, would be the catalyst to ensure that those acts are not repeated again.

Our submission Mr Chairman and members of the Committee, is that at the time of the conspiracy to assassinate Mr Phosa, Mr Gwamanda had associated himself with the objective of that conspiracy, and that was a political objective.

He was recruited by a person with political affiliations, Mr Elijah Mahlaba, who says that he was part of an organisation in the Mpumalanga province where Mr Enoch Mabusa was a member. He also was recruited and told that if he showed that he has IFP leanings, that that would be considered almost as a kosher political ideology and that would be recognised by members of a right-wing grouping.

It is under that guise that he became part of this conspiracy. I agree with the representative for the applicant that the applicant's application falls squarely in terms of Section 20(3)(e) that he had in fact committed the offence in execution either of an order or on behalf of a political organisation, although he may not have been a member thereof, but as an agent thereof.

He could not have acted on his own, but purely in concert with the members of the AWB and in that regard, my submission is that the objective was a political one and falls squarely within the requirements of the Act.

My further submission Mr Chairman and members of the Committee is that as my learned friend to my left has indicated, this Committee has to believe various issues.

One of the issues that one would have, that the Committee would have to look at Mr Chairman, is that the manner in which the evidence of Mr Gwamanda was given, he was forthright, there was no hesitation to answering any questions, he demeanour in answering the question showed that he indeed wanted to speak the truth, and I submit that he did so.

I submit in so far as his application is concerned, he has made full disclosure with regard to the relevant facts. At this stage Mr Chairman, and members of the Committee, I wish to state that my instructions are that when Mr Phosa had looked at the television set last night, he had indicated that the applicant was not the person that had come to see him at his home.

The person purporting to be Boy Gwamanda, was somebody else. The questions put to him in that regard, I must submit Mr Chairperson, that the answers to those questions were therefore truthful. My instructions are further Mr Chairperson, that Mr Phosa forgives Mr Gwamanda for his part in the conspiracy and my instructions are, to submit that Mr Gwamanda has satisfied the requirements of the Act and that he should be granted amnesty. Those are my submissions Mr Chairman and members of the Committee. I thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mukadam. Mr Mchunu, do you have any reply? Sorry, sorry, I forgot about Mr Mpshe.

ADV MPSHE: Mr Chair, I was going to say I am now assuming my position of neutrality, I have nothing to say.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mpshe. Mr Mchunu?

MR MCHUNU: Mr Chairman, I believe that it will do justice to respond to a few comments made by my learned friends on my right.

My learned friend Mr Falconer challenged the evidence of the applicant in as far as it related to an attempt on Mr Phosa. He further stated that the applicant was or did state in his evidence that he was coerced to do what he did, but with respect, I differ to a large extent in that regard.

The applicant did state that after a long discussion with a colleague of his in prison, Mr Elijah Mahlaba, he was finally agreed or he was finally convinced that he should follow what Mr Mahlaba was suggesting, and therefore I do not believe that there was coercion at all.

On the attack of Mr Gumedi, the taxi owner, I think that one, I have pre-empted because I had expected an argument on that, whether or not there was pecuniary interest. I have addressed I believe, that is already on record. The Committee has it.

On whether or not the applicant was coerced to stay at Ndwedwe, with fate being what it is, this Committee must understand the following that the applicant had just been released from prison, he had nothing on him, he had nothing left, he only had his family in Greytown. On his release from prison, he went straight to his home in Greytown, only to be advised that his family members had fled Greytown to Ndwedwe because of fear that they could be eliminated.

CHAIRPERSON: The surviving members of his family had fled?

MR MCHUNU: That is correct, the surviving members of his family. When he reached Ndwedwe, when he was following his other family, surviving family members, particularly his sister, who was the only one according to his evidence, who was left at that time, he found that his sister was living at this area Ndwedwe, despite the fact that the IFP was in a dominating position at Ndwedwe, but his sister was able to make a living within that area.

His brother-in-law too, also did try to convince the applicant and finally the applicant was convinced that he had to live in the area of Ndwedwe. The applicant had nothing on him, he had no hope. In other words he was just hopeless at that time, he had to make a living, he had to make a living, he had to stay somewhere, and the only place he could stay closer to his family members which was the only thing he had on earth, was his ... (tape ends) ...

I believe that my learned friend, Adv Mukadam, has also explained quite thoroughly or quite correctly and I agree entirely with the argument, with the submissions which he has made.

CHAIRPERSON: I didn't think you would be disagreeing with Mr Mukadam's submissions.

MR MCHUNU: Definitely yes, naturally I would agree. The submissions with regards to the questions posed by my learned friend, Mr Nel, I think I am in full agreement with that.

Other than that, I do not have any further response, unless the Committee members want me to address it on some other point.

MR LAX: Did I hear you say that you are in full agreement with what Mr Nel said?

MR MCHUNU: Not exactly. Mr Mukadam.

MR LAX: Mukadam, I beg your pardon.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mchunu, Mr Falconer, Mr Nel, Mr Mukadam. We will reserve judgement and we hope that the decision will come out in the very near future. Thank you very much.






















DAY: 8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Are you in a position to proceed with Mr Ntuli's application? If we can have as short a break as possible, so that we can start soon to make up for the lost time, thank you.



CHAIRPERSON: Before we start this matter, I would just like to for the benefit of the people attending, introduce the panel that will be hearing the matter, to you. On my right is Mr Jonas Sibanyoni, he is a member of the Amnesty Committee and he is an Attorney from Pretoria.

On my left is Mr Ilan Lax, also a member of the Amnesty Committee and he is an Attorney from Pietermaritzburg. I am Selwyn Miller, I am a Judge of the High Court in the Eastern Cape, in particular the Transkei Division of the High Court.

I would just like the legal representatives to please place themselves on record.

MR MCHUNU: Thank you Chairperson, my name is Mchunu, Mbongeleni Mchunu. I appear on behalf of the applicant in this matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mchunu. Mr Mchunu, while you are there, could you push, I think that other button, that other microphone seems to be on, or is it just the light reflecting on it. It was off, thank you.

ADV MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman and members of the Committee, J.M. Mpshe for the Amnesty Committee, appearing for the victims Mr Chairman. To my left Mr Chairman, is the brother to the deceased in this matter, the family members, all of them are in attendance, the parents, the sisters and the brothers.

The reason why I chose to have him here with me, is that he has certain questions that he would like me to put, so I want to communicate with him, to make sure that I put the questions as the family requested me.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly, thank you. Mr Mchunu?

MR MCHUNU: Mr Chairman, the headphones that I have just handed to the applicant, I am not quite sure which language they have been switched on. If I may just ...

CHAIRPERSON: If he wants the Zulu, it must be on channel 3.

MR LAX: Can you hear the translation now Mr Ntuli?


MR LAX: Thank you.

MR MCHUNU: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairperson, just as an opening statement, the applicant herein is Nkosinathi Immanuel Ntuli, who applies for amnesty for one incident, that is the murder of Ndlandhla Msani, on the 17th of June 1991 at kwaMakutha location, which offence he was charged, found guilty and was convicted and sentenced for 12 years.

I will start straight away leading, but before that, if I may just get him sworn in Mr Chairman.


EXAMINATION BY MR MCHUNU: Mr Ntuli, as just a matter of common cause, is it correct that you were born on the 11th of January 1972 at Umlazi township?


MR MCHUNU: Is it also correct that you are a supporter or during, or you are a supporter of the African National Congress?


MR MCHUNU: Is it also correct that you are serving a prison sentence, a 12 year term prison sentence for the murder of Ndlandhla Msani at kwaMakutha location?

MR NTULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR MCHUNU: Now Mr Ntuli, is it also correct that you are seeking amnesty for the offence which you are serving your sentence for?

MR NTULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR MCHUNU: Could you elaborate on the facts before the murder of Mr Msani, just give a background on what finally led to the murder of Mr Msani?

MR NTULI: Yes, I can explain.

MR MCHUNU: Proceed.

MR NTULI: After the death of one of our comrades who was shot by the kwaZulu Police at kwaMakutha, this comrade was removed from a taxi. After that incident, we did not know how the Police had found him, because he was on the run from the Police because of certain crimes.

During that time, a rumour circulated that the person who had contacted the Police was Mr Ndlandhla Msani as a person who worked at kwaMakutha, we knew Ndlandhla Msani.

After learning that he was the one who had contacted the Police, we wanted to question him about that incident. During those days, Ndlandhla Msani was not seen around, he was not around in the area. Some time elapsed - amongst the comrades, what we knew was that he was the one who had contacted the Police and we were expecting that whenever we saw him, we would stop and question him.

One day I had been with some of the comrades at the township, we were at Mkhize house, house number 10, it was in the afternoon. On that day I went home because it was getting dark. I took a jacket from home and I returned and as I approached, I saw the comrades discussing something. They were saying that Ndlandhla Msani was approaching.

This was the first time we saw him after the incident of killing Mduduzi. We thought that if he saw us as a group, he may be afraid, that is if he was responsible, because we also were not sure if he had indeed contacted the Police.

Therefore we planned that only one person should approach him, and stop him on the street because he knew us and if he saw only one person approaching him, he may not suspect anything. We deliberated on who should approach him because he had just passed us, but we knew that he was going to return the same way where we were standing.

I volunteered to be the one to stop him. There was a problem of how I would handle him if for instance he started fighting with me, and I said when he stops, they should also start approaching and I would explain this to him, that we wanted to speak to him as comrades.

I was a bit afraid because I was young, I was 19 at the time. I then requested from amongst the comrades that if a person, if anybody has a weapon, they should give it to me so that if maybe we argue or we fight Ndlandhla, I could threaten him with a knife or with a weapon.

Although I cannot remember who produced the knife, but somebody produced it and I took that knife and I went on to the street.

Ndlandhla approached and I stopped him. He did not stop directly in front of me, but he stopped at about the sixth house from where we were. I then ran to him. I thought that if I explained the situation to him, if standing from outside, he may suspect something or he may resist, because although we were not sure that he was indeed guilty, but if I had told him the entire story whilst I was outside the vehicle, he might actually run away.

I then asked him to take me to the depot and he agreed. I got into the vehicle, it was himself and his conductor in the car.

MR MCHUNU: You have said even though you were not sure, but it was a belief that he knew about this. How strong was your belief?

MR NTULI: As I said before, I would have asked him to stop or to reverse because he had not stopped directly in front of me. I only asked him to reverse when I was already in the car, because the comrades wanted to speak to him.

MR MCHUNU: If I may just direct, put this question this way, you said that you were not so sure that it was him who had sold out, but you had that belief, or there was that belief, that it was him actually. My question is, how strong was that belief? Did you have a very strong belief, or did you just have a suspicion?

MR NTULI: We believed that it could be that he did in fact contact the Police because in most cases, taxi drivers in the area, were close to the kwaZulu Police, so there was that belief that he may have done it.

Thereafter I got into the car and I told him, I asked him to reverse, because the comrades wanted to speak to him. He hesitated because he indicated that he wanted to move forward. I tried to reassure him that he shouldn't be afraid, because we just wanted to question him because of a certain problem.

He asked what the problem was about and I told him that we have heard rumours that he was the one who had contacted the Police with regards to Matobela's death. When I told him this, he tried to move the car forward and the car did move and I tried to stop him, by grabbing the steering wheel. He fought me off because he was bigger than me.

When he hit me, I also felt it. I took out the knife and I stabbed him twice at the time. The car was all over the road. Some of the comrades realised that there was a problem in the car, and they came and got into the car, and they told him that they want to speak to him, because of the rumour that had been circulating.

He seemed to be listening. We told him to get the car into another street, which was the second street from the main road. He seemed to be loosing consciousness at that time, and some of the comrades pushed him aside.

I got off and I went to sit behind the steering wheel. I drove the vehicle and as I turned the corner, getting into another street just below, he opened the door and tried to run away. As he opened the door, I stabbed him again and he ran away.

The people sitting behind, I think at the time the conductor was no longer there. The comrades that had been left on the street, would meet us at an appointed point. As Ndlandhla got off the car, I was the first one to alight, because apparently the sliding door at the back had a problem.

He ran to a nearby house and he fell as he arrived at this house. I met up with him there and I stabbed him again because at the time, it appeared to me that he seemed to know about the issue.

When I first got onto the car, he tried to move the car, also start the car when I told him about the problem, and I realised that he must know about it. If he did not know about it, if he did not have a problem, he would not have tried to run away if he was innocent.

After stabbing him, I left him there and I went back and I met up with some of the comrades and they asked me where he was, and I explained to them that he was at that particular house.

On our way back, we discussed that if he hadn't run away or after questioning him, we would have killed him anyway because during that time, we had problems regarding the kwaZulu Police and IFP killing our comrades.

Therefore nobody else but ourselves, had to protect our organisation and our members. The kwaZulu Police worked hand in hand with the IFP. When the other comrades arrived, we discussed that the car was parked on a hidden road, we should take it back to a street above, that it towards the rank, so that the others could see it.

We left the car there with the keys inside and we left. Thereafter our parents and the ANC leader in the area, who was not present during those days because he was sought after by the Police, he would sometimes come and sometimes he would leave, he would just come to attend meetings or maybe if there had been an incident, he would arrive.

Thereafter ...

MR LAX: Who was this ANC leader that you are referring to?

MR NTULI: Mr Eden Mongathi. After that, our parents together with Eden Mongathi who was not present when this incident occurred, and who had not known about it, they were surprised, they were shocked that this taxi man had been killed.

Other taxi people arrived and they removed the car. After this incident, we fled and we went out separate ways because we knew that the kwaZulu Police would come and they would not arrest, but shoot us.

With regards to the community, it was shocked. A meeting had to be called where an explanation should be given to the community. I did not attend that meeting. I was mainly sent as the person who had killed Ndlandhla and people did not know why.

At that meeting the community of Ward 1 received an explanation from other comrades with regards to the reasons for Ndlandhla's death, that is we had discovered that he was the one that had contacted the Police about the movements of Nduduzi.

The Police had stopped the car that he was travelling in and he was removed from the car, and shot. The community understood, but after that there was a problem, that is taxi's stopped running for about two weeks.

The taxi's did not run in the kwaMakutha area and the community complained about this. That is why that meeting was called and Ndlandhla's death was explained to the community.

After that, taxi drivers complained and they said that they would avenge themselves. After a few days, about three or four days, some people who were armed arrived at kwaMakutha and shot at comrades. The comrades that I remember to have died on that day were three or four.

They said that they were revenging. There was a problem in the community, killing that taxi driver, had left to the death of other people.

There had to be a way to resolve the issue, the taxi drivers and the community held a meeting and taxi drivers were told why Ndlandhla had been killed.

MR MCHUNU: You say the community members explained to who, to the taxi drivers, to the taxi owners?

MR NTULI: Yes, there was a meeting between the community and the taxi drivers. The community explained to the taxi drivers the reason for Ndlandhla's death, flowing from the meeting we had had before with them.

Discussions were held with taxi drivers and it was resolved that taxi's would return and start working in the area. Taxi drivers requested that I should be arrested.

Amongst the taxi drivers were people called Isincabi who were at the forefront at handling the issue of Ndlandhla's death. We suspect these were the very same people who had come in the night, to kill these other comrades.

After a few days, taxi's returned to the area and started working as normal. I was the one person who was, or who had a problem, because my name was mentioned in the killing of Ndlandhla. I did not even spend my evenings at home.

MR MCHUNU: Let me just again interrupt. How did it come about that finally you landed in the hands of the Police, in other words, you were arrested?

MR NTULI: When I saw my parents, they asked me about it, and I explained. Although I did not tell them the complete truth, I did explain that I was present amongst the people who killed him. They said there was nothing that they could do, if you have committed a crime, you must face the might of the law. I found it difficult to do this, because I knew that the kwaZulu Police used to kill people at the time.

They had killed many other comrades. Therefore I was afraid to go to them. A few days elapsed and my parents sent for me and when I arrived, they told me the same thing, that I should go to the Police so that they can also be free.

I could not really oppose what my parents were saying, I finally agreed that I would go. I made a request that other Policemen for example from the South African Police, should also be present, because I was afraid of the kwaZulu Police.

We went to the police station, I went with my father and a lawyer. We went to the police station and on arrival, the Police commented me for handing myself over and I made a statement and I was given bail and the trial commenced thereafter, and eventually I was convicted.

MR MCHUNU: What was your relationship with the deceased, Mr Ndlandhla Msani? How did you relate in other words, with him?

MR NTULI: I am not related to Ndlandhla.

CHAIRPERSON: I think the question Mr Ntuli was not really how you were related to him, but what was your relationship like with the deceased? How did you know the deceased, did you know him well, was he a friend of yours, was he a casual acquaintance, did you only know him by sight?

MR MCHUNU: Or was he your enemy?

MR NTULI: He was not my enemy, he was a taxi driver. We were used to the taxi drivers at kwaMakutha because sometimes they would help us like during rallies in town, we would ask them to transport us to the venue.

That is how I knew him.

MR MCHUNU: Was he a member of any political organisation that you knew of?

MR NTULI: I would not know which political organisation he belonged to, I just knew him as a taxi driver.

MR MCHUNU: You have spoken about also the death of Mduduzi.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, can I get the name of the other deceased, Mduduzi, what was his full name?

MR NTULI: Mduduzi Matobela.


MR MCHUNU: What was Mduduzi Matobela's role within your organisation? Was he a member first of all?

MR NTULI: He was an ANC member.

MR MCHUNU: What was his role within the ANC at that time?

MR NTULI: Mduduzi was known as a very courageous person, for instance if we were under attack from the IFP or the Police, he could stand his ground and fight those opponents. He was known to be a very courageous person.

MR MCHUNU: Within that area, was there a branch or a unit of the IFP?

MR NTULI: Yes, there was. At the time there was an IFP branch in Unit 10, Unit 18 and Feligisi, that is where they were based. Near my home in Unit 1, there wasn't an IFP branch.

On most occasions they would move from their areas, and attack our area.

MR MCHUNU: Am I understanding you correctly to be implying that there was violence in the area between the IFP and the ANC?

MR NTULI: Yes, there was violence.

MR MCHUNU: You have also spoken about the Police, the ZP's, kwaZulu Police, what was their role? How were they related to this whole incident?

MR NTULI: We had a problem with the kwaZulu Police in that if for instance the IFP was attacking us, you will find that there will be Police vans and sometimes we would see the kwaZulu Police amongst the IFP people who were attacking.

MR MCHUNU: Are you implying or are you saying that the kwaZulu Police members were siding with the IFP in the violence?


MR MCHUNU: After the death of Mduduzi Matobela you said, how did you regard the deceased Mr Msani, Mr Ndlandhla Msani?

MR NTULI: After the death of Mduduzi Matobela, Msani was absent, he was not seen on the street, he did not work. We learnt that, on learning that he had contacted the Police we expected to question him, and if he had indeed done so, we would have killed him.

MR MCHUNU: I mean with all the suspicions which you had, would he have been regarded as an enemy or ...

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Mchunu, you really are leading this guy by the nose a little bit here. I think he has made his point, you don't need to add the sugar coating on frankly.

CHAIRPERSON: I think if he has said that there was, they had heard that he had contacted the Police and they would have killed him if that was true, they wouldn't have done that to a friend, I don't think.

MR MCHUNU: Thank you for that. Could we just move on. Let me just put this question this way, did you regard your killing of Mr Msani as a vengeful attack or as what, something else?

MR NTULI: Although I would not say it was a revenge attack, what led to his death, was the belief that we had, that he had informed the Police. Before we could question him, if he had known that he was innocent, because he knew us, he was used to us, and we did not have a problem with him. If he had known that he was innocent, he could have just stopped and talked to us.

But when he tried to run away, we indeed believed that he was guilty. I was the first one to get into the car, and the others arrived and also got on the car.

CHAIRPERSON: We have heard what has happened, you have told us about the stabbing.

MR MCHUNU: During those times, if I may just ask this question lastly, how did you deal with people you perhaps regarded as informers of the Police or as informers of the opposite?

MR NTULI: At that time, it would sometimes happen that amongst ourselves as comrades, maybe somebody will be arrested and shortly thereafter, he maybe would return with the Police to identify or maybe he would mention people's names.

If that person was released, he would also be killed. There are comrades who died in that regard.

MR MCHUNU: You have also said there were other people whom you were also with during the occurrence of all this. Can you name them, those that you remember?

MR NTULI: The people that I remember are the ones that found me in the car. It was Lunga whose surname I do not remember, Sipho Zaba Khumalo, Clinton Zuma and Nathi Gumbi, there were four of them.

And they also got into the car.

MR LAX: I didn't catch all the names. You said Lunga, you don't remember his surname, Sipho Khumalo, Clinton somebody, Zuma and the fourth one?

MR NTULI: Clinton Zuma and Nathi Gumbi, Sipho Khumalo and Lunga.

MR LAX: Thank you.

MR MCHUNU: Are there any others that you can still recall?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mchunu, can you just repeat your question and put your microphone on please.

MR MCHUNU: Thank you. Are there any others that you can still recall?

MR NTULI: There were quite many. I did not note all of them because when I returned from my house, the discussion was already in progress that Ndlandhla should be approached. So I did not take notice of everybody who was there.

Normally we did talk in groups, we would always be in groups.

MR MCHUNU: Thank you Chairperson, I've got no further questions.


CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mpshe, do you have any questions to put to the witness?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV MPSHE: Yes, Mr Chairman, thank you. Mr Ntuli, when did you become the supporter of the ANC?

MR NTULI: I first joined the UDF in 1985, that is I first knew about the UDF in that year. I think at about 1990 the UDF was absorbed into the ANC.

At the time, during the 1980's, 1985, I was a supporter, I did not have much information on the UDF, what we learned was from older people, people like Madoda. He was the one person who would explain to us that the UDF was a people's organisation, fighting for the freedom of the people as well as many other things. He would tell us a lot about the UDF.

ADV MPSHE: What did the UDF stand for?

MR NTULI: Union Democratic Front.

ADV MPSHE: Did you attend any meetings of the UDF or of the ANC?

MR NTULI: There would be meetings in the area, and I would attend them.

ADV MPSHE: As a supporter?


ADV MPSHE: Did you ever participate in the meeting?

MR NTULI: At that time, I was just a supporter of the UDF. There was not a role that I played. In 1988 I went to a boarding school in Amanzimtoti. We had discussions as students and because of the little knowledge that I had about the political situation, we planned something at the school, because we were being exploited by some white teachers at the school.

That led to my detention and I was arrested and sentenced to Westville.

ADV MPSHE: This offence in June 1991, for how long had you been a supporter of the ANC?

MR NTULI: When the UDF was absorbed into the ANC, I knew that I was a member of the ANC, membership cards were brought to us in the area and an explanation was given to us that the UDF was being absorbed into the ANC and we were therefore becoming ANC members, and we received those membership cards. That is when I became a member of the ANC.

ADV MPSHE: At the time of committing this offence, for how long had you been a member of the ANC then, because you say you are a member, normal supporter?

CHAIRPERSON: He said since the time it was absorbed. Do you know how long before the time of this incident, that occurred?

ADV MPSHE: (Microphone not on)

CHAIRPERSON: He said he became a member since the UDF was absorbed into the ANC and somebody came and gave them membership cards. I don't think it is really relevant that we know how long before it was, or the date. It doesn't make much difference.

ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, to me it is relevant because I am disputing that he was ever a member and that this act was committed ...

CHAIRPERSON: Well, he said that since the time of absorption and he got a card, that is what he said. You can continue on that.

ADV MPSHE: When was the UDF absorbed into the ANC, just give us the year?

MR NTULI: Although I cannot remember correctly, but it was between 1989 and 1990.

ADV MPSHE: When you filled in this application form, were you already a member of the ANC, I want to believe?


ADV MPSHE: In your application you wrote here that you are a supporter of the ANC, page 2 Mr Chairman and members of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I see that. Do you have a copy of your application Mr Ntuli?


CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps, if you can just take a look at Mr Mchunu's copy there, you will see that is your application form. Take a look at paragraph 7(b) on the first page thereof.

You will see there that it is written in, 7(a) says that were you a member, office bearer, supporter of any liberation movement, it has been written African National Congress, and then 7(b) the capacity and there it is written supporter. Do you see that?

MR NTULI: Yes, I see it.


ADV MPSHE: Why did you write that you were a supporter when you were actually a member at that time?

CHAIRPERSON: If you can speak a little bit louder Mr Ntuli, the people sitting at the back also would like to hear.

MR NTULI: Because of the situation within the organisation, in kwaMakutha, we had experienced problems in acquiring these membership cards. It transpired that the membership cards that we had received, had to be renewed annually and I had not paid the full membership fee for the year.

My membership came to an end in June of that year and I did not renew my membership.

ADV MPSHE: Am I understanding you now to be saying that you are changing from what you told us that when committing this offence, you were already a member of the ANC, you are now saying you were not a member at the time? You are changing?

MR MCHUNU: Mr Chairman, if, without really objecting really, I think the applicant said that when the UDF was absorbed into the ANC, he became a member of the ANC, he got a card.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think Mr Mpshe, clearly on the last answer - is that he never renewed his membership. This incident occurred in 1991. Did your membership of the ANC, when you got that card, you said you never paid the full membership fee and you did not renew it, had that occurred before the occurrence of this incident that your membership lapsed because of non-payment of the fee or renewal of your membership?

MR NTULI: Yes, when the incident happened, the membership fee had elapsed.

ADV MPSHE: I won't pursue it, but I just want to put it on record, that he had said when I put a question to him.

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, we are aware and now, it is clear that he wasn't actually a member at the time of the incident.

ADV MPSHE: I am indebted to the Chair, thank you. I want you to turn to page 3 of your application, under nature and particulars Mr Chairman and members of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: That is right at the top of the page Mr Ntuli, the top of page 3, you will see (iv) that says nature and particulars.

ADV MPSHE: That will be line four, but I will read for convenience - where it says everybody in the community knew that Msani had sold our brother out. Do you see that?


ADV MPSHE: Now, then you continue to say, the comrades then planned to kill Msani, whom we saw as an informer. Do you see that? I want to know from you, who are these comrades who killed to plan Msani?

MR NTULI: With regards to the comrades, there would sometimes be discussions that would be held outside formal meetings. Although I cannot remember the names, but there was this belief that Msani was the one who had actually told the Police about Mduduzi.

This was something we had heard from the comrades, because I also heard about it from the comrades, that indeed Msani was the one who had told on Mduduzi.

ADV MPSHE: Mr Ntuli, were you ever in that meeting where the planning to kill this man, was done?

MR NTULI: I was not present at that meeting because it was not a formal meeting. The community was not informed that Ndlandhla had indeed reported the matter to the Police, but it was something that was discussed amongst comrades.

As I explained before, the situation compelled us to operate in little groups, because anything and everything could have happened because of the violence.

That is how Ndlandhla's issue came about and how it was discussed.

ADV MPSHE: Do I understand you Mr Ntuli to be saying that there was no meeting where the planning of the killing of Msani was planned, is that what you are saying now?

MR LAX: He is not saying that. With the greatest respect, he is saying there was no formal meeting of the community. I think you need to clarify that.

CHAIRPERSON: He said there was no formal meeting there, but there were meetings of comrades, but he said that he was not present at that meeting.

ADV MPSHE: When you are ready to eliminate an informer, would you hold a formal community meeting?

MR NTULI: No. We would not.

ADV MPSHE: Was there a meeting, was there a formal meeting where the killing of Msani was planned?

CHAIRPERSON: He said that they wouldn't hold a formal meeting, now you are asking whether a formal meeting was held. Aren't we wasting time Mr Mpshe?

Was any meeting held, an informal meeting you mean?

ADV MPSHE: When was the killing of Msani planned?

MR NTULI: Mr Msani's death was not planned, because we were not sure that he had indeed committed this act. We would have found out the truth from him, and if he had been guilty, he would have been killed.

ADV MPSHE: So there was no planning?

CHAIRPERSON: My note says Mr Msani's death was not planned as we were not sure that he killed the deceased, so you are asking him, so there was no plan? He has just said it.

ADV MPSHE: Mr Ntuli look at the paragraph I have just referred you to, page 3. I will read that line for your convenience.

The comrades then planned to kill Msani, why did you tell us that then, they planned, when you say there was no planning?

MR NTULI: From the discussions that were held, if it was discovered that it was indeed true that Msani was guilty, it was well known that if a person committed such a crime, if he was an informer, he would be killed. But this is something that was not discussed in a formal meeting, but it was something that was discussed in groups, when we saw each other.

That is from the rumour that we had heard about Ndlandhla.

ADV MPSHE: I won't belabour that point.

MR LAX: Just maybe you can help me here Mr Ntuli, it is really quite simple, the next part of your statement here says, I was part of this plan, I volunteered to lure Msani out, in the open, so that all the comrades could kill him.

The plan was to kill him, you have just told us that that wasn't the plan and you make it explicit here that it was part of the plan, and that the intention was to kill him. It is very simple, just give us an explanation why you said that in your form, and why that differs from your evidence here.

MR NTULI: As I said before, it was discussed amongst the comrades. On this day when I returned from fetching my jacket, there was a discussion in progress when I arrived that Ndlandhla had been seen and the problem was who was going to bring him to the comrades.

MR LAX: You obviously can't give us an explanation. Let's move on.

ADV MPSHE: Thank you. You told us that Mduduzi was wanted by the Police. For what crimes was he wanted, if you know?

MR NTULI: As I explained before, he was a very courageous person, he had a gun and he had shot the Police, the kwaZulu Police. When the Police sometimes arrived at the area, he would shoot at them.

Sometimes if for instance, there was somebody who was feared maybe, this person killing comrades, Mduduzi was not afraid to approach and kill this person. That is the reason why the Police were looking for him.

ADV MPSHE: Let me go back to the informal talks that took place where it was decided that Msani should be killed.

Was there any person of leadership in those informal talks? Leadership in the ANC, sorry Mr Chairman?

MR NTULI: At that time, we were not always in close contact with the leaders for the reason that the enemy, that is the IFP and the Police, were looking for them.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ntuli, I don't think that was the question put by Mr Mpshe. Mr Mpshe is asking at the informal talk where the deceased was discussed, you said you went and fetched your jacket and on your way back, you came and there was an informal meeting of comrades, he is asking not about the leadership of the ANC in the area, but at that informal meeting, was - who was the leader there if anybody? Who was in charge of that meeting?

MR NTULI: There was no ANC leader at that point. This was something that we discussed amongst ourselves as comrades.

Sometimes we would sit and these matters would be discussed. There was no formal meeting called to discuss the death even of Matobela. At the time when we discussed Msani's issue, there was no leader amongst us.

MR LAX: Amongst these comrades, there was nobody who assumed leadership within the comrades, that is outside of the formal leaders of the ANC? That is really the question that you are being asked.

MR NTULI: I would not say that there was a leader amongst us, because we were all comrades of the same status, and there was no particular person telling us what to do. We were discussing the issue as a group, the issue of Ndlandhla and the Police.

We were discussing that we should try and see him because it could also happen that he may have been seen by other comrades and not even ourselves.

They also would have asked him, and then they would have also killed him, themselves.

ADV MPSHE: Mr Ntuli, my instructions are that Mduduzi was never a member of the ANC, but just one ordinary criminal in kwaMakutha. What is your comment on that?

MR NTULI: I would not disagree because I was not sure that he was a member, but I knew that he was a supporter of the ANC.

With regards to what was happening in the community, he played a role amongst the comrades, the community trusted him.

MR LAX: Just, sorry, he hasn't answered an implicit part of your question, which was Mr Mpshe has put it to you that his instructions are that this man was a criminal. Was he a criminal? Was he engaged in criminal activities? I am assuming that is what you are saying?

MR NTULI: I did not know him to be engaged in criminal activities. I knew him as a supporter of the ANC.

ADV MPSHE: To put it further to you, my instructions are that when it happened that he be shot by the Police, he was actually being sought after by the taxi men in that area, for his criminal activities, or taxi owners?

MR NTULI: I would not fully agree with that, because at the time of his death, Mduduzi had been in the company of a taxi driver, with whom he had gone to the Isipingo rank. I do not see how he could have been with a taxi driver, if he was not on good terms with them.

MR NTULI: You were asked by my learned friend to divulge names of people with whom you were and you gave this Committee five names. My instruction is that the deceased was stabbed more than 25 times. Do you know how many people all in all, did the stabbing? Don't bother about names?

CHAIRPERSON: It has been put to you that the deceased had been stabbed about 25 times. Mr Mpshe wants to know how many people, besides yourself, stabbed the deceased, because you have only mentioned yourself having stabbed the deceased four times, twice initially, once getting out of the taxi and once when he fell at the house.

MR NTULI: I stabbed Ndlandhla many times. I do not know just exactly how many times I stabbed him, because he was also fighting me.

CHAIRPERSON: Did anybody else besides yourself, stab the deceased?

MR NTULI: No. I do not remember. From the people that I was with, I do not remember anybody else stabbing him.

Amongst the people that I was with, there was only one knife that was produced. I may not know whether others also had knives in their possession, but I did not see anybody else stabbing him.

ADV MPSHE: I don't want to belabour this Mr Chairman, but can I just put another further question as a follow up to what he has said, please.

I want to refer you to page 5, on what you have said that you do not remember whether any other ...

MR LAX: Just before you put that to him, just before you put that to him, did anybody else injure Mr Msani besides yourself? You said you were the only one that stabbed him as far as you could remember. Did anyone else injure him in any way?

MR NTULI: When Ndlandhla ran away and I was chasing him, some people arrived. When I left him, there were people around. There was one lady who came and some of the neighbours around the area.

After leaving him, I do not know if some other people arrived on the scene and injured him.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see any person, did you, yourself, see any person other than yourself, either stabbing or any other way, assaulting the deceased, that you saw with your own eyes?


ADV MPSHE: Then if you say no Mr Ntuli, turn to page 5 of your application. I will read Mr Chairman, for convenience, I started to stab him. I stabbed him twice and he fled. I chased him, he stumbled and he fell at Section 2, where a crowd of comrades was awaiting for him. He was then assaulted and further stabbed.

CHAIRPERSON: One more sentence.

ADV MPSHE: And I stabbed him once more.

MR LAX: To finish it off, he died there.

ADV MPSHE: Do you see that?


ADV MPSHE: Now, how can you say to the Chair that you didn't see anybody stab, when in your statement you stated it very clearly that the comrades were waiting there, came and a further assault took place and the stabbing, and you stabbed further?

MR NTULI: From amongst the comrades, I did not see anybody stabbing him. When he fled, I am the one person who chased him.

Even in the car, the others remained in the car, because they could not open the door. I caught up with him, when he fled and I stabbed him. As I said, there were people who came at that stage. One person had enquired what was going on and I said that this was a person who had sold us out, and I thereafter left and returned to where the other comrades were.

ADV MPSHE: My instructions are further that the deceased was deprived of money.

CHAIRPERSON: I think in this regard, perhaps if you can just turn to page 15 of the documents, paragraph 3. It is a submission made by the mother and you can perhaps read the paragraph, 3.

ADV MPSHE: There is a document here, and this is testified to by the mother, that money in cash as well as clothes, were taken.

What is your comment to that, thank you Mr Chairman?

MR NTULI: I do not have knowledge in that regard. I do not remember anything being taken from the deceased.

ADV MPSHE: In the killing of Mr Ndlandhla Msani, what did you hope to achieve?

MR NTULI: There were many comrades who died during that time under suspicious circumstances, and we will discover that they were informers, even amongst the comrades, who were responsible for selling these people out.

They will bring the Police and say something to the Police perhaps. Sometimes they would be working closely with the Police and such people will be killed.

With regards to Msani as well, if he was indeed guilty of selling out comrades, he would be a problem to us as comrades, and therefore had to be killed. We would have not have gained anything else besides knowing that we are safe in his absence.

ADV MPSHE: Mr Chairman, that will be all from myself. Just to make a request Mr Chairman, oh yes, I was going to ask permission from the Chair for him to continue.


MR MSANI: My question is going to be divided into two parts, one the political questions and two, I will put a question as a brother to Ndlandhla.

CHAIRPERSON: Could you please just identify yourself. Are you Mr Msani?

MR MSANI: Yes, Msani.

CHAIRPERSON: What is your first name Mr Msani?

MR MSANI: I am Wellington Bekumusi Msani, known as Maweza.

In those years, I was a full time paid organiser of the UDF. No one automatically became a member of the UDF. People became members of the UDF through local or community based organisations, like the Youth Organisations, the Civic Organisations.

CHAIRPERSON: I think if you can just ask questions Mr Msani. I think from that the question is, Mr Msani says that people didn't automatically become members of the UDF, you only became a member if you were issued with a membership card. Did you ever have a UDF membership card?

MR MSANI: There were no membership cards, you know, but ...

CHAIRPERSON: Did you ever register as a UDF member?

MR MSANI: How did you become a member of the UDF?

MR NTULI: I was a supporter of the UDF.

MR MSANI: As far as I know, I was a full time organiser of the UDF as well as part of the ANC, (indistinct) propaganda, a person became a person of the UDF if they were a member of a Youth or Civic or Teachers' Organisation, that is what I know.

MR LAX: Let him answer that statement. What do you say about what you have just been told?

MR NTULI: As I mentioned before, I was a supporter of the UDF. I never had a UDF membership card, I once had a membership card for the ANC.

MR LAX: Just hang on. The issue is really, were you part of a Youth structure, or weren't you? That is what is being put to you in a sense? A yes or no would suffice.


MR LAX: Thank you.

MR MSANI: Thank you. It means you were not a member of the UDF, if you were a member of the UDF, what was the role of the UDF in the national democratic structures?

CHAIRPERSON: Let him answer.

MR LAX: One at a time please Mr Msani.

MR NTULI: I will just like to explain with regards to the situation that prevailed, so that you will also understand the situation at kwaMakutha.

Becoming a supporter or joining the UDF was not just a voluntary act, but it was because of the situation that prevailed in kwaMakutha. As I mentioned before that in 1985, that was when the violence started in kwaMakutha, it started in Unit 1, near my home.

Unit 4 was an IFP area, and it was an area closest to us and I was traumatised by the people from this area, even before I became a supporter of the UDF. There were UDF people in our area, who used to explain to us about the UDF and as I explained about Ndodo who used to call us together and would explain to us about the UDF, this was after I had once been terrorised on my way from school by the IFP.

I had to learn about these things. That was when I became a supporter of the UDF, from the explanations that I got from those people who were knowledgeable about organisations in my area because as far as the IFP was concerned, if you were residing in Unit 1, you were a member of the IFP.

Therefore you may be faced with a problem, you could be killed, just because of where you come from.

MR LAX: So, you are saying this Mr Ntuli, if I understand you correctly, that it really depended on where you lived, if that area was predominantly IFP, then you were IFP. If you lived in another area, then you ended up just by the circumstances of the violence, being or regarding yourself as belonging to the UDF or non-IFP or whatever the case might be.

Is that how you are putting it?

MR NTULI: There was a time when I had no political knowledge, but the violence had already started by that time. Even Unit 1, there were people who were known as UDF members.

When we were terrorised at school, that was when people started explaining to us about the UDF and they would call us to meetings, explaining about the UDF as well as the IFP and they will put reasons for why the IFP was bad.

There was also a time during ...

MR LAX: Mr Ntuli, tell us about that stuff. We really asked you quite a simple question, and you are not answering it.

Please continue.

MR NTULI: In kwaMakutha township, there was a Youth Congress. Ndodo was part of this kwaMakutha Youth Congress.

Secondly, the role of the UDF, there was the armed struggle, mobilisation intelligence, amongst all these killers of the UDF because you became a member of the ANC after leaving the UDF.

MR MSANI: Could you tell us just what the difference was between the ANC and the UDF?

MR NTULI: (No translation)

MR LAX: There is no translation coming up.

INTERPRETER: I do beg your pardon, I was on a wrong channel, I am sorry.

MR LAX: Just repeat his answer for us please.

INTERPRETER: He was explaining that at the time when he joined the UDF, he did not have sufficient knowledge about the organisation, and that it was people like the deceased, Mr Ndodo who would explain to them, what the UDF was about.

MR LAX: Thank you. That was what I thought he said, but I just wasn't hearing the translation, so I wasn't one hundred percent sure.

MR MSANI: The question that I asked you, the difference between the ANC and the UDF is that the ANC was a political organisation, but the UDF was not, it was a mass organisation.

Another question relates to the revenge, if you remember quite well the speech of President Mandela at Kings Park.

CHAIRPERSON: Confine your questioning Mr Msani to one language, you ... (tape ends) ... speak it in one language.

MR MSANI: I will use Zulu. Revenge attacks were against the policy of the ANC and the UDF.

CHAIRPERSON: What is your answer to that Mr Ntuli?

MR NTULI: I will like to explain once again, that if this was a revenge attack, we would have attacked the Policeman who had killed him. The problem with Ndlandhla was that we had learned that he was an informer. He would have been killed for the reason that he was an informer.

Ndlandhla was going to be questioned and from ...

MR LAX: That is fine, we have heard that already.

MR MSANI: My other question is, how do you determine that a person is an informer because you should have proof that this person is an informer, and he has been responsible for information on one or two or three people?

CHAIRPERSON: ... Mr Msani, he has explained it. He said that they didn't, he said they had a rumour that he was an informer, and they weren't sure themselves, and they went to speak to him, and then when his reaction of trying to get away, when the deceased tried to get away, that in their minds, made them believe that he was an informer.

They didn't have any proof at all, on his own testimony.

MR MSANI: Okay. In 1990, 1991 there were structures present at kwaMakutha. Why, if there was a problem did you not approach the Chairperson of the Peace Committee, a certain pastor?

Secondly, ...

MR LAX: Let him answer one at a time, otherwise it gets too complicated. The question is why didn't you approach the Chairperson of the Peace Structure, one Mfundisi, I am not sure who?

MR NTULI: I am a little confused about the pastor, because I do not know him.

MR MSANI: You said there was no ANC leader when you discussed these matters. The ANC does not have one leader, but a collective leadership. There were people who were residing at kwaMakutha, who were ANC leaders.

MR NTULI: In that regard, you cannot compare me myself and yourself, with regards to the political knowledge that we have.

What happened at kwaMakutha that effected us, we did not have any one to protect us. The comrades would be killed, and we had to defend ourselves any way we could, and as I mentioned before, I did not have sufficient knowledge on the ANC.

What I knew was that there was an ANC leader, that is Mr Mgadi and when he actually came to the area, we explained to him about Ndlandhla's death and we knew that after reporting the matter to him, that was all that we had to do.

MR MSANI: I would like to disagree with you on some things, like for instance the issuing of membership cards, ANC membership cards. Who launched the ANC branch in kwaMakutha?

MR NTULI: Although I do not remember who launched that branch, I knew about it.

MR MSANI: The person who launched that branch was Kenny Ndlovu. Mr Ndlovu had been in the UDF leadership. There is also an Attorney who used to work with people from kwaMakutha, Linda Zama. That launching of the branch was a public affair, it happened at a stadium?

MR LAX: Mr Msani, it is quite clear from his evidence, and I really don't think you need to belabour the point, that he doesn't have a great deal of detailed knowledge about either the UDF of the ANC.

I think if you want to put the point which I think you are trying to make, which is that whatever structure he thought he was part of, that certainly wasn't the UDF or the ANC, as you would understand it.

I think that is the point you are making and maybe you need to put it to him just a bit directly, if that is the case.

MR MSANI: Yes, I want to suggest that there were criminal elements present, for instance I have Mduduzi's profile. Mduduzi was hired by an Indian taxi driver to shoot someone, and this he did.

MR NTULI: I do not have knowledge thereof, so I cannot agree or disagree with you.

MR MSANI: Secondly, they robbed a Policewoman of a firearm.

MR NTULI: I know about that, it was common practice.

MR MSANI: He was also involved in the death of two people at Adam's mission, on the 27th of December 1990? They had been stealing food.

MR NTULI: I do not remember that.

MR MSANI: They used to loot food from Ketani's shop?

MR NTULI: What do you mean by looting? I do not know about that either.

MR MSANI: You will also remember that he was one of the people who wanted to kill me, and you were also one of them?

I used to drive a Golf and you stoned this Golf, but I was not in the car at the time. You were one of the people who wanted to kill me.

MR NTULI: I am confused, I do not know you. That is the problem that I have, I am seeing your face for the very first time, and I wouldn't have wanted to kill you because I do not know you.

MR MSANI: It was common practice in kwaMakutha that people would be robbed and killed in Unit 1.

MR NTULI: I would like to explain with regards to robberies. It used to happen during the times of the violence, that sometimes furniture vehicles would be robbed. Those vehicles for example, the Hyperama, for instance Hyperama truck was one robbed.

This was explained as robbing from the Boers. Sometimes a bread delivery van was also robbed and the community did not accept this, particularly elder people who did not approve.

But most of the comrades engaged in this practice. It did not only happen in kwaMakutha, but also in other townships. This was something done as explained, terrorising the Boers.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Msani. Mr Mchunu, do you have any re-examination?

MR MCHUNU: Just a few questions Mr Chairman. Oh, no, Mr Chairman.


CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Sibanyoni?

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Mr Chairman, I just want to clear the question of the killing. Mr Ntuli, when you were stabbing the deceased, was it to restrain him from running away, or to restrain him from fighting you, or was it the implementation or the execution of a decision already taken to kill him?

MR NTULI: Can I just explain how it came about that I stabbed him.

MR SIBANYONI: Very briefly.

MR NTULI: As I mentioned that when I approached the car, I asked him to reverse the car so that he could talk to the comrades, so that we could discuss this matter, and hear what he had to say.

But because he tried to move the car and I was also hesitant because there was this rumour, he tried to move this car forward, and I did not know whether he was going to drive it to the police station, and if that happened, I would not have returned from the police station.

I was then defending myself, trying to stop him from starting the car. If he had listened and tried to talk to me, he may have survived, depending on what he had to say. That is from the questions that were going to be asked, because it would sometimes happen that people will be questioned and if they are found guilty, they will be disciplined.

MR SIBANYONI: Shortly, in that stage when he was killed, it was not yet confirmed whether the rumours about him were correct? Do you agree?

MR NTULI: Yes, it was not really confirmed that he had indeed done it.

MR SIBANYONI: Lastly, it would appear that either you are protecting the people who participated in the killing, in other words, you are not telling us the whole truth, or are you saying you effected all those 25 wounds which it is alleged were found on his body?

MR NTULI: I stabbed him many times, although I do not know just exactly how many times. But because he tried to fight me, I stabbed him and he was bigger than me and older than me. That is why I stabbed him many times.

MR SIBANYONI: Are you saying it could be 25 times?

MR NTULI: It could happen.

MR SIBANYONI: No further questions Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Lax?

MR LAX: Just one small question Mr Chairperson. You have just confirmed to Mr Sibanyoni that you really weren't sure that he was, you suspected that he was the person who sold out Mduduzi, but you weren't sure.

Why then in your form, at page 5, do you say the whole community knew? Sorry, not at page 5, I beg your pardon, page 3, everybody in the community knew that Msani had sold our brother out. Why do you say that, it is such a certain statement.

Everybody knew he had sold our brother out, when in fact you didn't know at the time? Just explain that for me please.

MR NTULI: As I said before, some people did know, that is Ndlandhla was believed to be the one who had contacted the Police. I can say some people in the community knew about it.

MR LAX: You are saying everybody, not some?

MR NTULI: The rest were told in a meeting.

MR LAX: Yes, but that meeting happened after he died, and this is before he died.

MR NTULI: Yes, both meetings took place after his death, but some people had this knowledge before the meeting, that is people who were close to the comrades.

MR LAX: I am not going to waste time, the way you have written it here, is that everybody in the community knew that Msani had sold the brother out, the comrades then planned to kill him. It was after everybody knew, that they planned this operation and that doesn't tie in with your evidence.

Do you understand?


CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any questions arising Mr Mchunu?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR MCHUNU: Yes Chairperson, just a few. In fact, it is a point which has been coming up quite a number of times before, and I want, I think it will do justice for us to clarify it properly.

Mr Ntuli, did you write this statement yourself, or did you fill this form yourself or did you get somebody to help you fill the form out?

MR NTULI: There were people who came to the prison, people from NICRO. I asked my mother to request them to come to the prison, so that I could apply for amnesty and one of those people filled the form for me.

MR MCHUNU: In what language were they talking to you, or was that person talking to you?

MR NTULI: We were using Zulu.

MR MCHUNU: And he was reducing that into writing in English?

MR NTULI: Yes, he translated it into English.

MR MCHUNU: Did he later on explain it to you or did he reread it back to you?

MR NTULI: On the day that they arrived, the prison normally closes at three o'clock, and this person came late and some of the things he wrote, on a piece of paper, and he said he would complete the form later, because he had come late to the prison.

MR MCHUNU: Would you say that this statement truly represents or truly represent what you stated and the events as they occurred?

MR NTULI: There are some things that are a true reflection of what happened. Some of the things are not true, because for example this statement that the community knew about it, is not true, because I did say that some people in the community knew about what Ndlandhla had done.

With regards to informers, this is something that was not mentioned to everybody in the community, because of security measures, this was something that would be discussed amongst the comrades already.

MR MCHUNU: I have also heard you say in response to the questions from the Chair, that you stabbed him so many times, that it could be 25, but I thought I also heard you say that there were other people who also arrived later on, and they could have assaulted him? Am I right?

MR NTULI: Yes, I left the scene, such that there is one person whom I remember. When he came on the scene, he was already armed.

He came to enquire what was happening, he thought that they were being attacked. I left the body there and there were people around, quite a number of them. The one person that I remember is that one elderly man who was armed.

MR MCHUNU: Thank you Chair, I've got no further questions.



ADV MPSHE: No questions, thank you Mr Chairman.


CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Thank you Mr Ntuli. That is the conclusion of your testimony.



MR MCHUNU: I've got no further witnesses.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you in a position to argue now Mr Mchunu?

MR MCHUNU: Yes, I can.


ADV MPSHE: Yes, I can.


MR MCHUNU IN ARGUMENT: Mr Chairman, my instructions are to apply as I quite did at the beginning, for the granting of amnesty on the applicant, in this matter.

The applicant, I submit, it does appear from his evidence that whatever he did, he did not do for any personal gain, for any particular other reason, other than the furtherance of the objectives of his organisation at that time.

At that time circumstances demanded that whoever was in the position of the applicant, should actually perform what the applicant did.

The motive of the applicant was really to rid the community of people who were suspected or who actually were known as informers of the Police, or of the adversary party.

If we have reference to the provisions of Section 23(b), which I may with the leave of the Chair, read quickly, the context in which the act, omission or offence took place and in particular whether the act, omission or offence was committed in the course of or as a part of a political uprising, disturbance or event or in reaction thereto.

CHAIRPERSON: I think that Section Mr Mchunu, we have dealt with it before, deals with the situation where you've got a political rally let's say and things go array and there is a problem, a sort of instantaneous, unplanned problem that occurs. It doesn't relate to the whole 30 year period of the struggle that the Act covers.

It is more the situations that arise in a political context, which lead to people to perform acts which they wouldn't have otherwise have performed, save for that flare up of a situation.

MR LAX: Like for example, there is a rally and a Policeman suddenly arrives on the scene and the crowd goes crazy and they start stoning the van, because of the provocation that that sometimes entailed for example. There wasn't any premeditated plan to do that, it just happened on the spur of the moment.

That is what that is really designed to deal with.

MR MCHUNU: I stand corrected Chairperson, but be that as it may, then I would still submit Chairperson, that it is still covered by (a) which deals with the motive of the person who committed the act, omission or offence. His motive, he has quite stated in his evidence, that he had no ill feeling whatsoever against Mduduzi per se as a person, he had no personal grudge. He knew him quite well and Mduduzi, no, not Mduduzi, sorry, Mr Msani, he knew Mr Msani quite well. He never hated Mr Msani for any other reason and the motive here was to take the deceased and have him explain account for what they believed he was.

Immediately thereafter there was, there was a struggle on his part, to actually run away and whilst in that process, the suspicion which they had, grew further to the effect that ...

CHAIRPERSON: I mean one can imagine the situation. If I am sitting in my taxi and four people climb in and there is a whole crowd outside, and they say look, we have a problem arising out of the death of our friend, and we've got a few questions to ask you surrounding his death, even if I had nothing to that death, I would be extremely frightened by that situation, particularly during those times and circumstances where everything was so volatile and we through bitter experience know that life was cheap.

So the running away could be seen objectively as a reasonable step taken by any person to run away from that situation. It doesn't necessarily mean that he was an informer.

MR MCHUNU: In the same vein Chair, during those times ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I can see it is going to be argued. He has explained that, he interpreted that as confirming their belief, but what I am saying is that that is not the only interpretation.

MR MCHUNU: Well, during those times it may also be recalled that there were so many of such acts committed without there being real proof, that a person is indeed an informer.

CHAIRPERSON: That is why I said, life was cheap then.

MR MCHUNU: That is correct. If I may proceed to the applicant was actually challenged on the question of whether or not he ever did become a member of either the UDF or the ANC.

I submit Chair, that the applicant in this matter, has quite consistently explained his position, that he never at any stage, was a member of the UDF and if you take also into cognisance the fact that the applicant was at that time only 13 years old, if you count from the time when he was born in 1972, he was only 13 years old, and it was a very tender age for him to understand the whole political dynamics at that time, and too, and most importantly, the organisations at that time, operated underground.

Such was the UDF too, it operated underground. The activities and the dissemination of information was not as good as it is today.

MR LAX: With the greatest of respect Mr Mchunu, the UDF operated perfectly above ground. All the Youth Congresses held meetings publicly, people became members. Yes, at certain times their members were detained and their activities were frowned upon by the powers that were of the day, but the UDF was a perfectly legitimate, above board, organisation.

Many, many of the Youth Congresses of every little small village and township around South Africa, were all publicly operating above board. It wasn't an underground movement by any manner of means.

That is not the same for the ANC of course, that was a banned organisation, as was other liberation movements.

MR MCHUNU: Yes, that is indeed correct, but it must also be understood in the context of that time, that any such meeting held, could at any time be spoilt by the coming or by the flocking of Police at that time, to arrest people who attended the gathering, to do all sorts of things.

Under those circumstances, meeting workshops and other platforms where youths such as the applicant in his case, would have been able to grasp, go get information about ...

CHAIRPERSON: In any event, he has explained to us the circumstances in which he says he identified with the UDF, etc. I don't think that he ever said that he was a keen meeting goer and followed it closely, he said basically the circumstances dictated that he fell on that side of - rather than the other side.

MR MCHUNU: Thank you Chairperson, very much for that. The point I now want to go into is on disclosure. I believe Chair, that the applicant in fact, I submit Chair, that the applicant has indeed made a full disclosure on the issues pertaining or related to this particular incident, because there is only one incident which is being talked about at the moment.

About the names of people, he has also explained that he cannot remember everybody who was present, but at least the names of those who were present, whom he can still remember, he has given to this Commission.

Unless the Chair wants me to address it on some other point.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mchunu. Mr Mpshe?

ADV MPSHE IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman and members of the Committee, the bulk of my argument has been covered by the cross-examination on the applicant, sorry, so I won't go back to obvious things that are on record.

I would just go by way of a point system, just enumerate and direct the Committee to have a look at these things, that is all Mr Chairman. One is that the deceased was killed when the applicant was not sure that he was an informer.

Point two, the killing of the deceased took place without any authority whatsoever, either of the UDF or of the ANC at that time. That is the evidence on record.

Point three, the applicant has told this forum that what they sought to achieve, was to be safe in the area.

Point four, I am asking this Committee to consider the manner in which the applicant struggled in answering questions that were put to him. In short the demeanour of the applicant which impacts on the credibility of the applicant.

May I resist Mr Chairman and members of the Committee, to be tempted to respond to Section 23(1)(b) that was alluded to by my learned friend incorrectly, as well as 23(1)(a). That is all Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Any reply Mr Mchunu?

MR MCHUNU: None Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. We will reserve our decision in this matter and it will hopefully be handed down in the very near future.

Mr Mpshe, that brings us to the end of the roll?

ADV MPSHE: That is correct Mr Chairman. Before we adjourn Mr Chairman, may I just put on record the victims' ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, if you can do that please.

ADV MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman as I have indicated at the beginning, we've got quite a number of people who are relatives to the deceased, but I will only mention those who are closer, not actually closer, but who are relevant in terms of the process.

That is the mother, who is Tokozile Msani, her affidavit is on page 15 of the papers.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it Msani, not Cele?


CHAIRPERSON: I thought the statement was Cele?

ADV MPSHE: No Mr Chairman, on page 15.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh sorry, it was Sergeant Cele who attested to the statement.

ADV MPSHE: As well as the father Mr Chairman, Hezron Msani.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the first name?

ADV MPSHE: Hezron and finally Mr Chairman, one of the important persons as well, the son to the deceased, who is present in the forum, Lindani Msani.

Mr Chairman, the address will be the same, it is given as P.O. Box 23635, Isipingo, 4110. Perhaps I need to put a telephone number as well Mr Chairman, in case they want to be ...

CHAIRPERSON: It will certainly do no harm.

MR LAX: Perhaps that information could go to the R&R people.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps you can do that yes, rather then publicise the family's telephone number.

ADV MPSHE: I stand corrected, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mpshe. As I said that brings us to the end of the roll here. Before we adjourn, I would just like to thank everybody who made these hearings possible, the Interpreters for the hard work that they had done all week. It is a very difficult task interpreting simultaneously as the people are talking, to the sound technicians who provided the sound system here, to the media, to the security people and the witness protection people, and also to the caterers who have looked after us so well during tea times and lunch times and indeed to everybody who made these hearings possible for us, thank you very much.

Thank you particularly Mr Mpshe, for all that you have done as well. We will now adjourn, thank you.