TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION … · TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION AMNESTY HEARING TRANSCRIPTS BENONI 2 (7 - 8 September 1998) Wimpy Bar bombings PART 1 PART 2

TRC AMNESTY HEARING TRANSCRIPTS - http://www.justice.gov.za/trc/index.html Page 1 of 117

TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION

AMNESTY HEARING TRANSCRIPTS

BENONI 2 (7 - 8 September 1998)

Wimpy Bar bombings PART 1 PART 2



AMNESTY HEARING

DATE: 7TH SEPTEMBER 1998

NAME: ERNEST PHUMUZI SIGASA

MATTER: WIMPY BAR BOMBING AND OTHERS

DAY : 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: I

wish to identify myself and would ask my colleagues and the different

representatives to do the same. I'm Judge Ronnie Pillay.

ADV MOTATA: I'm Advocate John Motata.

MS KHAMPEPE: I'm Ms Khampepe.

ADV STEENKAMP: I'm André Steenkamp.

MR KOOPEDI: I am Brian Koopedi.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi, you are appearing for the applicants?

MR KOOPEDI: That is indeed so, I'm appearing for all four applicants.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Steenkamp, you are appearing as Evidence Leader?

ADV STEENKAMP: Yes, Mr Chairman, and also on behalf of the victims, in the

Katlehong incident and the Wimpy attacks. As you wish Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Are there any other representatives?

ADV STEENKAMP: No, Mr Chairman, no further representatives.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Then we can proceed.

MR KOOPEDI: As it pleases the Committee. There is something which one

wishes to raise in limine, and I will ask the indulgence of the Committee. Two of

our application forms were not attested to. If the Committee will allow me, I would

wish to address that with each applicant as he starts.

CHAIRPERSON: Why can't it be attested to now? Why can't it be signed now?


MR KOOPEDI: We do not have any problem with signing that now, but because it

was not done timeously, one thought it would be proper to raise it in this forum and

do it correctly. We have discussed this and do not have a problem with signing

them now.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi, are you saying it is not attested to or not deposed

to? Is it not signed by the person who made it?

MR KOOPEDI: The applicants have signed but they were not signed before a

Commissioner of oaths.

CHAIRPERSON: If during one of the adjournments they are willing to confirm

that that is their signature, then it can be attested to.

MR KOOPEDI: As it pleases, we will do that, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Are there any objections to that, Mr Steenkamp?

ADV STEENKAMP: No, objections, thank you Mr Chairman.

MR KOOPEDI: Mr Chairman, our first applicant is here, Mr Sigasa. Could we

have him sworn in?

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, his application appears in the bundle, pages

21 till 27.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sigasa, do you have any objections to the taking of the oath?

MR SIGASA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Which language do you prefer to use?

MR SIGASA: English.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you quite sure?

MR SIGASA: Ja.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you not be more comfortable with any of the vernacular?

MR SIGASA: My submission is done in English.

CHAIRPERSON: It doesn't matter, I need to know that you are comfortable.

MR SIGASA: I'm very comfortable.

CHAIRPERSON: In English?


MR SIGASA: In English, yes.

ERNEST PHUMUZI SIGASA: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: Mr Sigasa, you are an applicant in this

matter, is that correct?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

MR KOOPEDI: You have prepared a statement to present, to read to the

Honourable Committee Members, in support of your amnesty application, is that

correct?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

MR KOOPEDI: Will you please proceed.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Koopedi, do you have copies of the statement he is about to

read for the benefit of the members of the Committee?

MR KOOPEDI: We had thought that as usual we would find the photocopying

facilities here. We worked until very late last night and unfortunately we have not

yet been able to make copies but as soon as we have made copies, our intention is

to submit that but for the moment, if the Committee Members will bear with us, we

do not have enough copies to give to the Honourable Committee Members and my

learned friend on the other side.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you.

MR KOOPEDI: Please proceed.

MR SIGASA:

"I, Ernest Phumuzi Sigasa, born on the 4th of June 1965 joined the

African National Congress and its armed wing, Umkhonto weSizwe

in 1984. I became the commander of the Regional Command

Structure, Johannes Nkosi Unit, between 1987 to 1990. I received my

military training and combat training in Botswana, Zimbabwe and the

former Soviet Union. Johannes Nkosi Unit was constituted by the

following combatants: myself, Ernest Sigasa, overall commander of

the unit, combat name Happy. My responsibilities were overall

command, clearance of the DLB's, the guidance to military activities,

to communicate with the front command of Botswana and the

military headquarters, Lusaka and Zambia and also to execute armed

attacks. The other fellow applicant, Tebogo Kebotlhale, the

Commissar of the Regional Command Structure, combat name,


Bernard. His responsibilities were to do political work within the unit

to train and distribute arms in our various sub-units, clearance of the

DLB's, executing attacks and sustain the moral of the unit members.

Alfas Ndlovu, fellow applicant, a member of the Command Structure,

combat name Ambros. Responsibilities was to train armed units in the

various areas, execute attacks and he was also a principal tactician, a

military tactician in the unit. Molwedi Mokoena, fellow applicant,

combat name, Bensaramos. He was responsible for the overall

welfare of the unit. He served as the principal fund-raiser for the unit.

He trained armed units, he executed attacks and his also responsibility

was a politico military analyst in the unit. Gift(?) Sephras

Mkomezulu, though late, member as well, combat name, Press. His

responsibilities were to train arm units, execute attacks and he was

also the military tactician in the unit.

Johannes Nkosi, the person, was born in 1905 and joined the

Communist Party at the age of 19. He was assassinated on Dingaan's

Day, 1930, during the burning campaign, past burning campaign. He

was shot at point blank, stabbed and beaten to death by a chief police

constable. No policeman was ever punished for his assassination. He

was a true veteran Trade Unionist, a seasoned communist from the

countryside.

Our unit was impressed with his selfless devotion to the liberation

struggle, hence the unit was named after him, Johannes Nkosi. The

composition of Johannes Nkosi Unit was characterised by the proven

record of involvement of members traced from the Congress of South

African Students, COSAS, the youth organisation during the '80's.

Johannes Nkosi Unit members involvement in the mass democratic

movement, championed by the United Democratic Front was in

various capacities as members and activists and leaders. This

informed their political readiness to serve in MK. Proven leadership

and political consciousness was the fundamental criterion

characterising membership to Johannes Nkosi Unit"

The structure of Johannes Nkosi Unit, it is in page 4 in the bundle of files, the

organogram of our structure.

"The political situation then, the mid-80's was characterised by the

heightened activity by liberation movements against illegitimate

regime. The apartheid regime had launched a brutal campaign of

repression and suppression against all the people, both the black and

white, urban and rural, rich and poor, unionised and non-unionised,

who were bent on bringing down apartheid machinery through

participation in the ranks of the people's organisations, civics, Trade


Unions, youths, students and many more other progressive

organisations.

The occupation of the townships by the then SADF meant that the

apartheid regime was clearly gearing itself for unleashing its might on

an unarmed and defenceless people. The occupation of the African

townships such as Sebokeng, Katlehong, Duduza and others

necessitated an urgent need from the side of the African National

Congress, ANC, through Umkhonto weSizwe to defend the people

against this occupation.

The occupation by the then SADF of our schools, churches and sports

fields was a calculated attempt by the apartheid regime to capitulate

the masses of the people and cause a hole to the struggle for

liberation. The occupation was a desperate response by the regime in

order to save face in the light of the successes made by Umkhonto

weSizwe, MK.

The call by President Tambo, the late President Tambo of the African

National Congress, comrade Tambo, I quote:

'Render the country ungovernable and apartheid unworkable'. That

was the January 8th statement of 1985, had been met with positive

revolutionary responses by the majority of people in South Africa. To

mention but a few, in 1984 school boycotts in the East Rand, the local

government elections in August '84, the national strike by the

National Union of Mine Workers, the rent boycotts in Sebokeng,

Duduza, Sakane and other townships. At that time the front-lying

states as well were under constant cross-border raids conducted by

the racists commandos as a result of the intensification of the armed

struggle in the country. The country was in a general state of war.

The Johannes Nkosi Unit was born out of the circumstantial realities

of the time. The Johannes Nkosi Unit was established henceforth to

lead our combat groups against apartheid tyranny. We believed that

the seeds of people's war were now charred by tribulations of mass

struggles waged by the people of South Africa. And believing that,

the armed struggle was integral component part of a broad political

process towards liberation of South Africa.

The Johannes Nkosi Unit emerged to reinforce those struggles

through increased armed activities and the revolutionary propaganda,

to marshal revolutionary forces into war for freedom, peace and

democracy in our country.


The strategic importance of Johannes Nkosi. The East Rand region

as an economic powerhouse in the province and the country was an

ideal and strategic place to launch an accelerated armed struggle. The

East Rand region through its multitudes of industries occupied and

served as the nerve centre of the apartheid economy. As an industrial

and economic giant through levies, taxes, rates, wealth created,

subsidised and maintained apartheid regime.

The East Rand region, due to its economic progress as part of the

broader campaign to weaken an cut the resource base of apartheid

regime was eventually targeted as an ideal place for armed struggle,

championed by the ANC's armed military wing, Umkhonto weSizwe.

Political turmoil in the East Rand. During the second half of the

'80's and countrywide informed the origin of the Johannes Nkosi

Unit. Furthermore, the whole country was in fire. Umkhonto

weSizwe and the masses of the people, organised by the mass

democratic movement, were engaged in fierce battles with apartheid

regime. It is during this period when killings, detentions, torture and

displacement of ...[indistinct] was experienced across the line of fire.

The emergence of Johannes Nkosi Unit in the East Rand was due to

political conditions existing countrywide and particularly in the

region. A need to build popular armed forces, a need to consolidate

armed activities in terms of quality and number in order to salvage

the people's war and finally to galvanise the support of the people and

the international community through armed propaganda activities

expressed in the operations executed by our forces to ensure that total

isolation and the defeat of apartheid is realised.

Our sub-units. Johannes Nkosi Unit trained, armed and led people to

battle, the combat units in various locations in the region. These sub-

units were ordered to deliver a heavy blow to the bogus municipal

elections in 1988 and the security personnel. The following

operations illustrate the extent of the blow unleashed by one of our

combat units under our command, Baizel February based in Duduza.

There was a blowing of a police van in Duduza with a limpet mine.

There was a blowing of the administration block in kwaThema with a

limpet mine. The sabotage of electrical sub-station in De Notre with a

limpet mine. The blowing of a post office in Nigel with a limpet

mine. Despite the difficulty to locate other units under our command

and keeping their records of operations, we however salute those sub-

units.

The brief or the mandate to Johannes Nkosi Unit. Our brief was to

train, arm and lead the people into battle. It was also to defend out


people, to severe the enemy lines of communications and power. To

disperse and immobilise the enemy forces. To destroy the enemy's

economic resources. To attack the enemy on all fronts and

...[indistinct] its forces. To make a people's war flourish in its

dimensions in every part of our country.

Our modus operandi. Our modus operandi was planning,

execution and control and the support services. On planning. We met

every Wednesday in a plannery to analyse, review and take decisions

on our actions.

On execution. We retrieved the dead letter boxes, we trained various

sub-units, we conducted reconnaissance, we distributed arms in

various sub-units in the East Rand, we issued out combat orders, we

executed armed actions.

On control. We received reports from units, we visited units to

ascertain welfare and needs, we monitored arms in their possession.

On the support services. We had links with the mass democratic

movement leadership, we owned two vehicles, we also had

underground houses.

Operations. The context of the operations. The nature of the

operations carried out by Johannes Nkosi Unit ranged from the point

of qualifying the elaborate position of number one, to attack the

enemy security personnel, to accelerate armed propaganda, hitting the

economic infrastructure of the system.

The least of our operations: Johannes Nkosi Command

Structures Operations.

1) We bombed the ...[indistinct] Barracks in Mnisi section. It was

carried out by my fellow applicant, Tebogo Kebotlhale and Alfas

Ndlovu.

2) The bombing of the sewerage pipes in Sunwatt Park, Boksburg, it

was by myself, Ernest Sigasa and my fellow applicant, Molwedi

Mokoena.

The ambush of "Kitskonstabels" and the SAP Motsamai Section in

Ndela hostel, it was myself and my fellow applicant, Alfas Ndlovu.

3) The bombing of Wimpy, Benoni, it was carried out by my fellow

applicant, Alfas Ndlovu.


4) The bombing of railway line and the sub-station, electrical sub-

station next to Katlehong Station, it was carried out by Alfas Ndlovu

and Molwedi Mokoena.

5) The bus terminus in Germiston, it was carried out by Tebogo

Kebotlhale.

We now classify our operations as follows: The electrical sub-station

in Katlehong - The bombing of the electrical sub-station in Katlehong

which powers the railway services between Germiston and Katlehong

areas was to signify the vulnerability of apartheid economic system.

The electrical sub-station serves as a reliable means to effect

transportation at the benefit of apartheid rules, as part of the broader

transportation network. The bombing of electrical sub-station came

on the eve of the stay-away campaign called by the Mass Democratic

Movement. For us to support struggling masses of the people, the

progressive organisations and undermining the apartheid economy,

the electrical sub-station became the target. For us to disrupt and

support the stay-away, we had to render trade services of use. In

summary, the electrical sub-station blast in Katlehong signified the

passion the Johannes Nkosi Unit had in supporting the progressive

forces which engaged the enemy despite limited means.

The Johannes Nkosi Unit attacked the electrical sub-station to support

the stay-away planned by the progressive organisations in the

townships. The Johannes Nkosi Unit attacked the electrical sub-

station in order to engrave in the minds of the people in South Africa,

that MK is with them and MK is everywhere. That action served as

an armed propaganda tactic as well.

Wimpy Bar. Wimpy Bar was not the target at first, the actual target

was the notorious Security Branch headquarters in Benoni next to

Benoni Railway Station. The extensive and constant information

sought through reconnaissance led to Wimpy Bar attack. Our reports

and information as a result indicated that most of the Special Branch

personnel frequented the place before and after their notorious

crusade of activities in the townships and elsewhere.

Wimpy Bar which is several metres from this Special Branch

headquarters became the target. To us Wimpy Bar was an ideal place

to attack the security personnel where they least expected.

Furthermore, it was to mark the 67th anniversary of the South African

Communist Party which was on the 30th of July.


Furthermore, guided by the revolutionary call of the leadership, in

particular the late Chief of Staff of Umkhonto weSizwe, comrade

Chris Hani, I quote:

'That we must turn the white areas into battle zones because there's a

popular war for total liberation in this country'.

In summary. Wimpy Bar in Benoni was bombed in line with the

principles of attacking the enemy security personnel as legitimate

targets and the revolutionary armed propaganda intended to cultivate

the spirit of rebellion and the frame of mind which puts the politics of

the revolutionary change to the fore. That was also a statement by

comrade President, the late President Tambo on the January 8th

statement, 73rd anniversary of the ANC.

The bus terminus blast in Germiston. The bombing of the bus

terminus in Germiston was carried with the sole purpose of furthering

the revolutionary armed propaganda. The bus terminus was

practically for white persons use in Germiston. The bus terminus was

observed and reconnoitred over a period of time. The outcome of the

reconnaissance revealed that it is only busy during peak hours of the

morning, roughly between from 7 up to 10 in the morning. The

bombing was time for 12 o'clock and during that time the place is

deserted. Hence it was placed consciously at a time when there are no

people around. They were done in order to cause confusion. Despite

the fact that it was an all white bus terminus we did not aim to attack

those white civilians.

The bus terminus bombing in Germiston was not an attack on the

whites but an armed propaganda tactic. In its planning and execution

of the operation, Johannes Nkosi embraced the message on the white

civilians' life as elaborated by the late President, comrade OR Tambo,

I quote:

'We have not been avoiding hitting whites as whites, there was no

policy of hitting buildings instead of whites, no whites instead of

buildings. This is not a distinction that we have been making. If we

have made any distinction it has been to avoid hitting people'

The bombing of the bus terminus in Germiston was planned in line

with the zeal to spread revolutionary armed propaganda and extend

the war into greater heights in the region.

The ambush on policemen. The Kitts Constable, the Municipal Police

known as the "Kitskonstabels", came to ...[indistinct] at a time of the

state of emergency declared on the 21st July 1985 by the ex-Law and


Order Minister, Louis le Grange. The Municipal Police in various

townships in the East Rand engaged in most brutal attacks on the

community. They enforced curfew with much more abhorable

arrogance ever shown by the racist Security Forces in the country.

They collaborated an action with the riot police, the then SADF and

the councillors, to extinguish the flames of war and to abort the cause

of liberation struggle. The Municipal Police, due to their geographic

deployment in townships, were always the first of the enemy security

machinery to be in touch with the popular activities of struggling,

waged by the communities. In all cases they crushed these activities

with a brute force ever unleashed by other enemy Security Forces,

that is the then SAP, the then SADF.

For us, Municipal Police represented part of the security machinery of

the apartheid regime. The defeat of the enemy plans to abort the

struggle for liberation in our country depended on the cleansing and

the elimination of all those cohorts in the apartheid regime's payroll.

The Municipal Police as the security apparatus of the apartheid

regime equally as the other agencies became the legitimate target for

our unit. It was about time that the armed offensive was directed

against the Municipal Police. In our minds they constituted the last

blow of the security agency that was created to suppress the

...[indistinct] wave of mass resistance against apartheid colonial

...[indistinct] forces.

It was also important for us, in order to deter and discourage the

people from joining the enemy ranks which was heavily infiltrated,

which has heavily infiltrated our communities through some 007

types, spies, informers, collaborators, at the point in questions.

In summary, the attack on the Municipal Police in Motsamai Section,

Ndela Hostel was a legitimate target act of defending our

communities against the savage attacks of apartheid regime.

The Municipal Police never hesitated to unleash systematic violence

against the fighters for the people's cause. They fanned fratricidal

conflict amongst the people in order to ensure the perpetration of

apartheid system, from which they benefited.

The late ANC President, comrade OR Tambo called, I quote:

'The offensive against apartheid system must be extended to reach

Bantustan and other apartheid institutions in all corners of the


country, among all population groups'. That also is the 73rd

anniversary of the ANC, 1985.

Johannes Nkosi Unit rose to the occasion to deliver telling blows

against the apartheid system and their puppets who have denounced

the people by defending the people's enemy.

The contribution. We saw our struggle as part and parcel of a

contribution by other MK cadres. The time has come therefore when

we should dip the revolutionary banner in honouring the memories of

our fellow martyrs, like comrade Izak Mokoena, Gift Mtaung,

Aubrey Nkosi and many others. The unsung heroes and heroines of

our struggle.

We want to say that today the heroic work of our people's army goes

on. The new dispensation, democracy, nation building and the healing

process testimonised the noble ideas of instituting a new South

Africa, united democratic in nature. The time has come when we

should extend gratitude and appreciation to all those MK forces who

made the spear more sharper and precise in line with the slogan:

"Every combatant a patriot and every patriot a combatant". It is

through their blood and sweat that South Africa is a free united

democratic in nature.

Our address to yourselves, the Commissioners. The Johannes Nkosi

Unit takes this opportunity to appreciate work done by the TRC and

the role it has played in bringing about reconciliation and healing our

ghastly past. We feel very much gratified for been afforded an

opportunity by the TRC to tell the truth. It is our firm belief that

through our actions we have in one way or the other contributed to

the establishment of a democratic dispensation. And it is those actions

which in a way contributed to the establishment of the TRC as an

important vehicle excavating the true history of South Africa.

It is also our firm belief that even the Commissioners and the

supporting staff have at one point or the other in their lives cherished

an ideal South African society in which democracy reigns supreme

and that the rule of ordinary law of the land applied. It is that kind of

society for which we ourselves risked our lives for the preservation of

life itself.

Address to victims if they are present in this hall. It has never been

our intention to deliberately kill and injure ordinary people. It was not

our intention to be sitting with you in the hearing like this. Our

actions were not specially directed to you and your families. It has

however happened within the context of escalating armed activities


that we sit here today and that you happened to be caught in that

cross-fire. We do not pretend that pain and all sorts of inconveniences

have not been suffered by yourselves as a result of our actions, but it

is within the context of the intensification and escalating armed

struggle that some of you fell victims.

We also wish to bring to your attention, the Commission and the

sundry, that you are not the only victims. In a way we are also victims

of circumstances which prevailed then. Those activities have affected

us tremendously to an extent that we need some kind of help of sort

specialised counselling.

It is also with the aforegoing reasons and circumstances that we

appeal to victims to understand our actions within that context. We

also make a humble request to all victims to accept our application

for amnesty. We acknowledge without any hesitation the trauma you

have suffered and undergone as a result of our actions. We know

there has been pain and suffering and we hereby extend our hand of

reconciliation.

We are convinced and hold a firm belief that all of these activities

were carried out in pursuit of the political objectives of the ANC and

its armed wing, Umkhonto weSizwe. These actions were intended to

bolster the moral of South Africans, to mobilise them and enhance

their revolutionary zeal and participation in the liberation struggle.

The other objective as mentioned elsewhere in this application was

also to create conditions for a general revolutionary climate and

demoralise and confuse enemy forces, police and army personnel.

Having said that, I present myself and my co-applicants, comrades,

members of our unit, before yourselves to be considered for amnesty.

I thank you".

MR KOOPEDI: That does his testimony for now Chairperson.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Sigasa, did I understand you properly when you said you

were not personally involved in the wimpy bombing?

MR SIGASA: Well technically I would say yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: Your involvement is only to the extent that you were the

commander?

MR SIGASA: Yes, I was an overall commander. The question of any

identification, reconnaissance and execution I viewed myself as part. We might

also delegate a responsibility to an individual person within the command structure


in the East Rand, but yes, I did not personally, but I am responsible because I was

part of that collective.

MS KHAMPEPE: Were you part of the collective which did the reconnaissance?

MR SIGASA: Initially yes, but we delegated the responsibility for further

reconnaissance and execution to my fellow applicant.

MS KHAMPEPE: But to some extent you did direct the attack?

MR SIGASA: Excuse me?

MS KHAMPEPE: To some extent you were responsible for directing that attack,

as the overall commander of the Johannes Nkosi Unit?

MR SIGASA: Yes.


CHAIRPERSON: You see, Mr Sigasa, what my colleague is getting at, we stuck

with this lacuna of taking responsibility for actions of the underlings, even if you

didn't know that they're going to do it or did it. In that context, were you party to

the decision to plant that bomb in, let's say, the Wimpy Bar?

MR SIGASA: Yes, I was.

CHAIRPERSON: And through all that planning stage you were party to it?

MR SIGASA: As an overall commander yes, I was.

CHAIRPERSON: And you were being informed of certain information or you

were receiving certain information because of reconnaissance?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And when the decision was finally made, the Wimpy Bar in

Benoni was set to be a target, you were party to that decision?

MR SIGASA: Yes, I was.

CHAIRPERSON: And you knew what was going to happen there?

MR SIGASA: I think it confuses a bit. As I elaborated in the submission, the target

as we indicated, because we have realised that it has created some kind of

hullabaloo, particular situation, we knew that people were going to be affected in

our military attack in that blast but I also clarified that Wimpy at first was not the

target but it happened to become a target then. As I elaborated, that through the


reconnaissance and the information gathered, security personnel as well in fact

were frequenting the place, particularly from the Special Branch stationed here in

Benoni, that is next to the railway station.

CHAIRPERSON: Well let me put it clearer then. You see people can't get amnesty

for something that occurred that they didn't know about, they have to be guilty of

something in order to obtain amnesty, not so?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And that is why I'm asking these questions, to see to what extent

you were involved in this. And in respect of the Wimpy, you do say that you were

party to the planning.

MR SIGASA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there, of all these events that you talked about, is there any

event that you were not party to, either by planning or actual activity?

MR SIGASA: Not at all, not that I know of. I was responsible. Everything that

happened I was party to.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

Mr Steenkamp?

MS KHAMPEPE: Chairperson, if I can be granted an indulgence, on a question of

clarity.

Can I therefore assume Mr Sigasa, that what you are crisply putting before the

Committee is that you were responsible for selecting Wimpy as a target?

MR SIGASA: A bit dicey question. I must start by saying I'm an ordinary man.

The question of selection of the targets, we delegate responsibilities like in terms

of the orders given to us or the brief, was that we identify wherever they are the

enemy personnel. The target of interest, economic and so on and the identification

of that resulted into Wimpy. The identification of the security personnel resulted

into Wimpy.

And yes, I was informed from time to time, the reconnaissance mission conducted

and the reports thereof.


Mr Steenkamp?


CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman,

Honourable Members.

Sir, the view of the victims of the Wimpy Bomb Blast is that first of all they are

opposing the application on the bases that the attack of the Wimpy Bar was a

callous attack because it was not a military target and can't be seen at all to benefit

your political motive at the stage. Can you comment on that first?

MR SIGASA: I think also, Commissioners, we indicated in our application or

submission where we quoted also our late President OR Tambo in relation to or in

regard to the issue of civilians or soft targets or hard targets, whatever one wants to

call it.

As the struggle intensified it was difficult to separate or to have a distinction of the

soft or the hard. When we talk of callousness we also knew at the back of our

minds that innocent civilians will be caught in that kind of, in the crossfire.

So I was saying therefore, they happened to be victims of circumstances at a time

when we were in fact directing our blows to the enemy security personnel.

ADV STEENKAMP: I can tell you as a matter of fact, that not a single Security

Police officer or military personnel or anybody related to any military structure

was involved in this incident or on the day of the incident. All the people that were

injured were only civilians, people working at the Wimpy, other people eating

there but no military people at all.

MR SIGASA: During also the other operations of MK in the country where clearly

the target was a military one in nature, but all reports that we received through

press of course at that time, we did not have the control of the press, even to date,

the reports that would come forth would say so much civilians have died and no

security personnel died. So we cannot deny or confirm that but our targets were

directed against the security personnel as I've said before.

ADV STEENKAMP: Before we go on Sir, from whom did you receive your

order? Did you get any specific orders from anybody to attack Wimpy Bars?

MR SIGASA: I think I must also clarify also again or repeat or reiterate what I

said. Firstly, the order given, we were dealing with the front command in

Botswana and the military headquarters in Lusaka, Zambia.

At no stage was Wimpy a target, at not stage. And as a result I also said that in

executing that action, military action, at no stage have we felt that Wimpy is a

target, it has never been a target before.

ADV STEENKAMP: So you haven't received any direct orders or implicated

orders from anybody, am I right or am I wrong?


MR SIGASA: Implicated orders to say?

ADV STEENKAMP: I mean implied orders, sorry. Did you receive any orders

from anybody? I'll tell you why I'm asking this question, because on page 25 of the

amnesty application - do you have your application in front of you Sir?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

ADV STEENKAMP: Do you see page 25?

Mr Chairman, Honourable Members, paragraph 11(b). I'll read there:

"Orders by Chris Hani at Zimbabwe 1988 which is in

line with ANC police"

Can you clarify that?

MR SIGASA: Mr Chairman, Chris Hani never said: "Go and blast Wimpy". I

would want, if I may, to recall what Chris Hani said, and in fact it was captured in

the press. After the people in South Africa in the townships were saying: "Through

these struggles only innocent African people are dying, therefore there is a need to

step up the armed struggle and extend it to the white areas", he said and I quote:

"Even those who are going to make the world sit up and

take note and for those who benefit from apartheid will

feel the brunt"

So therefore when we were targeting Benoni Police Station we realised in our

minds that Benoni was also in town and in line with that call we said we were

going to take that struggle to the white areas.

ADV STEENKAMP: You see, maybe just for your comment, it's also the view of

the victims, specifically the Wimpy bomb attack, that is attack was planned

basically against white civilians who frequented this place, not against any military

target whatsoever.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps if you are able to you must put to the witness as to why

that proposition or why those people feel that way.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, the view of the victims who visited this place

and were injured is that according to them this place was mainly visited and

frequented by white civilians and not ordinary military personnel as stated by the

applicant, Mr Chairman.

MR SIGASA: Mr Chairman, I think what I said, of course I hear what the advocate

is saying, like I said all operations carried out, like I said that in all operations


where activities, armed activities were carried out, where security personnel were

affected but you would find that the reports that come forth every time would say:

"No military personnel were in fact affected".

We also said in the application that the question, we never said they state there, but

in terms of our reconnaissance and the information gathered, that they frequented

the place.

ADV STEENKAMP: Did your information also indicate that a large majority of

the people visiting this place were actually children? If you look at the list of the

victims you will see, and if necessary we will put evidence to the Committee, that

there was a lot of information that people visiting this specific Wimpy Bar were

actually children coming from school or wherever and visiting this place. Have you

any information on that or can you deny that?

MR SIGASA: Well I wouldn't deny or accept that. The questions that the report as

it came, is that military or security personnel, not military, but security personnel

were in fact frequenting the place. That is the information came, that came forth.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you maybe explain to the Committee, what was the

ANC or the MK's policy regarding the identification of targets?

MR SIGASA: Commissioner, I would refer to my application when I, or the

submission as we, as I read it, that the overall brief we must also understand that

the front command, at that time the ANC was a banned organisation and as a result

in terms of communication it was very difficult to frequent in and out of the

country, but the brief in our origin was that we train, arm the people and so on, in

terms of the brief.

So identification of the brief has to be within these parameters as I indicated.

Parameters to say, you train the people, you attack the security personnel wherever

they are to sever the lines of communication and so forth.

So I was saying the identification of a target is influenced or informed by the guide

or the brief or the broad mandate as it were.

ADV STEENKAMP: Did you take any steps to minimise the injuring or the killing

of the civilians, did you take any steps whatsoever?

MR SIGASA: Well in terms of steps I'm not sure what that means, but of course

the question of affecting innocent civilians, in fact it was a touchy one.

We have in fact consistently throughout, in terms of the illustrations of our

operations, we have consistently refused to be drawn into a racial line also where

innocent civilians will be affected.


However there are certain circumstances where you can't avoid the affecting of

innocent civilians, but that has in fact been our mandate and our brief.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can I ask you, why was this attack planned on a Saturday

afternoon at 12 o'clock, why wasn't it planned during the day when Security Police

were actually in the building or probably in the building or next door? Operational,

why on a Saturday at 12 o'clock?

MR SIGASA: Like I said before, the question of actions, in all our actions we did

not wake in the morning and decide on an attack. Based on any information at the

disposal of one we would prepare plannings based on the information and we

would act accordingly.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, I don't know what is an appropriate time, if

you can indicate?

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman.

So you called, if I'm not mistaken, you called the Wimpy a military attack, am I

right? Is that what you said in your evidence in chief?

MR SIGASA: Wimpy as Wimpy is not or was not the military attack, not a

military target but the people who went to Wimpy were in fact unfortunately the

target, they happened to be in Wimpy.

If for instance one would make an example, was it Nandos, although Nandos is a

current thing or is a recent thing, if there were a Nandos and our information told

us or informed that they were in Nandos we would have hit them in Nandos or we

would have hit them in whatever restaurant. So it so happened to be Wimpy but

Wimpy as Wimpy was not a target.

ADV STEENKAMP: What information did you actually have on the Wimpy Bars?

Can you elaborate, exactly what did your reconnaissance say? What information

did you have on person frequenting that place?

MR SIGASA: We would all remember, at that time, during that time, the state of

emergency and so on, that many of the political activists were in fact arrested,

tortured in Benoni Police Station and some of the information that we got from

those was that the security personnel themselves, Special Branch in particular, in

terms of their movements and the place where they dine happened to be Wimpy.

So that is the kind of information, but of course in military situations or in armed

situations what you do is that you would have to verify and that is why based on

that, the question of following that information for verification purposes was in


fact conducted and hence the reconnaissance conducted and so on. That led to

Wimpy.

ADV STEENKAMP: Of the group of the four applicants, who of you exactly did

the reconnaissance? Were you involved yourself, personally?

MR SIGASA: I think I clarified that in my submission. I was involved in the

planning, the identification, the planning and so on but the execution was my

fellow applicant, Alfas Ndlovu.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you tell us ...[intervention]

MS KHAMPEPE: I'm sorry.

I thought I understood Advocate Steenkamp's question to have been: "Were you

personally involved in the reconnaissance"? Not in the actual execution.

MR SIGASA: I was not involved in the actual execution but in the planning, yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: In the reconnaissance, in reconnoitring Wimpy Bar?

MR SIGASA: We delegated the responsibility. I said it also, that my fellow

applicant Alfas Ndlovu was in fact the person that we delegated.

MS KHAMPEPE: So you were not involved in the reconnaissance?

MR SIGASA: No, I was not involved in the reconnaissance.

ADV STEENKAMP: Do I understand you correctly, Mr Ndlovu actually updated

you exactly what was happening in the Wimpy Bar, he was the guy with the

information at hand, first-hand information?

MR SIGASA: I'm not sure when one says "first-hand" information but in terms of

the reconnaissance data, yes he would report, as I indicated in terms of our modus

operandi, that we met every Wednesday to review, to take stock of the situation

and come up with new plans. And of course he would come and report in that

plannery session where decisions would be taken.

ADV STEENKAMP: Wouldn't you agree with me Sir, that probably to attack a

real military target like a police office or a military target like a military

installation, would probably have been a real military target?

MR SIGASA: Can I hear that again?

ADV STEENKAMP: Sorry, I'll repeat that for you. Would you agree with me that

to attack a police station or a military installation would probably have been a real

military target opposed to the Wimpy Bar on a Saturday?


MR SIGASA: I think I also indicated that - although the question comes in a

different form, but the question of attacking, we have been attacking, we have hit,

in the list of our attacks we have indicated we hit the barrack, we've ambushed the

security personnel, we have done that in terms of the information.

So I'm saying that forms part of the operations that we carried out, the security

personnel. And in fact in our operations we have carried out attacks on their

barracks as well.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, will you allow me, I've got a few more

questions.


ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Sir.

Can you explain to the Committee, why and how was the attack on the Wimpy Bar

beneficial to your political cause?

MR SIGASA: Our attack, firstly we indicated that we were a liberation movement,

we did not have the regular army. Part of our strategy or our tactic was to engage

in armed propaganda to prove to the people that MK is there but also to annihilate

the enemy forces was also part of our responsibility, where we believed that they

were vulnerable, where they least expected attacks. So I believe that we were in

fact hitting a target, they happened to be in Wimpy.

ADV STEENKAMP: Do you know where the arms came from, the limpet mine

and who decided to use a limpet mine? Can you elaborate on that?

MR SIGASA: Excuse me?

ADV STEENKAMP: Do you know where the limpet mine came from and who

decided to use a limpet mine?

MR SIGASA: The limpet mine was part of our arms that we cleared or collected

from the dead letter boxes, supplied of course by the unit of the ordinance which of

course we don't know but they would simply give us a sketch that in such and such

a place there such armament, quantity of armaments and that would include of

course limpet mines, AK's and so on, grenades and so on and so forth.

ADV STEENKAMP: Do you know if the ANC officially acknowledged this act as

part and parcel of their political struggle? Do you if they acknowledged this attack

as part and parcel of their political struggle, the attack on the Wimpy Bar?

MR SIGASA: I remember at that time when we met the leadership, they indicated

that there was an outcry, not only about our unit but the manner or the trend that


was beginning to assume in terms of targets and so on. Oliver Tambo said,

interviewed, I remember it was in January '86 when he was asked about the soft

targets, he said there is no policy of hitting civilians in the ANC policy.

However, he indicated in the context of struggle, that certain innocent people

would be caught in the cross-fire. There is no policy in the ANC in regard to the

question of hitting of whites.


NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV STEENKAMP


COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi, have you got any re-examination?

MR KOOPEDI: No re-examination thank you.

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Sigasa, I'm just going to put a few questions on issues of

clarity. You have given us an elaborate detail of the reconnaissance which was

conducted on the Wimpy Bar. Can you just explain to us further on who

constituted the reconnaissance group?

MR SIGASA: The reconnaissance was conducted by Alfas Ndlovu, it was after - I

think I must also clarify, I also said in my submission that for us to get to know

about the intended target, there were a number activists in Daveyton,

Tematsakan(?) and so on who were detained in Benoni Police Station. That's how

we got to know about that.

Further, what one forgets as well was that the police used to, Special Branch, used

to meet, particularly senior people, to review ...[indistinct] reports on Saturdays as

well, so that formed part of the data that came to us.

MS KHAMPEPE: No, but my question was quite simple, who constituted the

reconnaissance group that conducted the various reconnaissance on the Wimpy

Bar, the names of people who formed part of that group?

MR SIGASA: There were no groups except my fellow applicant who was assigned

the responsibility.


MS KHAMPEPE: So you are saying only Mr Ndlovu conducted the

reconnaissance?

MR SIGASA: That's it.

MS KHAMPEPE: On the information received from ex-detainees of the various

prisons?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: For how long was this reconnaissance conducted? Are you able

to shed any light on that?

MR SIGASA: Well I can't strike a total recall in regard to the duration of the

reconnaissance conducted but I know for a fact that we used to conduct for a

period of some time, depending on the nature of the target and so on.

We would take some time basically, and also for verification purposes as to

whatever the information that is at our disposal is in fact the correct one. But in

regard to the period and so on I can't strike a total recall.

MS KHAMPEPE: How many reports did you yourself as the overall commander

receive from Mr Ndlovu, with regard to his reconnaissance on the selected target?

Was it only one report?

MR SIGASA: No, no, various reports. I think - I would say various reports.

MS KHAMPEPE: You were part of the group that approved Wimpy Bar as the

selected target, is that not so?

MR SIGASA: Yes, as the head of Johannes Nkosi Unit.

CHAIRPERSON: No, that's not what is being asked. Were you in a meeting or a

gathering where the decision was made that in Benoni a particular target, because

it is frequented by members of the Security Police, that a bomb would be planted

in the Wimpy Bar?

MR SIGASA: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You were in a meeting?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: Was this decision decided after you had received the various

reports on the reconnaissance which had been conducted or was the decision to

target Wimpy as a target, to target Wimpy, decided before the reconnaissance was

conducted?


MR SIGASA: No, no, no. In fact Wimpy is not an exception, all our targets we

would identify, reconnoitre, collect data, verify and it's a period of time before you

reached the decision. For an instance you did not go or decide to go to Wimpy Bar

without planning, or any other target, without planning the route of entrance, the

route of retreat, the surrounding area, the enemy, the hostile forces around the area

and so on. You take that all in account and weight it before you decide to

...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: But the question is, the decision to target Wimpy in Benoni, the

one that was ultimately blasted, was that decision in which you were in a meeting

to decide that, was that decision taken before or after reconnaissance had taken

place?

MR SIGASA: It was after the reconnaissance had taken place. Clarity for that,

Wimpy was not - in fact it came to picture some time after we had identified the

actual target and then it led us to Wimpy. So Wimpy was an aftermath basically.

MS KHAMPEPE: Wimpy was an aftermath after you had been informed that

members of the Security Branch were visiting that place?

MR SIGASA: Absolutely.

MS KHAMPEPE: And are you able to tell us how many times these members

were identified as having visited that particular Wimpy Bar?

MR SIGASA: The report - well firstly, the security personnel works every day,

seven days a week, and particularly Saturdays. Head of departments on the

Security Branch would in fact meet and give reports, so we knew that they were

meeting frequently, almost every week.

After that of course they would then go to whatever place that they would go to,

but in particular in this case we are talking about the place in question, Wimpy,

they then happened to go to.

To add probably is that some of the detainees themselves, they used to order, if my

memory serves me well, they used to order for detainees from Wimpy, if my

memory serves me well. But you would understand as I'm saying if my memory

serves me well, because this thing happened more or less 9/10 years ago but I'm

trying to strike a total recall and so that I would have a total picture.

MS KHAMPEPE: In the reports that you must have received from Mr Ndlovu,

were you able to be informed of how many black people visited Wimpy?

MR SIGASA: I can't remember, but yes, there was an information to the effect that

blacks are in fact you know, some you know, eating in Wimpy but I can't clearly


remember but yes, I think I do recall a bit where an information came to say they

have seen blacks in Wimpy.

MS KHAMPEPE: As an overall commander, was it not something that was of

particular importance to you, to ascertain if the relevant people that you were

targeting would actually be the main targets of the attack and that innocent would

not actually form part of this attack?

MR SIGASA: Well there are two statements that one has to probably try his

utmost to address. One, we were and are not a racist organisation, if fact we

championed the course of non-racialism over the years despite the fact that there

have been numerous cases where there have been only blacks were dying. To that

effect if you look at the Botswana raid, Botswana nationalists died innocent and so

on, Lesotho, Zimbabwe and so on. So in many cases in a state of war

...[intervention]

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Sigasa, I'm going to interrupt you, I'm sorry to be doing this.

MR SIGASA: Okay.

MS KHAMPEPE: I just want you to stick to responding to the question that I pose

to you.

MR SIGASA: Okay.

MS KHAMPEPE: All that I want to know is whether you did as the overall

commander, take any precautions to ensure that the targets were the ones who

would suffer mostly in this attack and that innocent people would not be the ones

to suffer mostly in this attack?

MR SIGASA: Well, I - may I be allowed to say that in terms of planning and

executing any military or armed action, you look at the degree of the impact or

effect that you would deliver, and it was clear in terms of the report that we would

deliver a devastating, to a devastating degree in terms of our action. So it is on that

basis that we took the decision.

MS KHAMPEPE: So you didn't take any precautions to ensure that innocent

people who were not the subject of the attack should not be harmed?

MR SIGASA: I think that question should be put to the enemy personnel who

deliberately ...[indistinct] with innocent in return blame the liberating fighters for

the victims or the injuries incurred.

I would say in this case we viewed that and we regret where innocent lives, life for

that matter because it's very valuable and previous, where innocents were caught in


that kind of action, so we dearly regret. However, we do not regret of delivering or

carrying out armed actions that would annihilate the enemy personnel.

MS KHAMPEPE: You were a member of the MK from 1985, is that not so?

MR SIGASA: Yes, I joined the ANC inside the country in 1984. I went to

Botswana late '85 for the actual joining of Umkhonto.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes. And you are aware that apart from this particular incident

there were also other Wimpy Bar incidents in the country which were conducted

by unknown forces?

MR SIGASA: Well, I'm not aware of that except the report that I read on the

newspaper that there was one Wimpy, if I'm not mistaken in then Eastern Cape or

something.

CHAIRPERSON: Which one occurred first, the one in the Eastern Cape or the one

here in Benoni?

MR SIGASA: I don't know, it's only something that we took into account now

recently after the unbannings and so on.

CHAIRPERSON: You didn't know at that time that there was a spate of attacks at

Wimpy outlets?

MR SIGASA: No, no, no.

CHAIRPERSON: Not at all?

MR SIGASA: No, no.

CHAIRPERSON: So you can't even say whether the one in Benoni was the first or

the last or whatever?

MR SIGASA: No, I can't but I believe in fact we were not - I would imagine in

terms of the, I think Benoni came first. Whether that one came after and so on I

can't strike a total recall.

MS KHAMPEPE: ...[inaudible]

CHAIRPERSON: What is your answer?

MR SIGASA: No, it didn't.

MS KHAMPEPE: You are saying, to your knowledge you are not aware whether

there had been any Wimpy attacks before you launched your attack on this

particular Wimpy Bar?



MS KHAMPEPE: Did you report the outcome of this operation to the Botswana

Front Command?

MR SIGASA: Botswana Front Command was a - in fact we reported to the MHQ,

Military Headquarters. But the question, in fact we relied largely on press on radio

and TV at that time. So it was on the basis of what we read that we would know as

to the degree of the effect and so on about the operations and so on.

MS KHAMPEPE: No, I'm just asking whether you did report this particular

situation to the front command?

MR SIGASA: Yes, to the military headquarters.

MS KHAMPEPE: Would that be different from the front command that you've

referred to in your evidence?

MR SIGASA: Yes, that would - there's a distinction or there is a difference

between the front command and the military headquarters. Like in our case,

Johannes Nkosi Unit, we interfaced with Botswana Front Command as a service

centre so to speak. We would go to get some resources, information, update and so

on. But in terms of orders, activities and so on, we would deal with the military

headquarters in Zambia.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And when you reported the outcome of this particular

operation, did any personnel in the Military HQ say anything about the other

operations that had been conducted on other Wimpy outlets in the country?

MR SIGASA: No, at that time no, at that time no.

MS KHAMPEPE: And you are positive that you were not aware at all of the other

attacks on Wimpy outlets throughout the country?

MR SIGASA: Not at all. Like I said, it was only recently when one in fact read

about that and I tried to verify and so forth and seemingly not even our people or

MK members and so on were involved, but it was a recent thing. But at that time,

no, absolutely not.

MS KHAMPEPE: After the operation was conducted were you able to ascertain

whether any person from the Security Branch had been affected by this operation?

MR SIGASA: It becomes very difficult. At that time -I think I also indicated in the

submission that what we relied on, we were a liberation movement, we did not

have the resources, the machinery and so on to be able to gather that kind of


information. We would rely on the public, the mass media and so on. But we

didn't. As a result we cannot deny or accept whether ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: How would you measure your successes then?

MR SIGASA: Measuring successes, we measured successes through, as I said we

relied on media but there would be a time when one would have to verify and so

forth but largely that's how we do. For an action taken or executed, that in itself

counts.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja. Given that, would you not have seen reports of heard reports

over the media about other blasts at other outlets of Wimpy?

MR SIGASA: Judge, we are talking about a situation of about almost 10 years ago.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR SIGASA: Yes. I do not recall personally the other except in the recent past.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Sigasa, you must have, immediately after this operation had

been conducted, seen either on TV or in the printed media that the severity of

casualties suffered in this incident were those of civilians? And you have stated

that the policy of the ANC was to attack the military or the security forces. Indeed

that was the report you received from Mr Ndlovu, that this outlet was frequented

by the members of the Security Branch. What do you think you have achieved,

taking into account the fact that you are unable to identity a single member of the

security force, who fell casualty to this operation?

MR SIGASA: It's a bit difficult one as I was saying before. It is true firstly, that we

were interested in papers and reports and so on about what happened on the day in

question, the 30th of July, which by the way was the anniversary of the South

African Communist Party, we were interested indeed.

However, the question of the security personnel, it has in fact been - I think we all

know as South Africans, we are not coming from outside, that always where

enemy has been attacked they would always sensor or they would always conceal

or hide that kind of fact, such that they would always portray the ANC as a terrorist

organisation. No organisation for that matter has championed the course of

freedom, democracy and nation building like the African National Congress.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you Mr Sigasa, there are no further questions from me.

ADV MOTATA: Thank you Chair.


Mr Sigasa, this Wimpy Bar, how far was it from the initial target, when you

switched from going to the initial target when you were told that they frequent the

Wimpy Bar?

MR SIGASA: I can only be able to say it's more than 200 metres away but several

metres away, but in terms of the actual distance, in terms of figures I'm unable to

say that but it is within the proximity as I'm saying because the Benoni Station is

here, railway station and also the police station is here and Wimpy down in town.

ADV MOTATA: No, I just wanted an approximate distance. I know that is

difficult because you wouldn't have measured. That suffices.

What I want to know, did the information received about the reconnaissance that

this Wimpy Bar is placed in a shopping complex?

MR SIGASA: Indeed, indeed, the report says as you are saying Chairperson,

except the only thing also that we want to add is that the enemy personnel was not

moving in isolation or its own country in its own boundaries, it was in fact actively

interacting with ordinary people and so on. So yes, we know that, it came to our

attention.

ADV MOTATA: The bombing device obtained from the dead letter box, did you

know its power in relation to the target selected?

MR SIGASA: The impact I do not remember whether we used a mini limpet or a

limpet mine, a super limpet mine. I think we used a limpet mine, not a mini one,

not a small one but a super limpet mine. That is what we used.

ADV MOTATA: And wouldn't you say that for instance is too powerful to be used

in a complex where even civilians would be caught in that blast?

MR SIGASA: Well it depends on the nature of the target, target intended, to select

the weaponry and the devices themselves. We saw it fit to use that kind of an

explosive at the time.

ADV MOTATA: Let's just return to what my sister was asking you about

constantly, that is the reconnaissance of Wimpy and the security personnel who

frequented Wimpy, according to the information or reports received from Ndlovu.

Firstly you said you were meeting on Wednesdays, do you recall that?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

ADV MOTATA: Now we know it's a long time ago, 10 years to date, could you

give us an approximation, every Wednesday is fine but an approximation of the

time taken? Obviously it couldn't have been years, but if we could probably have

an idea about months that you took.


MR SIGASA: There was no specific time limit basically in regard to our meetings.

Depending firstly on the place, Sarati(?) does not draw the unnecessary attention,

or secondly, the agenda item that is to be discussed, so sometime we would take or

sometimes we would even adjourn and meet the following week or sometimes it

would take probably three hours or so, so there was no exact time spent.

ADV MOTATA: For instance let's say you had the initial target, being the Security

Police and their station and you had to change because you realised there is a much

more way of achieving your objective by saying: "Now we have recognised that

the frequent Wimpy". In relation to that, when was this somersault of the actual

target to the Wimpy Bar?

MR SIGASA: Well I wouldn't call it somersault. I remember on that, because our

plan was to celebrate or commemorate the anniversary, we planned something like

more than five operations and in those operations we were discussing about those,

and of course we might decide on one but depending on any information that

comes up during the course of discussion, we would always move to and from and

so on. But I wouldn't say that we spent so much time on this particular matter.

ADV MOTATA: Let's make it easier, in the sense that you received information

from your fellow comrade, Ndlovu, that the Security Police frequent he Wimpy

Bar, did you have information of how many members of the Security Branch go to

Wimpy?

MR SIGASA: Well we didn't have the number but we know that there were many.

It stems from the fact that they were meeting, as I said before, that they were

meeting every Saturday to give in reports and so on and they would also then go

after their reports or meetings and so on, they would then go for lunch or dining.

So it is based on that, but the exact number I am unable to you know, say.

ADV MOTATA: Did you have after submission of the reports, when they would

go to Wimpy?

MR SIGASA: Well the information, depending of course on how long they take,

but they would come in in the morning and so on and before lunch, lunch I would

imagine that what I'm talking about I'm referring to 1 o'clock, before lunch they

would in fact go out. Sometimes they would knock earlier than that, sometimes

they would come in at around about 11, 12, 1 and so on.

ADV MOTATA: So in relation to the number of the security people after

submitting their reports and going to Wimpy, did you take into consideration the

volume of people, whether the number of the Security Police would outnumber the

civilians who would visit Wimpy?


MR SIGASA: Firstly it's important to draw the attention to the fact that in the

second world war, the people who suffered, the majority of the people who

suffered was not nazism or nazists but ordinary civilians, true.

I'm saying therefore, in terms of that in our view, a loss of one life of a security

personnel is too great to send a demoralising message on the part of the security

personnel.

ADV MOTATA: Your submission was to the effect that some of the attacks was to

strengthen the propaganda that would make people aware of the existence of the

MK's, the ANC people within the country by attacking military forces, did I hear

you correctly there?

MR SIGASA: The legitimate targets, yes. The nature of the ANC as I was saying,

liberation movement with limited means and resources, South Africa was

experiencing an armed propaganda period at that time. I would term it personally

an armed propaganda period because it was not a full scale war where fronts or

armies would meet and so on in a battlefront. You are talking about a guerrilla

tactic, an urban guerrilla tactic to hit visibly so that that operation is intended also

as well to mobilise and conscientise masses of the people about their presence.

ADV MOTATA: I'm asking you this because I just need explanations. You said

civilians were not your target, hence my question that by looking at Wimpy, taking

into account that in things as you have explained of this nature, civilians would be

touched in the process, but it would have been of paramount importance for

instance in your unit that you weigh up if you go to Wimpy, who are the most,

because in fairness to you before you give your explanation, we all know that this

was a Saturday and this particular Wimpy was placed in a shopping complex. Now

in terms of civilians vis-à-vis the security forces, we wanted to make our

propaganda most felt with the security people. Would I be right in that context?

MR SIGASA: No, not at all. I think all of us at that time I would imagine, we were

in the country. At that time when in Mamelodi a six year/eight year old run down

with a Hippo, then in return the reports would be that no, he was stoning the, she

will be run down to death by a Hippo armed vehicle, then the reports would be no,

she was stoning the armed vehicle. You talk of situation where people in schools,

children in schools would in fact be sjamboked, teargassed and be shot with live

ammunition. We are talking at that situation at that time when the mood of the

people was very high.

ADV MOTATA: That I do understand, that what you are answering is that people,

and in this instance blacks, would be attacked at random and reasons would be

found by the Security Police, that I understand completely, that such information

would not. But I'm saying in relation to say civilians were not uppermost in your

minds, you wanted to avoid by all means attacking civilians because the ANC

preaches non-racialism. And I want to say - my question is, this is a Saturday, this


is a shopping complex, you have answered that the security people after delivering

their reports or deliberating on their reports, would then go for lunch there.

My question is, did you in the reconnaissance get data for instance, that: "Look,

despite the civilians going there we can't avoid that, but the majority would be the

security forces", that's the crux of my question.

MR SIGASA: I think that is what I said. Because I think it's important also to note

that we had the capacity at that time as a regional command structure. If we were

targeting civilians we had all the capacity, the armoury at our disposal to effect that

kind of terror, we didn't. With all, whatever push that the enemy forces were in fact

exercising, we didn't. But in this case we are saying in our submission that the

issue of Wimpy came as a result of the frequency of some of the people of the

Security Branch of the Benoni. It's as a resulted of that, well the least expected our

attack. That's how we carried out the operation. It's true that we took into account

the issue of civilians, yes we did.

MS KHAMPEPE: If I may ask ...[intervention]

MR SIGASA: I must also add that I also said in this statement, I'm repeating it,

that were life is lost whether black or white, it's a shame and we regret that greatly.

MS KHAMPEPE: If I may interpose Mr Motata.

What you are saying and you have already said is that you actually recognised that

the civilian casualty was something which was inevitable?


ADV MOTATA: And to give a short answer, you did not have data of the question

I asked, you were just interested that civilian ...[intervention]

MR SIGASA: We had, I think I answered that we had data. We had data that

restaurant, as a restaurant is in fact attended by people of both colour. We had that

information, but the target of interest was of upper most importance to us,

particularly the blow that we were to unleash, that was important.

Though we took into account the presence of innocent lives or innocent civilians.

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

Mr Sigasa.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR KOOPEDI

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sigasa, you know we understand that many atrocities were

committed in this country of ours. Some of them, until today, cannot be excused.


But we are not here today to discuss that, we are here to discuss your application. I

can understand the anger of the people. But tell me, you say that the super limpet

was used at the Wimpy Bar as you recall?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: If there was no Wimpy there, what would be the operation then?

MR SIGASA: I think Judge, one question since we started, came in many forms. In

my submission, explanation or deliberation before, I said that it so happened,

unfortunately happened, to be Wimpy. But if they were going to be it another

restaurant or cafe or wherever, where we would define them as vulnerable to our

advantage, we would have used that opportunity.

CHAIRPERSON: I can understand that.

MR SIGASA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Purely as a military strategy, but let's assume that you did not

have, or your Unit did not have this information, or that these members of the

Security Forces did not frequent a restaurant, and therefore the option of planting a

bomb at a restaurant was not an option, how would you attack these personnel?

MR SIGASA: That was going in fact to be informed by reconnaissance activities

and so on. I am saying that because the actual objective at that time, because we

wanted to show or demonstrate to political activists who were detained and

tortured in Benoni Police station, we would have found another way.

CHAIRPERSON: As I understand your evidence, there was another way which

was changed then to the Wimpy. What was that other way?

MR SIGASA: The first thing we identified Benoni Police station, and initially if I

recall well, was that we would use ourselves when we go in as people who would

be visiting detainees and so on, with a pretext of visiting detainees and so on. But

we understand as well that the vigilance, because that is the enemy terrain, the

vigilance of that, but that was, but as a result we were saying particularly the

people who were inflicting terror in particular to our activists, should in fact be the

first targets.

So our concentration and focus was on them, hence that led to the Wimpy issue.

CHAIRPERSON: I can understand that the opportunity presented itself at the

Wimpy. My question is if the personnel was the target, why wasn't the bomb

planted at the Police station then? It is as simple as that?


MR SIGASA: I think we indicated there were opportunities, the possible ways

where we can in fact hit. In terms of the situation as it stood then, we decided upon

the question of hitting where they were going to frequent. We changed from

planting, wanting to plant or make it a target, the Police station, because if you are

to plant it outside, the degree of impact as well was going to be very minimal.

CHAIRPERSON: You see when one, I need you to clarify this, by planting this

bomb, there was a point to be made that the military and the Security Forces were

the targets and they were the targets because the propped up the Apartheid regime

as I understand it, is that so?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Given that on the one hand, and on the other is the risk of

civilian life, why choose the latter?

MR SIGASA: It is important also to say that to register the presence in the minds

of people away from them, it becomes easier. It becomes easier for the enemy to

conceal, however, it becomes important for the registration of the presence of

Units of Umkhonto to be known to people.

It is in that context of struggling to popularise our presence and also send the

message home that people would see that there is war in the country going on.

CHAIRPERSON: But you would have attained that either way not so?

MR SIGASA: We didn't in Katlehong where there were hit in particular in an

isolated area. The enemy concealed and it spoke about some terrorists who have

shot and the report was very flimsy basically in regard to that. They always found a

way of explaining the failure on the part of the ANC or its military wing,

Umkhonto weSizwe.

MS KHAMPEPE: What you are basically saying Mr Sigasa ...[intervention]

MR KOOPEDI: May I interrupt you Honourable Committee Members, I have an

indication from the applicant that he wishes to use the loo.

MS KHAMPEPE: With pleasure.

CHAIRPERSON: There is only one more question.

MS KHAMPEPE: Will you take a question which in a way is - will you be able to

take that or do you want us to adjourn immediately?

MR SIGASA: Oh no, we can.


MS KHAMPEPE: Okay. What you are basically saying is that you selected

Wimpy as a target, simply because it would facilitate your objectives of making

your presence felt by the regime because it was seemed to be a sitting duck, it was

vulnerable as opposed to the Police station. Is that what you are saying?

MR SIGASA: That is what I am saying, that it served two purposes. One, hitting

the Security personnel, but also publicising the ...(intervention)

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes, and you would be able to attain both objectives because

Wimpy Bar which was frequented by the Security Forces was also a vulnerable

entity as opposed to a Police station?

MR SIGASA: Yes, they were vulnerable in that.


COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

ERNEST PHUMUZI SIGASA: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Sigasa. He is excused.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, sorry Mr Chairman, I would like the

Committee's indulgence, I have a few questions for the applicant, purely because I

received new information this incident, which I think is highly relevant that must

be put before the Committee. If you would bear with me Mr Chairman, I would

like to ask a few questions, and maybe make a few comments.

Some of, well, we are in the process of verifying the information, but I think the

information is highly relevant to this hearing. If you would allow me Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Why has it only come available now?

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, the information was not available to us when

this matter was investigated. After speaking to more of the victims appearing here,

and attending the hearing, it came out that actually as far as the victims are

concerned, that certain information must be put to the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Put it as propositions then.

MS KHAMPEPE: Before you proceed Mr Steenkamp, may we ascertain that we

have now been able to take proper and full instructions from the victims?

ADV STEENKAMP: Yes, thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, to start off, I

would like to read from a newspaper clipping and then just a comment of the


applicant, if needs be further information will be at hand, and if needs be, people

will be called to testify to this.

According to a newspaper article Mr Chairman, I might add this is an article that is

written apparently as article on a statement that was made by the ANC earlier this

year about this specific incident and with your indulgence Mr Chairman, I am just

going to read a specific paragraph. It is dated Friday, 6th of February 1998, and it

deals with this specific incident, the Wimpy bomb blast in 1988 and just for the

comment of the applicant, I am going to read the specific paragraph.

This document will be made available to you Mr Chairman and copies to ...

ADV MOTATA: Mr Steenkamp, for the record, from which newspaper is that

article?

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, sorry, it is from the Benoni City Times, dated

Friday, 6 February 1998. I am going to read paragraph 3 Mr Chairman.

The ANC statement said the Wimpy Bar operations were carried out by Umkhonto

weSizwe members, but due to confusion within the organisation, the attacks were

not in line with party policy.

It explained that the operations were launched after the ANC decided to take the

armed struggle into white areas, but that the party had not intended this to include

purely civilian targets. Mr Chairman, with your permission I will hand this

document in, preliminary as Exhibit A. If you would allow me Mr Chairman. I will

make copies available for everyone.

CHAIRPERSON: (Microphone not on)

ADV STEENKAMP: Sorry, Mr Chairman, I beg your pardon, it must be Exhibit

B.

MR KOOPEDI: Mr Chairman, if you would allow me to come in here, I have not

had my learned friend give us the author of that statement and who in the ANC

may have made those utterances and we would appreciate getting that for him to be

able to respond properly.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, we are in the process of tying to obtain the

original statement from the ANC office.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi, does it matter who the author was? He has been

asked if he can make a comment about what was written there, if he can't he can't.

If he can, he can.


MR KOOPEDI: I will say with respect, that I got an indication from him that he

does not seem to be able to understand what that is about, but he wanted to know

he we know who the author is, so that he could make an appropriate comment.

Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Listen carefully then. Here is a report in the Benoni City Times,

dated the 6th of February 1998. The relevant paragraph which Mr Steenkamp

wants you to listen to and perhaps comment on, I am going to repeat.

The ANC statement said the Wimpy Bar operations were carried out by Umkhonto

weSizwe members, but due to confusion within the organisation, the attacks were

not in line with party policy.

Are you able to comment on that or not?

MR SIGASA: I am able to comment. First and foremost, I indicated or I said in my

submission or our submission, that it has never been a policy of the African

National Congress and Umkhonto weSizwe, to target civilians.

We did not target Wimpy as Wimpy for the sake of the lives of whites, we didn't. I

think conveniently here we did not see the point, or hear the point that we were

putting forth.

In fact the people who were meeting in Wimpy Bar were not just ordinary

Policemen. Benoni Police station, the Special Branch Headquarters of the Special

Branch in the East Rand. In fact in terms of the reports that we received, they

would meet as the top brass even other counterparts from other Police stations as

well.

So, the attack on Wimpy we must emphasise, was not an attack on Wimpy because

it is a restaurant to the vulnerable civilians. It wasn't. It happened to be hit because

of the nature of the target.

As we said, it is not just ordinary Police, that is why I said to us that one life was

critically important, because it had a demoralising effect on the part of the Security

personnel.

CHAIRPERSON: So what you are saying, what is contained in the newspaper

report, you agree with?

MR SIGASA: No, I don't.

CHAIRPERSON: You don't agree with it?


MR SIGASA: No. And in fact to make one further comment, the ANC does not

always you know, communicate with the media, its people through the media

primarily because there is latitude.

A reporter can report the manner in which he understands and give his own or her

interpretation.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Sigasa, are you saying in short, you have given us a very

lengthy answer to what is being put to you. You are saying in short that the Wimpy

attack was in line with the ANC policy? That seems to be the crux of the problem?

MR SIGASA: Because of the target of interest, yes, it is.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you. You may proceed Mr Steenkamp.

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. You see my information is and if

needs be, a sworn statement to the effect will be handed in to the Committee, that

just across the Wimpy Bar, there was what at that stage was known as a Police

kiosk, it was a small shop that was hired by the Police as a kiosk, just across the

Wimpy Bar.

Now, my question to you is first of all, do you agree with me, and secondly, why

didn't you attack the kiosk and not the Wimpy Bar?

CHAIRPERSON: Did you know there was a kiosk?

MR SIGASA: No, we didn't.

ADV STEENKAMP: But sir, then I don't understand your evidence in chief, you

said on numerous occasions and on questions, at least two questions of the

Chairperson himself, that your information was verified.

MR SIGASA: Yes.

ADV STEENKAMP: You had numerous meetings?

MR SIGASA: Yes.

ADV STEENKAMP: So, if your information was verified, how does it come, or

how is it possible that you didn't know about this kiosk at all?

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Steenkamp, before you answer, isn't that an unfair question

to put to Mr Sigasa? His evidence in chief has been that the information that was

verified was the information that was received from Mr Ndlovu through his

reconnaissance and that information did not purport to say anything about the

presence of the kiosk?


ADV STEENKAMP: Right, I will leave the question there Mr Chairman.

I also has come to my information, my information is and it is not verified as of

yet, we are in the process, but the Police station was not very close to the Wimpy

Bar, as you said, plus minus 200 metres. It was more or less a kilometre from the

Wimpy Bar? Would you agree with that?

MR SIGASA: I said I think the Advocate is twisting my words, I am not sure

whether deliberately or not, what I said was that it was more than 200 kilometres,

and in fact several metres away. That is what I said.

So to say 200 metres, I say it is more than that - than several metres away.

ADV STEENKAMP: At the day of the incident, you had planned this incident, you

have made reconnaissance, you had numerous meetings, so I take it at the day of

this incident, at twelve o'clock, you had verified information that there were going

to be Security Police at the Wimpy Bar, am I right?

MR SIGASA: Absolutely. Not also to add, not ordinary Policemen. I think that

should be clear. As we said, that we termed it the notorious Special Branch. The

Headquarters of the Special Branch, Springs, Boksburg and so on, in fact it is its

Headquarters, the Special Branch.

As a result of that, the impact or the degree of the action and its impact or the

results, they were important for us to identify that target and hit them where they

were vulnerable. For your own information, the information that you received, not

only were they meeting, that top brass that we were referring to, even the informers

were met in that Wimpy Bar.

Burgers were bought for detainees in that Wimpy Bar.

ADV STEENKAMP: Sorry sir, my question was purely this, so you had

information that at twelve o'clock that Saturday morning, specific Security Branch

Police would visit that Wimpy Bar?

MR SIGASA: No.

ADV STEENKAMP: Because that is how I understood your evidence?

MR SIGASA: No, I didn't.

CHAIRPERSON: Then you misunderstood his evidence.

ADV STEENKAMP: I am sorry Mr Chairman. Maybe I must rephrase the

question. Why did you specifically decide to attack the Wimpy Bar at that specific

Saturday at twelve o'clock, why specifically that day and that time?


MR SIGASA: Well firstly, firstly the Security personnel as we indicated, they

work seven days a week, every day, and on Saturdays they meet to hand in reports

and so on and so forth, their daily duties and so forth, and after that of course, they

would go for the dining and so on, for lunches and so on. We had that information.

As to who and how many, we didn't know that, but we knew that there were

Policemen, particularly the senior people, meeting in that. Secondly, on that day,

we also indicated in our main submission that it was in fact a commemoration of

the anniversary of the South African Communist Party on the 30th of July.

ADV STEENKAMP: My information is also that the Benoni Wimpy Bar was

actually the last Wimpy Bar to be attacked in this type of fashion? This specific

Wimpy Bar attack was the last Wimpy Bar attacked, that was attacked in the spade

of Wimpy Bar attacks?

MR SIGASA: I don't know about that. That is news to me and I believe also it is

news also to the fellow applicants. That is news.

MS KHAMPEPE: You can only speak for yourself Mr Sigasa.

MR SIGASA: Oh yes, I am speaking for myself, that is news.

ADV STEENKAMP: Am I right in saying that you were well aware that there is a

real possibility that a large number of people would have been killed in that

Wimpy Bar, would be black people because I can tell you as a matter of fact, that

more than 20 people, more than 20 people in that Wimpy Bar were black people

who were injured?

The majority of them were workers, who were working in the Wimpy Bar, so you

knew very well beforehand that they were going to be injured or even killed?

CHAIRPERSON: What is the relevance of that question Mr Steenkamp?

ADV STEENKAMP: The fact is Mr Chairman, if you look at some of the other

applications, they are referring to a white only attack. My question to this applicant

mainly is this, they were aware that other civilians, normal civilians would also be

killed?

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Steenkamp, hasn't this point been sufficiently covered?

ADV STEENKAMP: I will leave the question there, thank you Mr Chairman.

MS KHAMPEPE: Because I think if I recall, it has been covered by yourself

previously and also by the members of the panel.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, thank you for the indulgence.


CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

WITNESS EXCUSED


AMNESTY HEARING


NAME: TEBOGO CHRISTOPHER KEBOTLHALE


DAY: 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------MR KOOPEDI: Mr

Chairman, our next applicant will be Mr Tebogo Kebotlhale. May we call him

through.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR KOOPEDI: Thank you.

ADV STEENKAMP: Page 5 - 11, Mr Chairman.

MR KOOPEDI: May I say Mr Chairman, for the benefit of our Interpreters, that all

the applicants intend using the English language.

TEBOGO CHRISTOPHER KEBOTLHALE: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: Thank you Mr Chairman. You are one of

the applicants in this matter, is that correct?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That is so.

MR KOOPEDI: Perhaps before you tell this Honourable Committee about your

involvement in the Johannes Nkosi Unit, would you briefly tell them who you are,

where you were born, when did you join the ANC?

MR KEBOTLHALE: My name is Tebogo Kebotlhale. I was born on the 14th of

November 1967 in Hohodi in Vryburg. I am 30 years of age. I joined Umkhonto

weSizwe underground unit in Hohodi in 1983 and I underwent internal training,

internal military training.

I left for exile in February 1985 and underwent military training in Angola, Cuba

and the former USSR. I was trained in the use of various weapons and underwent

specialised training on military engineering and urban suburban guerrilla warfare.

I had been a Section Commander, the Platoon Commander and Company

Commander and Sub-Regional Commissar in the East Rand in my career in

Umkhonto weSizwe.

I was infiltrated in the country in 1987, I operated in Bloemfontein area and later

redeployed to the East Rand. I trained and armed various internal MK recruits in

the East Rand and elsewhere.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi, have you got a copy of that statement?

MR KOOPEDI: The biographical details that he has just given to you, we are

trying to get a copy done. We will most probably be able to hand it over in a short

while, however, I wish to point out that it will only be the biographical details,

there is no statement prepared by him for the process.


The only statement is the one that I believe has been handed in. The one done by

the previous applicant. Have you done?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I am through. I agree with all that my Commander has

presented before the Commission and everybody.

MR KOOPEDI: For the purposes of your application in the matters before this

Committee, would you confirm that other than being a member of the Johannes

Nkosi Unit, were you involved in any manner whatsoever in the Wimpy matter and

if so, how were you involved?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I was only involved in the Wimpy matter in so far as the

planning was concerned.

MR KOOPEDI: Would it be correct to say that at all times when the planning was

done and whatever decisions were taken, you were present?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I was present, yes.

MR KOOPEDI: And you also take full responsibility for whatever came out of that

decision?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I do.

MR KOOPEDI: Now, would you also confirm that in as far as it relates to the

attack on the "Kitskonstabels" in Lindelani Section in Katlehong, what was your

involvement there?

MR KEBOTLHALE: My involvement also included the planning part of it, the

distribution of ammunition and the support provided to members of my fellow

Unit.

MR KOOPEDI: And you would therefore confirm that in fact you are responsible

for whatever consequences that came after making the decision during the planning

sessions?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

MR KOOPEDI: That is all from this witness for now.


CHAIRPERSON: So you are only making application in respect of two incidents,

the attack, the blast at the Wimpy in Benoni and the attack in Katlehong on the

"Kitskonstabels"?


MR KOOPEDI: May I interrupt you with respect Mr Chairman, that in fact, he like

all the other applicants, are making - have made applications for various offences,

however, from communicating with my learned friend on the other side, it appears

that with other matters, this can be dealt with as Chamber matters, because perhaps

people may not have been injured, however there is a list of the offences for which

they apply for and this appears on the statement that I believe is before you, the

one that was presented by the first applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi, all I am asking is for what he is making an

application today so that when we give the judgement, either we grant or refuse an

application in respect of specific incidents.

That is all I am asking. Am I correct then that we have to consider an application in

respect of the blast at Wimpy Bar at Benoni and the Katlehong attack on the

"Kitskonstabels"?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Honourable Judge, if I may refer you to page 10 of our main

submission.

MR KOOPEDI: He is actually referring to the submission by the previous

applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Exhibit A?

MR KOOPEDI: Yes, Exhibit A.

MR KEBOTLHALE: On page 10, there we have enumerated the list of operations

that we carried as the Johannes Nkosi Unit and we have also made specific

reference, specific mention of who carried what operation.

MS KHAMPEPE: But what are you applying for amnesty, in respect of which

incident are you seeking amnesty?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I am applying for amnesty for the bombing of the whites

only bus terminus in Germiston.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes, as appearing on page 12 of our application documents.

MR KEBOTLHALE: I am also making application for the bombing of the

"Kitskonstabels" barracks in Mnisi Section.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes. Is that all that you are seeking amnesty for?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.


MS KHAMPEPE: What about the fact that you have just stated that you were

involved in the Wimpy matter in so far as its planning was concerned. Are you not

seeking amnesty for that?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That would include, that would include the two operations

that were discussed extensively earlier on. The Wimpy one and the ambush on the

"Kitskonstabels".

MS KHAMPEPE: We have to be very clear Mr Kebotlhale, in respect of which

incident you are seeking amnesty. You have just stated now when you were being

questioned, that you are seeking amnesty in respect of the bombing of the

Katlehong Police barracks and also in respect of the bombing of the Germiston

whites only terminus?

MR KEBOTLHALE: If I may mention, I am also making application for the

bombing of Wimpy itself and the application for the bombing of the attack on the

"Kitskonstabels" in Lindela Section.

CHAIRPERSON: How many is that now? Four?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That would also include the bombing of the railway line, the

electrical sub-station in Katlehong.

MS KHAMPEPE: Why were these incidents not included in your application? In

your formal application for amnesty, form 1?

MR KEBOTLHALE: If you may refer to page 6 of the bundle of documents, we

are mentioning there that, I am mentioning there that the

Benoni/Duduza/Katlehong actions were involved, and if you look into 9.8(1) I am

saying there the acts include issuing out of instructions and carrying out attacks on

Wimpy outlet, South African personnel and councillors and whites only bus

terminus. I have eloquently stated that in my application.

MS KHAMPEPE: Oh, thank you very much Mr Kebotlhale. I have actually looked

at your further particulars which appears on page 12 and 13 and I had overlooked

that one. I think it has not been very clear and that is why it is important for us to

make sure that we in a way detail all the incidents, so that we don't loose sight of

what you are applying for.

MR KEBOTLHALE: Thank you.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Kebotlhale, maybe if we can again for purposes of the

record, enumerate once more the incidents in respect of which you are seeking

amnesty. Can you do that?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.


MS KHAMPEPE: Make use of page 10 and tell us exactly which incidents we

should be considering you for amnesty.

MR KEBOTLHALE: The bombing of "Kitskonstabels" barracks in Mnisi Section.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes.

MR KEBOTLHALE: The bombing of the sewerage pipes in Sanwat Park.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes.

MR KEBOTLHALE: Ambush on the "Kitskonstabels" and SAP in Motsamai

Section. Bombing of Benoni in Wimpy. Bombing of the rail line and electrical sub-

station next to Katlehong station.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes.

MR KEBOTLHALE: And lastly the whites only bus terminus in Germiston.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, now you say that in the Katlehong "Kitskonstabels"

attack your involvement was planning and distribution of ammunition.

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I also included you know, providing support to the

attack.

CHAIRPERSON: What kind of support?

MR KEBOTLHALE: As my fellow applicants were attacking, I stood by in the car

and I drove them after retreating.

CHAIRPERSON: So you drove the getaway car?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: The sewerage pipes, what did you do there, how were you

involved there?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I supplied the ammunition.

CHAIRPERSON: That is all?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I supplied the ammunition and I was part of the

planning thereof.

CHAIRPERSON: The ambush on the "Kitskonstabels" at Mindela?


MR KEBOTLHALE: I have already answered that Honourable Judge, by saying

that I provided support. I drove the getaway car.

I also issued out ammunition in that respect.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

ADV MOTATA: But I need some clarity Chairperson, that my understanding

when we started with the first incident, we have two here, the "Kitskonstabels" in

Mnisi Section and we have the "Kitskonstabels" in Motsamai Section.

We want to know in respect of each, that is why we are enumerating them so that

we get clarity.

MR KEBOTLHALE: With respect to "Kitskonstabels" in Mnisi Section, I

personally together with my fellow applicant Alfas Mabore Ndlovu, executed that

operation, I supplied the ammunition thereof and I took part in that incident.

ADV MOTATA: When you say you took part, what did you do?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I left a boobytrapped limpet mine.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Kebotlhale, I note that you have referred to a bombing of the

Katlehong Police barracks, is that the same incident as the bombing of the

"Kitskonstabels" in Mnisi Section?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That is right, yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: And that appears on page 13 of your further particulars? Is that

the same incident?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.


CHAIRPERSON: You dealt with the bombing of the Wimpy Bar.

MR KEBOTLHALE: Sorry, I didn't get that.

CHAIRPERSON: You have already dealt with the bombing of the Wimpy Bar.

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What about the bombing of the railway line?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I have provided ammunition for the bombing of the railway

line, and I took part in the planning thereof.


CHAIRPERSON: And the sub-station at Katlehong?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I took part in the planning and provided the ammunition

thereof.

CHAIRPERSON: And the bus terminus?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I executed that operation myself.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Steenkamp?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman, if I

may just ask a question on the application. Sir, I see in your application you are

referring to attacks on Wimpy outlets, page 6. Are you only referring to one

Wimpy now or is it more than one?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No, it should read Wimpy outlet, not lets.

ADV STEENKAMP: And you are also referring to attacks on councillors? Is this

not now part of your list?

MR KEBOTLHALE: The councillors feature in so far as the operation of our sub-

Units were concerned, and I think my Commander has elaborated on the operations

of those Units.

CHAIRPERSON: (Microphone not on)

MR KEBOTLHALE: I was involved ...

CHAIRPERSON: Let me be quite fair to you, you are not making any application

now in respect of attacks on Councillors or are you?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No, I am making that application in so far as our Unit helped

in the execution of those. In so far as our Unit planned the execution of those

incidents.

CHAIRPERSON: You know, as a panel we have a problem with that. One cannot

get or obtain amnesty for something one didn't to or one was unaware of.

Now, you say that you are accepting liability for certain things that the sub-Units

did. We need a bit more, were you involved or not?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I was not personally involved in the executions of those

actions.

CHAIRPERSON: We are not only talking about executions, we are talking about

planning and in any way assisting in that operation.


MR KEBOTLHALE: Judge, I would say that I did not plan those operations, but I

took part in terms of distributing ammunition for the execution of those operations

themselves.

CHAIRPERSON: And you knew for what purpose the ammunition was being

distributed?

MR KEBOTLHALE: For - yes, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Who are these Councillors and were they injured or did they die

or did they loose property or what?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I think, I would not say for sure who the Councillors are,

because we did not get you know, concise reports from Units and because of the

lack of constant, given the conditions under which we operated, it was very

difficult to get the concise reports.

CHAIRPERSON: So you are not in a position to tell us Councillor X was a victim

of a particular operation?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I am not in a position to tell that.

CHAIRPERSON: So therefore we don't know, neither do you know whether you

are guilty of anything in respect of those Councillors? It may never have taken

place, not so?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No, we know for a fact that our Units have carried out

operations against Councillors.

CHAIRPERSON: On who?

MR KEBOTLHALE: We have made mention, the Commander has made mention

in our main submission, we mentioned the Basil February Unit which carried out

attacks in Duduza and KwaThema.

CHAIRPERSON: Now we know where and perhaps we know when. Who?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That I don't know Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Steenkamp?

ADV STEENKAMP: Sir, the same page refers to handgrenade attacks or grenade

attacks there. Grenade, paragraph 9(iv), grenade attacks. What was this because

you said according to your initial list you are talking about limpet mines, but here

you indicate in your application grenade attacks, ambushes and booby traps, but

what about the grenade attacks, what was this?


MR KEBOTLHALE: I would indicate for sure that grenades were mostly used in

attacks against Councillors.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you put a time frame on this, and where did this

happen?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That happened in 1988.

ADV STEENKAMP: And were anybody injured?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I am not sure.

ADV STEENKAMP: And of how many incidents are we talking here, one, two,

three or four incidents?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I would not strike a total recall as to how many of those, but

it is more than one.

ADV STEENKAMP: Are you saying your whole Unit was involved in these

attacks?

MR KEBOTLHALE: In so far as I have indicated earlier on, with regard to the

planning, with regard to the distribution of ammunition, issuing combat orders.

ADV MOTATA: Just to interpose here Mr Steenkamp, let's look at the main

submission, page 7, you make reference Sub Units, do you have that? We look at

the different print, do you see the different print and it says blowing of a Police van

in Duduza with a limpet mine. Were people injured, or the Police who were

driving that van, injured?

MR KEBOTLHALE: The report I could indicate before the panel is that the Police

were there you know, playing soccer and that is how they got attacked at that

soccer field.

MS KHAMPEPE: Are you applying for amnesty in regard of that incident?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I have indicated already that in so far as I was part of

distributing ammunition and I was part of the issuing out of orders to the Units to

carry out those attacks. I did not personally execute that incident.

CHAIRPERSON: You don't know if those operations were successful? You don't

know if attempts to carry it out, were made, is that not so?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I would not for sure say that.


MS KHAMPEPE: I thought you had enumerated the incidents in respect of which

amnesty was being sought, and that is not one of the incidents you have

enumerated?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I am not applying for that incident, I am not applying for

amnesty.

MS KHAMPEPE: I am confused Mr Kebotlhale. We want you to respond to

incidents in which you are applying for amnesty.

MR KEBOTLHALE: I did not include the Basil February operations, I am not

applying for amnesty for those operations.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes, now I have understood you to be saying that Mr Sigasa has

already referred in detail to the February operations, which you have alluded to

have included the attack on Councillors, and as I read the submission, because I

thought probably I had left something or something had escaped my memory,

when I read his reference to the February sub-Unit, there is no reference, there is

no evidence that I can deduce about the attack on Councillors, and that appears on

page 7, that is where the February Unit is being referred to.

MR KOOPEDI: If you will allow me Mr Chairman and Honourable Committee

Member, may I try to explain something which perhaps would clarify the problem

we have now.

If we look at page 4 I believe, yes page 4 of the bundle of documents that has been

supplied to us, we have an (indistinct) which tries to tell or to show how this Unit

was. The incidents that are enumerated on page 7, would have been incidents

which were planned and carried out by the people who appear there on the block

written Johannes Nkosi Unit.

However, these people were also a command structure which had sub-Units. I

believe what the applicant is saying now is that he would wish to apply for

amnesty, that is above the things enumerated on page 7 of Exhibit A, he would

wish to apply for amnesty for other acts which may have been carried out by the

sub-Units.

MS KHAMPEPE: Are you using the word may have been, deliberately Mr

Koopedi?

MR KOOPEDI: With respect I am, and let me explain why. It has been stated on

that page 7, that it has not been possible to make contact with those Units for

verification and confirmation purposes. As matters stand, applicant here was in a

command structure, which below it, were sub-Units.


He does not know whether those Units still exist today. However, he thinks that

because at that time it was not within the law to have arms or to supply arms to

other people, he is therefore mentioning those. He was not personally involved in

the execution of those, and that is why it becomes difficult for him to explain what

happened and when did that happen if these were actions carried out by the Unit.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes, I understand that. I really need clarification.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi, are you acquainted or are you aware of the

judgement in the case that is commonly known as the ANC application?

MR KOOPEDI: I am, in fact I handled that matter, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't this particular instance a matter similar to that?

MR KOOPEDI: I would argue not, it is not. What we are saying here is, well, let

me first start by saying that those applications, the ANC applications we are

referring to, are called Declaration Applicants. These are applicants who attached

some declaration to their applications, but this is not the case in this instance.

Here we have an applicant who states where he belongs, who states fully what he

did, but who also feels that it is his duty for the purposes of this hearing, for the

purposes of reconciliation, to state that there were sub-Units which I have assisted,

which I have armed. However, I am unable to say what they did and I believe it

will then be on this Honourable Committee to decide that, no, we are not

entertaining what your sub-Units did simply because of the rationale that you

cannot give amnesty to a person for something he didn't know it occurred, but he

feels it is his duty to inform this Honourable Committee and in fact everybody

here, that he armed those people and they were his sub-Unit. As to what they did,

he may not have the facts.

MS KHAMPEPE: But is he not saying what the sub-Units did? He is saying they

attacked Councillors, that is what he is saying?

MR KOOPEDI: It is indeed so Madam Commissioner, that he is saying that they

attacked Councillors, however, he does not know when, that is the date, he does

not know which Councillor, and had it been possible for him to confirm these, he

would be saying with certainty, but because he doesn't know who was attacked, he

only knows that Councillors were attacked. That is why he is saying so.

MS KHAMPEPE: How does he know that Councillors were attacked as a result of

the weapons that he supplied to the sub-Units?

MR KEBOTLHALE: By virtue of grenades having been used in some instances in

areas where I distributed some.


MS KHAMPEPE: Were you the Commander of the sub-Units that you supplied

ammunition to?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I was the Commander in so far as I belonged to the

command structure.

MS KHAMPEPE: And were you not therefore kept abreast with the execution of

the operations that you yourself have stated that you gave instructions to?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I was kept abreast, but the information was not

complete in most of the instances. We did not get finer details, given the

circumstances under which we operated there.

MS KHAMPEPE: At page 6 of the bundle of documents, that is your formal

application, you say that you issued out instructions and carried out attacks. The

you enumerate the incidents, then you say on Wimpy outlets, SAP personnel,

Councillors and whites only bus terminus. Did you issue out instructions on the

attack of Councillors?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Let me explain this. Given all the Units that we commanded,

we visited them at all times, regularly if we had time and we would actually give

out instructions to carry out attacks against the Councillors in pursuit of the

objective of rendering the 1988 October Municipal elections a farce.

MS KHAMPEPE: Did you personally issue out instructions to your sub-Units on

Councillors?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I did.

MS KHAMPEPE: And were any reports given to you subsequently those

instructions having been issued by you, were any reports given to you on the

execution of those operations?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No reports were given, but I know that in areas where I have

distributed grenades, Councillors were attacked.

MS KHAMPEPE: Did you not find out from your sub-Units how the execution

had been carried out, on whom of the Councillors the attack had been ...

MR KEBOTLHALE: I had not been able to do so.

MS KHAMPEPE: Why not?

MR KEBOTLHALE: It was very difficult, we were operating under very difficult

conditions at that time.


MS KHAMPEPE: But how would you be able to measure the success or the failure

of your sub-Unit if such information was not furnished to you?

MR KEBOTLHALE: We depended largely on the media reports, the print and

television reports.

MS KHAMPEPE: Why not your sub-Units, these are people who are very close to

you? Why should you depend on the media that you didn't trust?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I am saying that it was very difficult for us to get exact

information, given the circumstances under which we operated.

MS KHAMPEPE: In conclusion for what it is worth, you are saying you are

seeking amnesty in respect of the attack on the Councillors and the weapons that

you supplied on your sub-Unit in the attack of those Councillors. Is that what you

are seeking amnesty for?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

ADV MOTATA: But it goes further than that, if you have regard to the bundle,

page 7, you are saying there have been injury of several Policemen and

Councillors, but from what my sister has been asking you, it would appear you

have no information as regards whether Policemen were killed, Councillors were

killed or injury caused to them?

MR KEBOTLHALE: This I got from the newspaper and media reports.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Steenkamp?

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Sir, can you explain to the

Committee exactly how did you see your political motive, or how did you

understand the political motive or can you describe your political motive for

attacking the Wimpy Bar?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I would, this matter I think has been dealt with

extensively by my Commander.

CHAIRPERSON: We want to know how you saw it.

MR KEBOTLHALE: Oh yes. That was part of taking the war to the white areas. It

was part of celebrating the 67th anniversary of the South African Communist

Party, and that was actually intended to remove the honeymoon out of the

television screens.

Removing the honeymoon out of television screens actually meant in everyday life

of our television, we would see people sitting in beaches, people sitting in nice


places, not portraying the exact situation which was happening in the townships,

which was happening in churches, which was happening in schools.

People were being shot at by the Police, people were being killed by the Police on

a daily basis in the township. That was not properly projected into the media.

CHAIRPERSON: So, the Wimpy Bar was specifically targeted for that purpose?

MR KEBOTLHALE: It was also part of the armed propaganda.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Are you sure about that answer?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, it was part of the armed propaganda.

CHAIRPERSON: So as far as you are concerned, and you must correct me if I am

wrong, the attack on the Wimpy Bar, was not essentially because it was frequented

by members of the Security Police?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No, that is wrong. Sorry, can the Judge repeat that for me

please?

CHAIRPERSON: You told me that, and I understand your evidence to be that the

attack on the Wimpy Bar here in Benoni was to remove the honeymoon off the

television screens?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And you also told me that Wimpy in Benoni was specifically

targeted for that and also that it was part of taking the war to the white areas?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that correct?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Given that, I asked you are you sure of your answers, and you

said yes. I said well, I am concerned because there is the prospect of Wimpy being

targeted and blasted because it was frequented by members of the Security Police

and then you said, no, that is wrong?

MR KEBOTLHALE: It shouldn't have been like that, it was attacked because it

was frequented by the top brass of the Police. These other things were just part of

it, taking the war to the white areas, and accelerating the armed conflict.

CHAIRPERSON: What did you then understand my question to be when you

answered?


MR KEBOTLHALE: I thought you were saying that Wimpy was attacked because

it was frequented by the Police?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you understood correctly. You said it was not so.

MR KEBOTLHALE: Then I did not understand it in that sense.

CHAIRPERSON: How did you understand it then, because you repeat my question

in essence and you understood it correctly.

MR KEBOTLHALE: What I am saying is that Wimpy Bar was attacked.

CHAIRPERSON: I know you are saying that, we all know it was attacked. The

question is why?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Because it was frequented by the top brass of the Police

personnel.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, when I asked you that just now, you said no, that is not so.

MR KEBOTLHALE: It must have been a mistake on my part, but I did not mean

to say that.

CHAIRPERSON: Why did you make the mistake?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Maybe I did not understand.

CHAIRPERSON: No, you did understand it, because you still understand the

question correctly.

It is precisely what I asked you. I am asking why you made a mistake then?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Because I did not understand the question clearly.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Steenkamp.

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Sir, am I correct in saying that the

attack on the Wimpy Bar was mainly to create and to instill fear amongst the

people, among the civilians in that specific area?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That would be incorrect.

ADV STEENKAMP: Are you sure?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

ADV STEENKAMP: Did you understand my question correctly?


MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can I read from your own application on page 8? Mr

Koopedi, can he please read for himself. I read paragraph 1 therein. All the actions

above constitute part of the overall conspiracy and strategy to bring about

instability and instill fear in those who served in structures of Apartheid. Is that

now right or is that now wrong?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That is right.

ADV STEENKAMP: But my question was was the attack on the Wimpy not part

of this?

MR KOOPEDI: With respect Mr Chairman, I think we are having a problem of my

learned friend putting it that the attack on Wimpy was for this reason and I think

what he is saying is that it was not only for that one reason. You know there are a

number of issues involved, not the one reason.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you rephrase the question.

ADV STEENKAMP: I will do so, thank you Mr Chairman. My question was

simply, I didn't say it was the only reason, I asked you was it a reason and you said

no. That is how I understood you.

MR KEBOTLHALE: You see, it was not intended to instill fear on civilians. For

those who served in Apartheid structures, the Special Branch in Benoni was part of

the Apartheid structure.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can I just ask you then this, why didn't you include in your

amnesty application that your attack on the Wimpy was mainly to deal with the

Security Branch who was frequenting this place, why didn't you include this at all

in your amnesty application, at all?

Even in the further particulars that you were asked, you didn't include this at all?

Can you explain this?

MR KEBOTLHALE: You see, it was the personnel that served in the Apartheid

structure which frequented Wimpy, and I think that explanation suffices.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is why isn't it included in your application?

MR KEBOTLHALE: It is included in the application. If you go through and if you

can go through page 8 there.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes, can you start from page 7, see under paragraph 10(a) a

question is asked, state political objective sought to be achieved in committing the


act in which you are applying for amnesty, for which you are applying for

amnesty, and you then starting from page 7, respond by stating what you have

stated and Mr Steenkamp's question is to this extent and this extent only, why have

you not stated that the reason for attacking the Wimpy Bar was to attack the

members of the Security Police, that does not appear?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I think we are saying here that, we are talking about those

who served in the structures of Apartheid, and that includes the Special Branch in

Benoni who frequented that area.

MS KHAMPEPE: But you see the words that you have used, the choice of words

that you used in response in particular to paragraph 10(a), you have stated that the

reason, the political objective you sought to achieve was to deprive the then South

African State the monopoly of violence used and create an environment and

climate of war, particularly in towns and places used for leisure and entertainment

by whites.

That is Mr Steenkamp's problem, there is no mention there specifically of attacking

members of the Security Force. That is the explanation you must give to Mr

Steenkamp.

MR KEBOTLHALE: The understanding of the statement is that those who served

in the Defence Force, those who served in the Police, would after having carried

out operations against you know, innocent people, used the Wimpy, they would

use the cinemas and whatever places as leisure places, and these people would be

construed to be ordinary civilians. This is what this insinuates in that paragraph.

MS KHAMPEPE: But you yourself had decided to use the word entertainment by

whites, you didn't say entertainment by members of the Security Force?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No, but if you would notice that the whites there is "whites",

that is what it was intended to express.

ADV STEENKAMP: Sir, can you just tell us from whom did you get your

instructions in specifically carrying out the Wimpy Bar attack or the Katlehong

attack, both those incidents, from whom did you receive your instructions?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I think the Commander has dealt with the matter by saying

that we meet every Wednesday to review, to plan and take decisions.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you tell me who is the person called Vusi, do you know

who Vusi was?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Vusi, yes I know who he was. I know him by the name of

Vusi. He served in the front command in Botswana. I don't know his other name.


ADV STEENKAMP: You see again sir, unfortunately if I look at your amnesty

application, page 9, paragraph 11(b) the question there is who gave such order and

approval, you didn't refer to your Commanding Officer, applicant 1, you referred to

Mr Vusi.

Can you elaborate on that?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, in so far as Vusi served as a post box in the front

command.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can I ask you then maybe just before I go to the Wimpy Bar

attack, why didn't you refer to the first applicant and say he was my Commanding

Officer and I received my instructions from him? Why didn't you state it there?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That has been stated on page 9.

CHAIRPERSON: What has been stated?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That I received commands from a person known only to me

as Vusi.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that is not the question. The question is why didn't you in

answer to that question say that the first applicant, the first witness in fact gave me

the orders. That is the question.

MR KEBOTLHALE: He did not give me orders because we would sit in a

plannery to decide on actions to take.

ADV STEENKAMP: Coming to the Wimpy Bar attack, what information did you

have, or what information did you receive about the Wimpy Bar before deciding to

attack it?

Did you get reports and from whom did you get the reports, or did you have

informers, how did you manage to get the information on the Wimpy Bar?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I think we have explained this. We have also mentioned it in

our main submission, that we were sitting every Wednesday to give individual

commands as a command structure, and we would then discuss, deliberate on

individual reports, make recommendations and take decisions on the basis of that

information.

The main source of information with regard to Wimpy came from fellow applicant

Alfas.

ADV STEENKAMP: So he informed you about the Wimpy Bar and the possibility

of a target and all that, am I right?


MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, by way of reporting to the Unit, yes.

ADV STEENKAMP: And who decided ultimately that the Wimpy Bar should be

attacked, was it you or who was it?

MR KEBOTLHALE: All of us, we decided on it.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you explain to me, at the time why did you think the

Wimpy Bar, or how did you see the Wimpy Bar as a military target, or did you see

it then, can you explain to me how did you see it as a legitimate target, let's put it

that way?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I think the matter has been answered by my fellow applicant

in his submission that the place was frequented by top brass Security personnel.

ADV STEENKAMP: What would you say to the possible question or the possible

information that I attained, that the attack on the Wimpy Bar as far as the official

ANC statement goes, was not part and parcel of ANC policy?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Can you repeat the question for me please.

ADV STEENKAMP: According to information we received which is not verified,

what is your comment if I make the suggestion or if I tell you according to the

ANC's official statement, the attack on the Wimpy Bar, this specific Wimpy Bar,

was not part and parcel of the ANC policy at the time?

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Steenkamp, won't you rephrase your question because there

hasn't been any evidence led before us to suggest that the information that is

contained in the press report, is official ANC information?

ADV STEENKAMP: You have heard, you have listened to my comment on the

newspaper remark, you have heard that, am I right?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I think it has been ...

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you comment?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, it has been explained that Wimpy became the target in

so far as it was frequented by that Security personnel.

It was an area which became an interest, a target of interest to us, in so far as the

Security personnel frequented the area.

ADV STEENKAMP: Did you verify the information that you got from Mr

Ndlovu, that at that stage Security Branch Police Officers and high brass as you

call them, would most probably have visited that Wimpy Bar on that Saturday?

Did you have information to that extent?


MR KEBOTLHALE: It has just been explained that we got information from the

former detainees and we also relied extensively on the information forthcoming

from Mr Ndlovu.

ADV STEENKAMP: That on that specific Saturday, please help me if I am wrong,

that on that specific Saturday, Security Branch high brass will visit the Wimpy Bar

at twelve o'clock, is that what you are saying?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No, I think that you must understand that we are not saying

that the Security Branch personnel stayed in Wimpy. We have information to the

extent that these people frequented the area, they met there.

ADV STEENKAMP: No, no, sir, I am talking about this specific day. Why did

you decide to attack the Wimpy Bar on this specific day?

The only reason I can see is because on that specific day, there was a possibility or

you had very good information, that Security Branch Police will be at the Wimpy

Bar, high brass?

MR KEBOTLHALE: They frequented the area and we have indicated previously

that on Saturdays they held meetings there to give reports, and to debrief and

whatever, as it was explained earlier.

ADV STEENKAMP: Am I right in saying, please help me if I am wrong, you

didn't have any verified or any confirmed information that on that specific day, on

that specific time, twelve o'clock that Security high brass Police would visit the

place? You didn't have any information of that sort at all am I right?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No, you are wrong.

ADV STEENKAMP: What is the answer then sir, in other words, please help me.

What you are saying is you had information ...

MR KEBOTLHALE: That they frequented ...

ADV STEENKAMP: Can I please finish my question, you had information that on

this specific Saturday, this specific incident which happened on I think the 13th of

June, 30th of July sorry, at twelve o'clock, you had information that on that day

high brass Security Branch Police will be in that place. Did you have information

to this extent, can you answer me just that please first?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Not that they will be in that place, but we knew that it was a

norm that after having had discussions in their offices they would go have lunch

there and have tea there.


CHAIRPERSON: What you are saying is it was the normal thing to happen and

you expected them to be there?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Can I ask you according to our

information there was a Police kiosk which was situated in a small shop across the

Wimpy Bar, that was actually manned on a full time basis by the Police. Why

didn't you decide to attack that kiosk than the Wimpy Bar?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Personally I did not know of the existence of the kiosk.

ADV STEENKAMP: Are you saying you didn't know about this kiosk at all?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I am saying I did not know of the existence of the kiosk

in that area.

ADV STEENKAMP: Who did the reconnaissance on this Wimpy Bar, do you

know who was involved there? Can you give us a name of the group who was

responsible for this, and who reported to you?

MR KEBOTLHALE: It is not a group, it is Alfas Ndlovu.

ADV STEENKAMP: And he never reported to you that there actually was a Police

kiosk there?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No. Not that he did not report, but he reported on the matter

that he was dealing with, and that was Wimpy.

ADV STEENKAMP: So did he report there was a Police kiosk?

MR KEBOTLHALE: He could not report on the existence of the kiosk. The kiosk

was not an area of interest to us. He reported on the matter that we handled, that

was Wimpy at that time.

ADV STEENKAMP: Sorry Mr Chairman, if I have to repeat myself, I don't want

to labour this point. Just before I step off this issue, one thing I can't understand

you wanted to attack the structures which supported Apartheid, among them Police

or Security Police. But in this issue, you decide not to attack this Police kiosk

which was full of Police.

MR KEBOTLHALE: I think Mr Steenkamp, the matter has been dealt with, we

explained that situation in length in our main submission and it was explained by

the Commander.

Our area of interest was in Wimpy and if there was existence of any Police kiosk

nearby or opposite, that I did not know.


ADV STEENKAMP: Do you have any other information on other, or do you

know, do you have any knowledge on the other Wimpy's that was attacked by

ANC or MK members?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No, no.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you maybe just in short explain to me what was MK's

policy regarding the identification of military targets at the time of the incident?

MR KEBOTLHALE: What we are saying is that we are going to attack all enemy

personnel, wherever they are. We have also indicated that we would follow them in

the Bantu (indistinct), in towns, in the cities, in the rural areas and everywhere, and

this is what we actually did at that time.

ADV STEENKAMP: Who decided on the use of this super limpet I think that is

what the applicant, the first applicant said. Who decided on the use of this limpet

mine, the super limpet mine?

MR KEBOTLHALE: We collectively decided on it, all of us.

ADV STEENKAMP: Who planted the bomb?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Alfas.

ADV STEENKAMP: How do you know that, were you present?

MR KEBOTLHALE: He reported back to the Unit that he planted the bomb.

ADV STEENKAMP: Were you during this planning, who was also involved in the

planning, it was you and the first applicant, who else was involved?

MR KEBOTLHALE: It was Alfas, it was Molwedi, it was Simfrey Mkomesi who

is now late.

ADV STEENKAMP: I am sorry, can you give us, it was you, the first ...

MR KEBOTLHALE: It was myself, it was Ernest Sigasa, it was Alfas Mabore

Ndlovu, it was Mokoena Molwedi.

ADV STEENKAMP: You said he is deceased?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No, lastly it was Simfrey Mkomesi who is deceased.

ADV STEENKAMP: Okay, sorry, thank you. Exactly what was the role of your

Commander? How did it work, did he give you instructions and you had to carry

them out or can you just explain to me how did it work? This Unit you had, how

did it work?


MR KEBOTLHALE: If I may refer you to page 2 of our submission, we are

stating quite clearly there what the role of the Commander was there and Bullet.3,

he gave guidance to military activities.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, maybe I have missed the point here, but I was

under the impression that this statement was the statement made by the first

applicant and that it was not a joint statement. Maybe I am wrong, I don't

understand this.

CHAIRPERSON: I think it was a statement by the first applicant, but this witness

has associated himself in so far as it effects him, with that statement.

MR KOOPEDI: If I may answer, it was decided that because all the applicants are

associating themselves with similar acts, for the sake of brevity, only one statement

would be prepared.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, I don't want to be very technical, but I would

ask on behalf of the victims that this statement at least be signed by whoever is

going to be handed in the statement on behalf of the applicants, because the

position as far as the Act goes Mr Chairman, we are dealing with applications are

required by the Act, and I am not quite sure and my difficulty is this, this

information contained in this statement was not catered or not rendered or not

supplied by any of the applicants at all.

As far as the victims go we find it a bit difficult to understand how this information

can just be submitted and numerous acts be added to the application of this

applicant, maybe I must ask the applicant why this is done today.

If I can ask you sir, why are you adding all this new information in this statement,

and why didn't you take the opportunity when you prepared your application, to

submit this to the TRC? Can you give an explanation of that?

MR KOOPEDI: In all fairness to the witness, if you will allow me to come in Mr

Chairman, there are no new incidents that are being mentioned here, because all

these incidents if my learned friend goes through the application forms here, he

will find a corresponding note to that effect.

On the other hand in as far as the request or the instruction that all applicants sign

this statement because the statement cannot be simply handed in, I wish to remind

my learned friend that this statement was meant to be read and not to be handed in

initially and it was handed in because we were asked to hand it in, and remind my

learned friend also that the present applicant has under oath associated himself

with this statement and I do not see the need therefore to sign the statement.

But I wish to stress the fact that there are no new matters that are being brought.


ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, I will not take this point any further, except to

say that there is definitely information that was added, numerous incidents like

page 7, the Honourable Committee Member Khampepe showed, pointed out the

sub-Units, there is no information contained in this application at all.

MR KOOPEDI: Mr Chairman, without creating a dialogue if you will allow me,

my learned friend ...

CHAIRPERSON: You just did.

ADV STEENKAMP: I will just leave it there Mr Chairman, it is up to the

Committee to decide. Maybe it is a question for argument.

ADV MOTATA: No but before you do, we had regard to page 14 of the bundle.

ADV STEENKAMP: Sir, it is the view of the victims that this was an act, a callous

and cowardice act mainly targeting white people who were frequenting this Wimpy

Bar, do you have any comment on this?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I would say that the action on Wimpy was not targeted on

white people. It was targeted at the Security personnel that served on the

Headquarters of the Special Branch, whether black or white and it has never been

the policy or intention of the ANC to hit or to attack ordinary civilians.

ADV STEENKAMP: My last comment, maybe you can comment on this sir, I can

put it as a matter of fact to you that not a single Security Police or political person

was injured at all in this Wimpy attack, it was only civilians.

MR KEBOTLHALE: I would also indicate that this matter has been dealt with by

my Commander.

MS KHAMPEPE: You are being asked notwithstanding the fact that it has been

dealt with by your Commander. You are being asked a question and you must

respond to it Mr Kebotlhale.

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes, I would say that the possibility of concealing blows

suffered by the Special Branch personnel cannot be precluded in that regard, as

part of you know, concealing their defeats.



CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination Mr Koopedi?

MR KOOPEDI: Nothing in re-examination of this witness, thank you Chairperson.



MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Kebotlhale, I just have one question to pose to you. When

Mr Ndlovu gave you a report after he had conducted some reconnaissance on

Wimpy Bar, did he give you any information with regard to whether there was any

black patronage of this particular Wimpy?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I do not recall that for sure.

MS KHAMPEPE: Did you yourself not know whether that particular Wimpy was

patronaged by blacks?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That I did not know.

MS KHAMPEPE: Were you resident within the Benoni area at that time?

MR KEBOTLHALE: I was staying at Katlehong at that time, not in Benoni.

MS KHAMPEPE: Were you familiar with the mall wherein this Wimpy Bar was

situated?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Personally, not.

MS KHAMPEPE: Had you never gone past the vicinity around the Wimpy

restaurant?

MR KEBOTLHALE: No.


ADV MOTATA: Just one Chairperson. You said you relied also on information

from former detainees, did I hear you correctly?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

ADV MOTATA: And when you say information from former detainees, were they

accompanying the Security Branch to the Wimpy?

MR KEBOTLHALE: That I could not confirm, but that is the information that we

got from former detainees.

ADV MOTATA: That for instance they got food from Wimpy which was bought

by the Police?

MR KEBOTLHALE: Yes.

ADV MOTATA: But never indicated that they actually went with the Police there?


MR KEBOTLHALE: No.

ADV MOTATA: Thank you Chairperson, I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, you are excused.

WITNESS EXCUSED



AMNESTY HEARING


NAME: ALFAS MABORE NDLOVU


DAY: 1

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

MR KOOPEDI: Mr Chairman, I would ask for some direction here. I am not sure

what this Committee proposes to do. When this Committee proposes to close for

the day.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly not now.

MR KOOPEDI: I would then ask or request to call the third applicant, I wanted to

indicate that I wanted to call him, but was not sure when the Committee intends

breaking up, thank you.

The next applicant is Mr Ndlovu.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, page 28 - 34.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ndlovu, which language would you prefer to use?

MR NDLOVU: English.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you comfortable with that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

ALFAS MABORE NDLOVU: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: May I have an indulgence for a second

please, there is a document I am trying to find.

ADV MOTATA: Whilst your counsel is finding a document, how do you

pronounce or spell your second name? I am not sure of the spelling on page 28 of

the second name?

MR NDLOVU: Mabore. Actually it was misprinted because during those days, we

had problems. Now my name is being changed to be Mabore, my real name is

Mabope.


MR KOOPEDI: I have found the document I was looking for, if I may proceed Mr

Chairman. Thank you for the indulgence.

Is it correct that you are one of the applicants in this matter and an applicant in

terms of you being, or having been a member of the Johannes Nkosi Unit?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MR KOOPEDI: Could you speak up to the microphone?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MR KOOPEDI: Now, would you tell the Commissioners, the Honourable

Committee Members before we go into the details of the acts for which you are

applying amnesty, who you are, when were you born, when did you join the ANC?

MR NDLOVU: Okay, actually what I will do is I will read the biography that has

been prepared.

My name is Alfas Mabore Ndlovu. The address is 35 Esangweni Section, Tembisa.

The date of birth, 1964-07-02. I joined the ANC and the People's Revolutionary

Army, MK in September 1985.

I joined the liberation forces during the time when colonialism and perilous forces

were displaying African people in particular, and killing them. The total full,

calculated military aggression against the front line States, suppression of student

bodies, that is COSAS and working class formations (indistinct).

The military skills which I acquired within the ranks of the African National

Congress and Umkonto We Sizwe is as follows: I received the following military

training in Angola in 1985. I have done the following courses, military

engineering, politics, firearms, military tactics, typography, physical training and

artillery.

Further I went to Cuba and I have done the following course, that is suburban

warfare, Commander's course in the year 1986.

And furthermore, I have done military combat work in 1989, that is the former

Soviet Union. That is finished.

MR KOOPEDI: Now, will you tell the Honourable Committee members, the

offences for which you are applying for amnesty.

MR NDLOVU: Actually what I would say is that I am applying for all offences

which my fellow applicants spoke about.

MR KOOPEDI: Will you please enumerate them?


MR NDLOVU: Number 1, that is the bombing of "Kitskonstabels" in Mnisi

Section, Katlehong.

MR KOOPEDI: ...[inaudible] for which you are applying for amnesty.

MR NDLOVU: Actually what I would say is that I am applying for all offences

which my fellow applicants spoke about.

MR KOOPEDI: Would you please enumerate that?

MR NDLOVU:

1) Number 1: That is the bombing of "Kitskonstabels" in Mnisi

Section, Katlehong.

2) The bombing of sewerage pipes in Sunwatt Park.

3) The bombing of "Kitskonstabels" and SAP.

CHAIRPERSON: Before you carry on, the bombing of the "Kitskonstabels" in

Mnisi Section, what did you so there? What was your role in that?

MR NDLOVU: My role was that physically and practically I went there to execute

the operation and even part of the planning.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR NDLOVU: Okay, the second one is the bombing of the sewerage pipe. In this

one I do agree with my fellow applicants, that together being a unit that was

stationed or to organise activities around East Rand, I also planned and approved

the operations that it must executed. ...[indistinct] the planning.

4) The third one: Ambush of the "Kitskonstabels" and SAP in the

Motsamai Section.

My role, it was that I went there physically and I took part in the execution of the

operation.

MS KHAMPEPE: How?

MR NDLOVU: By carrying an AK rifle and went there to demoralise the enemy

by firing shots.

5) The other one is the bombing of Wimpy Bar.

And this one I went there personally to execute the operation.


6) The bombing of the rail line and electrical sub-station next to

Katlehong Station.

My role was that I went there physically to execute the operation in benefit of our

people.

7) The last one - not last. The bus terminus in Germiston.

I also took part in planning and giving the approval with other comrades and my

commanders, that the operation should be carried out.

MR KOOPEDI: Is it correct that the incidents that you are referring to are all

enumerated on page 10 of Exhibit A?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MR KOOPEDI: Is it also correct that in all these operations, even though you did

not personally, you may not have personally carried out or executed an act,

however you were involved in the planning thereof?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I was involved in the planning and the other things, the

operations which were being carried out by our sub-unit. That is the attacks against

councillors.

MS KHAMPEPE: I didn't hear that one.

MR NDLOVU: I'm talking about the attacks against councillors.

MS KHAMPEPE: What about them, did you also take part in their planning?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know the names or identities of these councillors who

were victims or possible victims?

MR NDLOVU: No, I don't know the identities.

CHAIRPERSON: So you don't know if any attack took place?

MR NDLOVU: Actually through media we heard the reports ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: You don't know yourself?

MR NDLOVU: Pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: You don't know yourself?


MR NDLOVU: Actually I'm trying to indicate that operations were being carried

out, especially by our sub-unit.

MS KHAMPEPE: But didn't your sub-unit come back to report to you as people

who must have been higher than them, about how they had fared with the

operations?

MR NDLOVU: Actually, when it comes to that issue, they do give reports but it

was not possible or easier to locate our comrades, especially in the sub-units, to

give proper reports because we also were operating under difficult conditions

which were by that time, it was not conducive enough for our units to operate. We

operated under difficult conditions.

MS KHAMPEPE: Difficult conditions which made it impossible for your sub-units

to come back and give you reports about operations that you had given them

instruction to execute?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that's too difficult to locate our units, especially after

operations you find that, let's say a person might be under serious stress or either

fear of being caught, would take retreat position or take underground retreat.

MS KHAMPEPE: How many instructions did you give to these sub-units to carry

out in respect of the councillors?

MR NDLOVU: Actually the instructions which we gave is that they were

collective, not as an individual.

MS KHAMPEPE: Was it at one given time or were you able to meet and give

them further instructions with regard to the conduct of further operations?

MR NDLOVU: Actually what I can say on that issue is that we do, sometimes we

do meet but not meeting - how can I put it, regularly.

MS KHAMPEPE: I'm still a little unclear about it, how these instructions were

given and how reports were actually given to you from your sub-units. You must

have been in some kind of control of your sub-units?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, we do have the control but the other thing is that a unit cannot

give, let's say names, we have to consider the security situation, that we are not

allowed, we are going to guerilla warfare, that we should write reports.

MS KHAMPEPE: The only reason why we are posing these questions is we have

to ascertain whether there was an offence which was committed or not before we

can either consider whether you qualify for amnesty or not.

MR NDLOVU: Yes.


MS KHAMPEPE: I hope you understand.

MR NDLOVU: I'm saying that to throw a grenade against a councillor, during

those days and even presently, it is an offence according to the law.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes, but you don't know whether that grenade was thrown to a

councillor or not since no reports were ever given back to you.

MR NDLOVU: What I'm trying to indicate is that new in the newspapers were

being read, that there were attacks, and we knew that our sub-units were carrying

attacks against councillors.


ADV STEENKAMP: Sir, can you maybe state to us how did you ...[intervention]

MR KOOPEDI: May I just say that there are no further questions from my side at

this stage?


CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP: I apologise Mr Chairman, to

my colleague there as well.

Sir, can you state how did you see or how did you understand your political

motive? Can you explain to us your political motive for engaging in these acts for

which you are applying for amnesty?

MR NDLOVU: The political motive, it has been stated by my fellow applicants,

and I don't think that we have to continue with the same question in different

forms, because it has been answered by my fellow applicants and even my

commander as a head of the unit.

ADV MOTATA: But Mr Ndlovu, you are before us as an applicant, and if we had

to look at you and say the others have answered for you, what would ...[indistinct]

be saying what you said before us, which would be considered either to grant or

refuse amnesty, we wouldn't be having that. So it might be a repetition but please

answer the questions as posed to you.

MR NDLOVU: Will you repeat your question?

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you indicate to us what your political motive was, or

how did you understand your political motive at the time, when committing these

acts.

MR NDLOVU: The political motive was that I wanted to liberate our country from

colonial forces and imperialist forces because our people were being under


constant military attacks, assaults and tortures. And again, to boost the moral of

our people and to secure a clear environment for victory in our liberation struggle.

ADV STEENKAMP: Help me if I'm wrong. I don't know the ANC policies as well

as you do, but was it also the ANC policy to act against colonialism or actions, or

can you explain what the ANC policy was regarding these attacks? How did you

understand the ANC policy regarding the identification of targets. Let's start there.

MR NDLOVU: Actually what I can say is that when it comes to ANC policy, the

policy of the African National Congress there's never mentioned in its political

history that we should attack whites in particular. And again there is no policy in

the ANC that states that we should run amok attacking civilians, either black or

white.

ADV STEENKAMP: Who gave you your instructions Sir?

MR NDLOVU: To do?

ADV STEENKAMP: Sorry. In the Wimpy Bar and the Katlehong incidents, who

gave you your instructions in those incidents?

MR NDLOVU: Actually in that question, the decision was taken after we have met

and we have discussed extensively about the presence of the enemy at Wimpy Bar,

but Wimpy Bar, it was not the actual target, our target was these people who were

murdering our people and sustaining apartheid structures within our country.

ADV STEENKAMP: And who did the reconnaissance in the Wimpy Bar incident?

MR NDLOVU: Actually I was given the mandate to that, to do that

reconnaissance.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you tell us what exactly you reported? What

information did you get that you reported to your commanding officer?

MR NDLOVU: Actually, the reports were as follows: Every Saturday, because the

enemy spent sleepless nights working overtime until Saturdays, Sundays, during

the week. The information was that the security, especially those who are from the

higher ranks, were meeting there inside the Wimpy Bar to debrief their informers,

to extract information from various operatives under their command.

ADV STEENKAMP: Where did this information come from, where did you get

this information from?

MR NDLOVU: Actually the information, it was from the former political

detainees around our country.


ADV STEENKAMP: Sir, help me if I'm wrong please. On your own you couldn't

verify this, you heard this from other detainees, am I right?

MR NDLOVU: No, you are wrong.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you explain?

MR NDLOVU: Actually we got information from former political detainees, those

who were involved in our revolution, that those policemen were buying food from

Wimpy Bar and they are frequenting the area.

ADV STEENKAMP: But have you seen this yourself, have you seen police

actually buying, Security Branch police visiting and frequently the place, having

meetings with informers, did you see this yourself?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

ADV STEENKAMP: How did you identify the Security Police, did you know

them, because we all know they were wearing plain clothes? Did you identify them

yourself and the informers?

MR NDLOVU: Actually I've seen them several times doing their job inside

Wimpy Bar and so through continued reconnaissance we have decided, together

with my fellow applicants, that our operation should be carried out.

ADV STEENKAMP: But how did you know they were Security Branch police but

just visiting the Wimpy Bar?

MR NDLOVU: Actually they were using or utilising the cars which belonged to

the state with the registration at the end, B and in the beginning, B. So that is the

identification that this vehicle belonged to the state. Whatever they are wearing

civilian clothing, an enemy is an enemy, it can't change.

ADV STEENKAMP: Did you know there was a police kiosk just opposite the

Wimpy Bar?

MR NDLOVU: Our mandate or our main focus was not ...[intervention]

ADV STEENKAMP: No, no, my question is: "Did you know there was a police

kiosk opposite the Wimpy Bar"?

MR NDLOVU: No, I didn't.

ADV STEENKAMP: Didn't you see it?

MR NDLOVU: No.


ADV STEENKAMP: If I put it to you that evidence will be led that there was a

kiosk operating, it was an operational kiosk used by the police, or basically a small

police station, you can't say anything about that?

MR NDLOVU: Actually what I can say is these are news and the new information

for me.

ADV STEENKAMP: But Sir, you did the reconnaissance.

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I did.

ADV STEENKAMP: You frequented this area, as I understand from your

commanding officer, not once but a few times.

MR NDLOVU: Yes, but the concentration was not on a kiosk, we wanted to hit the

main target, the main planners. Kiosk it was nothing because let's say we have

attacked their seniors, it will put a direct impact on the psychology of apartheid.

ADV STEENKAMP: My question is this Sir, the Wimpy Bar had a lot of civilians,

we know today that no police were killed. Opposite the Wimpy Bar there are

police, a lot of police, and you're saying now today that you didn't want to attack

the police ...[indistinct] opposite but rather the one or two individuals in the

Wimpy Bar?

MR NDLOVU: I've answered that question, that I couldn't know that there was a

kiosk. If I'd known by that time I think they're also going to be our target because

we wanted to attack the enemy whatever they are.

ADV STEENKAMP: Maybe you can answer this question, who decided to attack

this Wimpy Bar on this specific day and specific time, was it you?

MR NDLOVU: Will you repeat your question?

ADV STEENKAMP: Who decided on this specific day, which was a Saturday at

noon, 12 o'clock, who decided at this specific time this bomb must be planted and

the operation must be executed? Who decided on this?

MR NDLOVU: Actually the whole unit decided on that because we took a

common grounds, especially on planning.

ADV STEENKAMP: So wasn't the reason because it was the anniversary that you

decided on this specific day, not because people were frequenting this place?

MR NDLOVU: No, actually what I'm trying to say is that we took a general

planning and we took a collective mandate or to execute the operation. And the


other thing is that we were celebrating the anniversary of the South African

Communist Party.

ADV STEENKAMP: So that's the reason why you decided on a week day, or early

morning, or late afternoon?

MR NDLOVU: Will you repeat?

ADV STEENKAMP: Why did you decide on a weekend, or during the week, or

early morning, or late afternoon, why noon on a Saturday?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, we have to decide for Saturday because the enemy was

supposed to be there exactly 12 o'clock or past.

ADV STEENKAMP: You planted the bomb as well, I mean the limpet mine,

yourself?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I did that.

ADV STEENKAMP: When you planted the limpet mine, did you see any police in

the Wimpy Bar at all?

MR NDLOVU: Actually during the time when I went there to organise the thing

we knew that their are coming.

ADV STEENKAMP: No, no, no, my question is Sir, according to our information

this limpet was planted inside the Wimpy on a leg of a table, am I right? That's

right, that's were the limpet mine was planted, am I right?

MR NDLOVU: Not on the leg.

ADV STEENKAMP: Where was it planted?

MR NDLOVU: Underneath the table.

ADV STEENKAMP: Underneath the table.

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

ADV STEENKAMP: And you did it yourself?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I did it.

ADV STEENKAMP: When you did this, this is my question, did you see any

police, security, high brass police in the Wimpy Bar when you planted that bomb?


MR NDLOVU: Actually I've been repeating that the enemy by that time, they were

supposed to be there at twelve.

ADV STEENKAMP: Sir, you said repeatedly you knew these people, you

identified them, you did reconnaissance. My easy question is, I think it's just yes or

no, were there police inside the Wimpy or not?

MR NDLOVU: Actually what I can say is that through my reconnaissance it's been

said that the police personnel and those who belong to the high structures are

visiting or frequenting that Wimpy Bar.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ndlovu, when you planted the bomb, were there policemen

that you knew of in the Wimpy Bar?

MR NDLOVU: What I can say is that ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see any policemen there?

MR NDLOVU: Is not(?)

INTERVENTION BY AUDIENCE CLAPPING AND COMMENTING

CHAIRPERSON: I'm not going to tolerate that.

ADV STEENKAMP: I'm sorry Mr Chairman.

Sir, did you check, before you planted this bomb, that there actually were other

people or police close by the Wimpy Bar? Before you did that, did you check

whether or not there were police close or even inside?

MR NDLOVU: I have checked.

ADV STEENKAMP: And what did you see, did you see any police close by?

MR NDLOVU: Actually through my reconnaissance, as I have indicated, at 12

they were supposed to be there and so attacking Wimpy Bar, it was meant for

attacking, it was not meant to attack civilians.

ADV STEENKAMP: Sir, to be frank and honest with you, you knew very well

because you knew the place, there was no police inside or even close to the Wimpy

Bar. Am I right in saying this?

MR NDLOVU: No, you're wrong.

CHAIRPERSON: He just said so.



Did you get paid? How did you sponsor yourself, or this trip, did you get paid, did

you get any amount of money for this work you've done?

MR NDLOVU: Actually we were being assisted from our frontal commands, to be

sustained, especially financially.

CHAIRPERSON: No, the question is: "Did you get paid for doing this job"?

MR NDLOVU: No.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] question was.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you answer the question? Did he answer, I didn't hear.

Thank you Mr Chairman, sorry.

Sir, who was your commanding officer and who gave you your instructions?

MR NDLOVU: Where?

ADV STEENKAMP: For attacking the Wimpy Bar and the attack on the police in

Katlehong.

MR NDLOVU: Actually what I said previously is that we took a decision together.

ADV STEENKAMP: Because I don't see that anywhere in your application which

was submitted to the TRC, can you give an explanation for that?

MR NDLOVU: Can you repeat your question?

ADV STEENKAMP: I don't see this information anywhere in your amnesty

application which was submitted to the TRC, that you took a decision collectively,

and you don't mention anybody. Is there a reason for that?

MR NDLOVU: Actually through our organigramme it has been stated that our

structure, it was structured the way it exists on the bundle of papers.

ADV STEENKAMP: No, I'm talking about your own application. I can refer you

to your application ...[intervention]

MR KOOPEDI: With respect to my learned friend, the organigramme was

supplied as part and parcel of the further particulars requested by the TRC from all

the applicants. It may well have been supplied by one of them but this refers to all

of them and it would improper and unfair to say that this organigramme is not part

of his application.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] Mr Steenkamp, look at page 32.


ADV STEENKAMP: I've seen it Mr Chairman.

My last question to you Sir, I see here in your application you refer to page 32,

paragraph 11(b):

"The order by Chris Hani at Zimbabwe"

What is the relevance of this information?

MR NDLOVU: Actually what I can say ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: What's the question?

ADV STEENKAMP: Sorry Mr Chairman.

I see you are stating there, on the question: "Who gave such an order". You said:

"It was in line by ANC police to conduct such an act.

The order by Chris Hani at Zimbabwe"

MR NDLOVU: Actually we never instructed by Chris Hani to attack a Wimpy Bar

because Hani belonged to the MHQ, he never issued out such an instruction.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you explain to me what your role was in the Katlehong

attack?

MR NDLOVU: Which one?

ADV STEENKAMP: The one where the police were injured.

MR NDLOVU: What was my role?

ADV STEENKAMP: Yes. The Lindela Hostel, can you remember that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I remember that.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you tell me what your role was exactly and your part

there in that action?

MR NDLOVU: My role in that action, we went there to execute the operation by

shooting at the enemy personnel.

ADV STEENKAMP: Why did you decide on this specific place, Katlehong, was

there a specific reason or not?


MR NDLOVU: Actually we decided to attack the enemy at that point because we

knew and we were reconnoitring that area, that the enemy they are exchanging

their shifts using that barrack within the hostel vicinity.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you just indicate to me, as far as your knowledge serves

you, as far as I know there are two incidents where people were injured or killed,

this is the Wimpy incident and the Katlehong incident. Are you aware of any other

incidents where you were involved in where people were either injured or killed?

MR NDLOVU: Actually what I can say is that we have been reading newspapers.

We couldn't go back and verify because the only thing we knew was that was an

enemy, enemy territory. In order to verify we are supposed to be taking other

initiatives.



CHAIRPERSON: Re-examination Mr Koopedi?

MR KOOPEDI: Nothing in re-examination, thank you.


MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Ndlovu, my questions are going to be in respect of your

reconnaissance with regard to the Wimpy bombing.

I want to know how long it took you to do your reconnaissance in terms of days, in

terms of weeks, in terms of months?

MR NDLOVU: Actually we took several months monitoring that area.

MS KHAMPEPE: How several, two, three months?

MR NDLOVU: I cannot remember because it's an old incident, but what I'm

saying is that several months.

MS KHAMPEPE: With whom were you when you were doing your

reconnaissance?

MR NDLOVU: I was on my own.

MS KHAMPEPE: And the information that you had received from the ex-

detainees, what exactly did it contain?

MR NDLOVU: Actually the information contained that when people were being

captured for being involved in the liberation struggle, they could be taken to


Benoni Police Station and then during the process of undergoing severe

interrogation, they could be taken to the Wimpy and those security guys would buy

food and eat there, went back to the police station.

MS KHAMPEPE: So the information was that the people who were detained were

taken to Wimpy by the security members, given food and then taken back to the

police station for further interrogation?

MR NDLOVU: What I'm saying is that they could be taken there - let's say they

are inside this security cars and so the security personnel, they will went inside buy

food and then they will come back and take them to the prison. The other thing,

they could go there on a daily basis for consultations or to plan other operations

which we couldn't know.

MS KHAMPEPE: So the information was that the security members were

frequenting that particular Wimpy Bar on a daily basis?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: And it wasn't that they went there on Saturdays?

MR NDLOVU: Actually what they were doing is that they could frequent the area

every day because enemy we knew that it was operating seven days in a week,

because they couldn't rest.

MS KHAMPEPE: What kind of information did you elicit from your

reconnaissance?

MR NDLOVU: Actually the information that I've got is that the enemy forces were

frequenting the Wimpy Bar and on Saturday, specifically Saturday, they could

organise a meeting there or take their lunch after their ...[indistinct] or extracting

information from their ...[indistinct].

MS KHAMPEPE: And how was this information obtained, how were you able to

obtain this particular information with regard to the meeting on Saturdays?

MR NDLOVU: Actually I've managed to extract the information because I was

also using a Wimpy Bar to get food and to listen and to see the environment inside,

what they are doing.

MS KHAMPEPE: And in your frequenting the Wimpy Bar for purposes of

collecting this kind of information, were you able to see whether there were any

black patronage of that particular Wimpy Bar?

MR NDLOVU: Actually in my position what I've noticed is that if the enemy is

within the given territory with the support groups, meaning people who are


supplying the enemy with information, they could be there always, especially on

Saturday.

MS KHAMPEPE: So in brief what you are saying is that you were able to observe

black patronage in that particular Wimpy?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: How big was that compared to the overall number of people that

you were able to observe, for the past three months that you did your

reconnaissance?


MS KHAMPEPE: How big was the black presence of people who were

patronising Wimpy? You were able to do this reconnaissance for the past two to

three months.

MR NDLOVU: What I can say is that our people couldn't have a chance to enjoy

themselves, especially in Wimpy Bars ...[intervention]

MS KHAMPEPE: How big? I'm talking of numbers.

MR NDLOVU: Oh, the number?

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes.

MR NDLOVU: I cannot remember but they were very, there were a few but what I

can say, I'm not so sure if I can say there were a few.

MS KHAMPEPE: Were you able to also observe the number of workers who were

at Wimpy?

MR NDLOVU: Generally I could say they were plus minus 6 or 7, not so sure.

MS KHAMPEPE: And did you give this information to your command structure?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: And was there any attitude adopted with regard to the presence

of black people?

MR NDLOVU: Actually what I can say is that when we planned to execute that

operation, our main objective was to attack the enemy forces, not civilians as it has

been stated.


MS KHAMPEPE: Yes. And how did you hope to achieve that, after you had seen

that there was a small presence of black people frequenting that particular Wimpy?

How would you then have averted a civilian attack?

MR NDLOVU: Actually I'm having a problem concerning the concept, civilian.

During the year 1985, our comrade President, Oliver Tambo, once spoke about a

civilian and a policeman. Now my problem is, how do you differentiate between a

person in uniform and a person in civilian clothing but serving the same principle,

being a policeman in disguise?

MS KHAMPEPE: Did you take any precautions at all Mr Ndlovu, to avert any

civilian casualty? Can you honestly say that you did?

MR NDLOVU: Can you repeat yourself?

MS KHAMPEPE: Did you take any precautions to avert any civilian casualties, in

carrying out your operation in that particular Wimpy?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, we did take precaution.

MS KHAMPEPE: Can you explain what precautions you took?

MR NDLOVU: The precaution is that during our operation we knew that that

Wimpy Bar, especially 12 o'clock, the enemy forces will be there in large numbers

and even their recruits in our townships, to supply them with information and to

debrief their agents. According to the area - according to the building itself, the

Wimpy, it could not accommodate a large number of people and we know that by

that time the enemy forces will be inside.

MS KHAMPEPE: What time did you go into this particular Wimpy to plant the

bomb?

MR NDLOVU: If I could remember, if my memory serves me well, I was there

plus minus ten, half past ten, I'm not sure.

MS KHAMPEPE: Half past ten.

MR NDLOVU: I'm not saying half past, I'm saying from ten onwards until half

past, I'm not so sure.

MS KHAMPEPE: And the people who were there, were you able to observe any

security members, of the people who were already there at 10 o'clock or past 10

o'clock? Were you able to recognise any members of the Security Police?



MS KHAMPEPE: Of the people who were there when you went in at past ten,

were you able to recognise any members of the Security Police?

MR NDLOVU: As I'm saying that you could recognise the enemy presence.

MS KHAMPEPE: You could?

MR NDLOVU: I'm saying that you could recognise the enemy presence by the

virtue of, they are utilising their state vehicles, meaning that they could be around

there or waiting outside.

MS KHAMPEPE: Were you able to identify any vehicles belonging to the state at

that time?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, because I have been carrying reconnaissance against the

enemy forces.

MS KHAMPEPE: So from your prognosis, you then concluded that there should

be the presence of the enemy inside Wimpy?

MR NDLOVU: If they were not inside, it simply means that they were on stand-by

to attend a meeting, Outside, they may be outside or whatever, corner.

MS KHAMPEPE: They would be outside until about 12 o'clock, because your

reconnaissance had actually elicited information that the meeting at about 12

o'clock, that's your evidence?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: And they would be standing outside from about 10 o'clock until

12 o'clock? Could that have been probable?

MR NDLOVU: I'm not so sure about that because when I'm saying that - let's say

somebody is attending a meeting, he can decide to stand outside. Let's say like he

will be taking a cigarette and smoke for a while ...[indistinct] to a meeting or he is

still busy with somebody.

MS KHAMPEPE: With regard to the Lindela Hostel attack, how many people did

you actually shoot?

MR NDLOVU: Actually you couldn't went back to the enemy forces and ask them

that: "How many people have been attacked"?, but what has been happening is that

you have been reading reports from media, especially from Citizen or whatever

newspaper, if I remember very well.

MS KHAMPEPE: From which position did you shoot at these people?


MR NDLOVU: Actually would you clarify your question?

MS KHAMPEPE: If you are unable to know how many people you shot at - did

you shoot at a police vehicle with the "Kitskonstabels" inside the car or what

happened? How did the ambush take place?

MR NDLOVU: We shot them while they were inside the thing, inside the truck.

MS KHAMPEPE: Inside the truck?

MR NDLOVU: Mm.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you, no further questions.

ADV MOTATA: Just two Chairperson.

Just returning to the Wimpy Bar incident. Other than the state vehicles, did you

know any Security Branch policemen? Other than the vehicles you saw parked

there and the assumption that it belonged to them, they might be in Wimpy Bar,

did you know any?

MR NDLOVU: Actually their appearance you could see that this guy he belongs to

the state.

ADV MOTATA: Wimpy Bar had the hall, restaurant itself for eating inside and

there were people who could also dine outside, would I be right?

MR NDLOVU: If I could remember well, I'm not so sure about dining outside.

ADV MOTATA: In fairness to you, we have several statements that say some

would dine outside.

MR NDLOVU: I can't remember that because it is an old incident, I cannot

remember everything.

ADV MOTATA: Now let's return to your bundle, your application itself, page 32,

paginated. In response to a question asked there you said:

"It was in line with the ANC policy to conduct such an

act"

And if we look at your application you are talking about the "Kitskonstabels", you

are talking about Wimpy Bar, why now singular it?


ADV MOTATA: If you say:


"in line with the ANC policy"

then you say:

"policy to conduct such an act",

you are not speaking of acts and you are making application for several acts.

MR NDLOVU: What I can say, especially when it comes to the position of ANC

policy, yes, it's being a policy to attack an enemy forces but not to attack civilians.

ADV MOTATA: No, no, I think we are at cross-purposes here. I say my reading,

correct me if I'm wrong, I say reading this submission you are making, you say:

"such an act"

and when we listen to your evidence, you are applying for several acts or attack

acts, if I may put it that way.

MR NDLOVU: I think it was a mistake and you have to understand that English is

not my mother tongue.

ADV MOTATA: And you say:

"The order by Chris Hani at Zimbabwe"

Did Hani give you any orders whilst he was at the HMQ?

MR NDLOVU: Actually the orders that we have been given, we've been given the

order during the time when we were stationed at Zimbabwe. And now it is being

ordered that we should escalate assaults and intensify attacks against enemy forces

and we have to take the struggle into the white areas.

ADV MOTATA: Thank you Chairperson, I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: You're excused.

MR NLDOVU: Okay, thanks.

WITNESS EXCUSED



AMNESTY HEARING


NAME: MOLWEDI MOKOENA


DAY : 1

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

MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, I will ask the question I asked before this witness

...[intervention]


MR KOOPEDI: There is one last witness.


MR KOOPEDI: The idea is not to call any other witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Steenkamp, how many witnesses do you propose to call?

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, it depends on the situation. At this stage I

have two witnesses Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: What does it depend on?

ADV STEENKAMP: Well it doesn't depend on anything Mr Chairman, we'll

definitely call them. The problem is, we didn't prepare any sworn statements but

we can call them. There's a possibility of a third witness tomorrow morning.

CHAIRPERSON: A third witness?

ADV STEENKAMP: Yes, Sir, but the definitely the two witnesses are available,

they can testify immediately.

CHAIRPERSON: The evidence that your witnesses are intending to give, is

...[intervention]

ADV STEENKAMP: Well the first two witnesses, yes, Mr Chairman. The third

witness will probably deal with the facts of the incident itself, at the day of the

incident. The Security Branch police officer will probably come before. The

...[indistinct] will make a sworn statement if necessary. We're waiting for him but

there is a request from the victims to testify, two victims.


CHAIRPERSON: So what we're talking about is actually a maximum of three

witnesses and one applicant tomorrow?

Perhaps we can dispose of your last applicant now.

MR KOOPEDI: As it pleases the Committee. Chairperson, the next and last

applicant is Mr Molwedi Mokoena. He is before you now.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mokoena, what language would you prefer to use?

MR KOOPEDI: I will answer for him whilst he is still ...[indistinct]. He also, like

we indicated earlier, will use English.

MOLWEDI MOKOENA: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi, where is Mr Mokoena's ...[intervention]

ADV STEENKAMP: Page 8 until 20, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I see his personal particulars are already set out in his

application so you can skip those and get to the nitty gritty.

EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: As it pleases the Committee.

Is it true that you are one of the applicants in this matter and further that you are a

member of the Johannes Nkosi Unit which was based in the East Rand?

MR MOKOENA: Yes, I was.

MR KOOPEDI: Now would you, very briefly so, inform the members of this

Committee when you joined the ANC and in particular what training you had?

MR MOKOENA:

"I joined the African National Congress and its armed wing

Umkhonto weSizwe in 1986 internally(?). I became a member of the

regional command, Johannes Nkosi Unit, between 1987 and 1990. I

received military and combat training in the former Soviet Union,

Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe"

MR KOOPEDI: Now the offences for which you are here before this Committee,

would you, for the sake of the record, state the offences for which you are applying

for amnesty?

MR MOKOENA: I firstly say I engaged in the following in my personal capacity:


1) The bombing and electrical sub-station near Katlehong Station

with fellow applicant, Alfas Ndlovu.

2) Bombing of the sewerage tanks in the Sunwatt Park with fellow

applicant, Ernest Sigasa.

And as part of the overall command, the Johannes Nkosi, I'm applying for the

following:

1) Bombing of the "Kitskonstabels" Barracks in Mnisi Section.

2) The bombing of - the ambush of the "Kitskonstabels" and SAP in

Motsamai Section next to Lindela Hostel.

3) The bombing of Wimpy Bar.

4) And the bombing of the bus terminus in Germiston.

MR KOOPEDI: Now when all these offences were committed, or in fact prior to

that, were you involved in any way in the planning thereof?

MR MOKOENA: Yes, I was.

MR KOOPEDI: Now you have explained or mentioned the offences for which you

are applying for amnesty, would you briefly tell the Members of this Honourable

Committee what you did on that day, how you went about executing those acts?

MR MOKOENA: ...[inaudible] and on the electrical sub-section, and we placed the

mini limpet mine on the railway line, the intersection of the railway lines. And the

next thing we only got reports from the newspaper.

MR KOOPEDI: With regards to the main sewerage tank in Sunwatt Park?

MR MOKOENA: With regard to the main sewerage tank in Sunwatt Park, we

moved from our base again together with fellow applicant, Mr Ernest Sigasa. We

used one of our vehicles, which is somewhere identified as part of our support

service to the place in Sunwatt Park. It was in the evening between 8 and 9. We

went for those sewerage tanks which were a bit further away from the residential

place and we placed our mines, and it happened like in the very first case, that we

had to get the report from the newspapers of the explosion.

MR KOOPEDI: That is all for now Mr Chairperson, from me.


CHAIRPERSON: Can you just run by the incidents that you apply for?


MR MOKOENA: I think are two-phased, the specific ones that I applied, wherein I

was physically involved and which is the bombing of the railway line and electrical

sub-station near Katlehong, and the bombing of the sewerage tanks in Sunwatt

Park. And the rest are as my part as component member of the Johannes Nkosi

Unit.

CHAIRPERSON: Which events are you talking about in respect of that now?

MR MOKOENA: It's - say for instance, the bombing of the "Kitskonstabels",

which my fellow applicants ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: What did you do in respect of that?

MR MOKOENA: The planning. Being part of the command unit, I was part of the

planning.

CHAIRPERSON: Which are those now where you were part of the planning?

MR MOKOENA: The bombing of the "Kitskonstabels" in Mnisi, the ambush of

the "Kitskonstabels" and SAP in Motsamai Section.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR MOKOENA: The bombing of Benoni Wimpy Bar and the bombing of the bus

terminus in Germiston.

CHAIRPERSON: Your only involvement was the planning? Yes, is that all Mr

Koopedi?

MR KOOPEDI: Yes, that is all for now.

ADV STEENKAMP: I've got no questions, thank you Mr Chairman.

NO QUESTIONS BY ADV STEENKAMP

MS KHAMPEPE: I have no questions Mr Chairman.

ADV MOTATA: I've got no questions Chairperson.

MR KOOPEDI: Mr Chairman, that concludes the evidence from and for all four

applicants.

CHAIRPERSON: We will adjourn then till tomorrow morning at 09H30.

MR KOOPEDI: As it pleases.


ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, may I just take the

opportunity to apologise on behalf of the victims for the incident which happened.

I'm sure we'll take care of it in the future, I do apologise.

WITNESS EXCUSED

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS


ON RESUMPTION: 8TH SEPTEMBER 1998 - DAY 2

ADV STEENKAMP: Honourable Members, Mr Chairman, first of all, from my

side I do apologise for starting late, there were certain logistical problems. Mr

Chairman the first witness I'll be calling is Mr Scheepers. Mr Scheepers will be

testifying in Afrikaans Mr Chairman, if there is no objection.

JOHANNES ABRAHAM SCHEEPERS: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr

Scheepers is it correct if I say that you are a retired police officer and that you

retired to the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel?

MR SCHEEPERS: Johannes Abraham Scheepers.

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Can you just quickly sketch the

background of where you worked up until the time you retired?

MR SCHEEPERS: Chairperson I was involved with the Security Branch of the

South African Police since 1976, and the branch in Benoni that is, where I had

several positions until the end of March 1988 when I was

appointed as the Commander of that branch, end of March 1988. I was

Commander in Benoni since 1988 until December 1993 when I was transferred to

the Regional Office in Braamfontein, Johannesburg.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Scheepers can you tell us, do you know anything

concerning the Wimpy attacks which happened on the 30th of July 1988, do you

know of this incident?

MR SCHEEPERS: Yes I do.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you just quickly tell us how did you learn about this

incident?

MR SCHEEPERS: I was at the scene of the crime. I was the Commander of the

branch, and my personnel investigated the whole situation.

CHAIRPERSON: Was this after the incident?

MR SCHEEPERS: After the incident I arrived at the scene several minutes after it

actually took place, as soon as I learned about it.

ADV STEENKAMP: Colonel the allegation which the applicants make is that the

Wimpy was attacked or was identified as a target because high superior officers of

the Security Branch often visited this Wimpy, and on Saturdays they'll have


meetings there and they'd also meet with informants. Can you give any comment

on that?

MR SCHEEPERS: Chairperson our personnel meeting were held in our offices on

Fridays, and that was at the current police station at Harper Lane which is about

1½km away from the scene of the crime. We never gathered in the Wimpy, or we

never went to eat there as a group of personnel and I do not know of any one of my

personnel who would have met informants there.

ADV STEENKAMP: During this incident 1988, where were was the security

offices and where was the police station with regards to the Wimpy?

MR SCHEEPERS: The police station in Benoni since April 1980 is in Antholl

Lane in Benoni, and the Security Branch since December 1979 it was situated at

the same place in Harper Lane before it was actually opened officially, so the

Security Branch was since '79, December in Harper Lane.

ADV STEENKAMP: How far is that from the Wimpy, the police station, how far

is from the Wimpy?

MR SCHEEPERS: About a kilometre and a half.

ADV STEENKAMP: Do you know of a police kiosk which was situated close to

the Wimpy?

MR SCHEEPERS: Chairperson in the centre of town and this area, there was a

kiosk which was manned by reservists, about 50 metres from the Wimpy. The

reservists, especially on Saturday, they'd man this kiosk on a Saturday to serve the

public there in the centre of town.

ADV STEENKAMP: Do you know of any occasion where food would have been

ordered from the Wimpy by the policemen from the station, maybe to get food for

the detainees or the people who were interrogated, do you know anything about

that?

MR SCHEEPERS: No not at all, I know nothing of that.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you just tell us what was the practice when you dealt

with informants? What was the practice, what did you used to do?

MR SCHEEPERS: Chairperson the informants were met at places where they were

safe themselves, and also to make sure their identity was protected and we also had

to make sure that it was safe for the member who was involved, places where the

public did not have access to easily, or if it was in public, it would be in a very

busy place where they would not be noticed. It was not the practice to meet them in

a Wimpy Bar.


ADV STEENKAMP: And finally I'd just like to know your comment on this, you

see that one of the applicants said that he recognised this place and that he gained

information, and his information told him that on Saturdays around lunch, superior

officers of the Security Branch would gather there.

MR SCHEEPERS: I was the Commander of the branch in Benoni and I never met

my people there.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think he meant to say that you were part of it, but can you

dispute the fact that some of your men did meet there on a Saturday afternoon, or

had lunch there?

MR SCHEEPERS: I cannot dispute the fact that a man went there, but this

allegation considering that it's superior officers, definitely not. It might be that one

guy with his family might have gone there, but not as a group, that was not out

practice.

ADV STEENKAMP: And the question I'd also like to ask you, is that allegation

was made that police vehicles with "P" or "B" registration plates which was

according to allegations used by the Security Branch, it was noticed outside of this

building. Do you know anything of that? Would the security personnel drive of

these vehicles?

MR SCHEEPERS: No, we used vehicles that could not be distinguished from

others, they had normal plates so they were not identifiable. A person who wanted

to identify one of our vehicles had to go through a long period of observation to

determine whether it's used by security personnel or not.

ADV STEENKAMP: And can you also tell the Committee what happened to the

docket? What was the end result of this docket? Were the investigations stopped,

what happened?

MR SCHEEPERS: The docket was investigated, and all of these dockets were at

one point sent to Pretoria Head Office and they were busy with the political

negotiations, and prosecutions were stopped. We no longer have the dockets

available to us.

ADV STEENKAMP: Now your information as Security Chief, would you ever

think that these Wimpies could have been a military target? What was your

experience afterwards, what was considered to be targets that might be attacked,

military targets?

MR SCHEEPERS: Usually it was installations, power lines, water-pipes, etc. The

Wimpy was a civilian target, that was something else.

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman I've got no further questions.



CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi have you got any questions?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: Just a few, if I may proceed. And

may I put the questions in English rather instead of Afrikaans.

CHAIRPERSON: As you please, yes.

MR KOOPEDI: Mr Scheepers you have testified that there was a kiosk about 50

metres from the Wimpy Bar. Now my question is, who manned this kiosk, was it

manned by ordinary police, or was it manned by security personnel like Special

Branch people?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi he has already said it was manned by reservists. Do

you dispute the fact that there may have been a kiosk?

MR KOOPEDI: As it pleases. Now I've also heard you say that you could not

dispute the fact that any of your members could have gone to this Wimpy on one

occasion or another. But now my question is, if people from time to time bought

food at Wimpy, would this be a matter that is known to you or reported to you that

they buy food at this place?

MR SCHEEPERS: No I would not know if someone in his personal capacity

would go and buy food at the Wimpy, or even frequented the place.

CHAIRPERSON: I think we can take it further, if some of your men decided on a

day, let's some of us go and eat at the Wimpy, is that something that they would

tell you or convey to you, or report back to you about this, a social thing?

MR SCHEEPERS: If it would have been a social event I would have carried

knowledge of it. If it was a single occurrence, for example if they wanted to go and

buy cooldrink I wouldn't know about that, but if it was a function or at a regular

period would go there I would have known about that.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me put it this way Mr Scheepers, we've held a few of these

hearings, and many of them had to do with the applications of members of the

Security Branch throughout the country, and some of the evidence that we heard

was that some of the men that was involved had regular braais, at least once a

week. For what reason it doesn't matter. Is that something that was written in a

book or that was mentioned to the Station Commander, or is something that just

happened?

MR SCHEEPERS: Mr Chairperson, in my office we had the arrangement with the

personnel if they wanted to have a braai they must inform me because then I would


know. I had no objection if it happened, but then I had to know about it, and I had

good control over my personnel.

CHAIRPERSON: You said the same would have happened if they as a group

would have decided to go to the Wimpy?

MR SCHEEPERS: Yes, that would have happened.

MR KOOPEDI: Now as you headed the investigation on this matter, is it correct

that the result of your investigations were that a coloured man or an Indian man

was responsible for planting this bomb?

CHAIRPERSON: Does that - is that relevant Mr Koopedi, your applicants have

said they planted the bomb, and I can't see them having been classified by the

previous regime as Indian or coloured.

MR KOOPEDI: That is precisely my point Chairperson, and the idea was to show

that much as the investigation is proved to be floored now by the nature of the

applicants we had then, and I thought that for the sake of record purposes we have

to show that perhaps the witness before us here cannot be said to have known all.

And like he said there are things that he would not be sure of.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me put it this way, I think I speak for my two colleagues too,

we'd rather prefer a small record than a larger one.

MR KOOPEDI: There are no further questions to this witness.


CHAIRPERSON: Re-examination?

ADV STEENKAMP: No thank you Mr Chairman.

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Scheepers on the issue that has already been addressed by

the Chairperson concerning your possible knowledge of the activities of your

underlings with regard to places that they could have visited with their informers,

is it possible that they could have visited Wimpy with their informers because it

was patronised by people of all races, and in those circumstances they wouldn't be

easily noticeable? Is it possible then they could have done that without your

knowledge?

MR SCHEEPERS: Mr Chairperson I was for a long time in control of the

information collection, in other words the, I dealt with the reports from my

personnel, even before I came Commander, and it was not practice to use the same


place over and over again. If one of the members visited this Wimpy in order to

meet up with an informant, they would not easily repeat this because that would

become a risk.

MS KHAMPEPE: But if he had met with an informer at a Wimpy, would that be

something that would be reported back to you?

MR SCHEEPERS: I would have known if he visited the informant or met up with

him because he has to take notes, but I would not always know where this took

place. But it was not practice to go to the same place over again.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you very much.

MR MOTATA: Just one Mr Chairman following up on my colleague there. I

understand you when you say probably it was not the practice, but could it happen

without your knowledge that for instance for convenience that your underling

would go to the same place more than twice with the same informer because it's a

public place, it's not easily noticeable?

MR SCHEEPERS: Mr Chairperson I doubt that because it would be a risk for

himself as well. In their training they were not allowed to do this. And if he does

do it he would run the risk of being exposed or his informant can be exposed, and

the personnel would not do this.

MR MOTATA: Thank you Mr Chairman I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words you say that it is not likely to happen in this way,

but you cannot dispute it?

MR SCHEEPERS: It is not impossible, but it is very unlikely.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

ADV STEENKAMP: May the witness be excused Mr Chairman.

WITNESS IS EXCUSED

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman the next witness I'm

then calling is Mrs Beatie Malope.

Mr Chairman just before Mrs Malope will start testifying if I can just indicate that

Mrs Malope is also a victim in this incident and she used to work at the Wimpy

Bar where this incident happened. She will be testifying in Xhosa Mr Chairman,

sorry Sotho Mr Chairman.

MRS BEATIE MALOPE: (duly sworn in, states)


EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mrs

Malope am I right in saying that you are also a victim in this incident and that you

are also opposing the application of all 4 applicants, am I right in saying that?

MS MALOPE: That is correct.

ADV STEENKAMP: Before we start the question can you maybe just indicate to

the panel exactly what was your extent of your injuries?

MS MALOPE: My ears were affected, one of my ears is -when you talk with me

you must speak a little bit louder.

ADV STEENKAMP: At the time of this incident, am I right in saying that you

worked at the Wimpy Bar?


ADV STEENKAMP: During 1988 for how many years have you been working at

the Wimpy Bar at that stage?

MS MALOPE: Three years Sir.

ADV STEENKAMP: And what was your function in the Wimpy Bar?

MS MALOPE: I was receptionist receiving calls.

ADV STEENKAMP: Am I right in saying that you were the person receiving calls

for people who was ordering food from the Wimpy Bar?


ADV STEENKAMP: Can you remember, have you ever ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Steenkamp before she carries on, I missed the injuries that

she described on this ...

ADV STEENKAMP: I'm sorry Mr Chairman I'll just ask her to repeat it.

Can you just repeat your injuries to the Chairperson please, exactly what was the

extent of your injuries.

MS MALOPE: The other problem is that my - I'm not able to see from a distance,

my eyes are affected, I have a ...(indistinct) problem.

ADV STEENKAMP: Am I right in saying that you've got limited hearing ability

and also limited vision, is that what the extent of your injuries were?



ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Just to repeat that last question,

have you ever received any orders during the time that you worked in the Wimpy

Bar from the police ordering food for people that was in custody, or even people

that were in custody who was ordering food from - via telephone, or by the

telephone?

MS MALOPE: When we receive orders through the phone you ask the person the

name and you ask him where is the place where he is staying. We were not

delivering food on Saturdays.

ADV STEENKAMP: Have you ever received any orders from police or from the

police station via the telephone?

MS MALOPE: No Sir.

ADV STEENKAMP: During the time that you've worked there - or let's go to the

day of the incident, am I right in saying that on that day you had a special for

children and you were organising this special. Can you maybe describe or

elaborate on that please?

MS MALOPE: Yes we had specials for children. Parents were bringing children on

that day so that they would have the food with the children. We had balloons so

that we should give to all these children that when they punched those balloons one

of them would win a prize.

ADV STEENKAMP: Why did you choose this specific day, was there any reason,

or did you do it on a regular basis?

MS MALOPE: Every month in Wimpy we have a special for children.

ADV STEENKAMP: And this was the specific day in the month?

MS MALOPE: Specials were issued by the company, they would not even tell us

the date. Even on Saturdays we would have specials, but those specials were

usually held on month-end.

CHAIRPERSON: Mrs Malope tell me, you say you were injured and you were

affected by what occurred that day. How do you feel about it?

MS MALOPE: I'm not happy because I did not know what happened or what was

happening on that day.


CHAIRPERSON: Well you've heard the evidence of the applicants, they now say a

bomb was planted there which obviously resulted in your defects now. What do

you feel about that?

MS MALOPE: It is difficult.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it difficult to accept it?

MS MALOPE: It is difficult yes Sir - yes it's difficult.

CHAIRPERSON: Aside from not being happy about having defective hearing and

eyesight, apart from that lot, why is it so difficult?

MS MALOPE: I'm not able to forgive a person. If it was possible for him to make

me recover from my problems with my eyesight and my hearing, that will be

possible for me to forgive.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the reason you oppose the applications?

MS MALOPE: That is correct Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Has any one of them come to speak to you previously after this?

MS MALOPE: No Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: What would be your attitude if they did, any one of them did - to

come make his peace with you?

MS MALOPE: I would not able to answer that. If he will make me recover from

my eyesight and my hearing, I would be able to forgive.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

ADV STEENKAMP: Just the one question. Maam you've heard the testimony

yesterday of the applicants, do you think what they have said yesterday is the full

version, or do you accept the evidence as the truth - what is your feeling about

that?

MS MALOPE: I don't believe.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you maybe just elaborate why you think you don't

believe them?

MS MALOPE: Why did they plant the bomb there if they were looking for people

they were looking for, their targets.

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman, no further questions.



CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi have you got any questions.

MR KOOPEDI: No questions for this witness thank you.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR KOOPEDI

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you, you're excused.

WITNESS IS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Before you go Mrs Molope, what is your address?

MS MALOPE: 1761 Moutlatsi Street.

CHAIRPERSON: 1761?

MS MALOPE: Moutlatsi Street - M-O-U-T-L-A-T-S-I, Moutlatsi.

CHAIRPERSON: Where is that?

MS MALOPE: It's in Benoni Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there any particular name for a suburb?

MS MALOPE: It's next to Attenville.

CHAIRPERSON: So your address would be 1761 Moutlatsi Street Benoni.

MS MALOPE: 1761.

CHAIRPERSON: Moutlatsi Street, Benoni.

MS MALOPE: Wadeville.

CHAIRPERSON: Excuse me?

MS MALOPE: Wattville. W-A-T-T-V-I-L-L-E.

CHAIRPERSON: W-A-T-T-V-I-L-L-E.

MS MALOPE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Benoni. Yes, thank you.


ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman the following witness will be Ms Amanda Jane

Elizabeth Clemenson - Clemenson with a "C" Mr Chairman. Ms Clemenson?

CHAIRPERSON: Amanda?

ADV STEENKAMP: Amanda Jane Elizabeth Clemenson. She is currently residing

in London Mr Chairman, and her full address - she will state her full address just

now. Thank you Mr Chairman. She will be testifying in English Mr Chairman.

AMANDA JANE ELIZABETH CLEMENSON: (duly sworn in, states)

EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Ms

Clemenson can you indicate before we start your physical address, where do you

stay now currently and what do you do for a living?

MS CLEMENSON: I stay in Newcastle ...(indistinct) in England and I'm currently

unable to work because of my disabilities.

CHAIRPERSON: If I had to write a letter to you how would I address it?

MS CLEMENSON: My address?

CHAIRPERSON: Ja.

MS CLEMENSON: 9 Shearwater Close ...

CHAIRPERSON: S-H ...

MS CLEMENSON: E-A-R-W-A-T-E-R Close, Etal Park Estate - E-T-A-L Park

Estate, Newcastle Upon Time (?).

CHAIRPERSON: Newcastle Upon Time.

MS CLEMENSON: ME54NH, England.

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Ms Clemenson - Mr Chairman I

could just indicate that Ms Clemenson did make available certain photos indicating

her injuries. Can you just state for the record exactly what the extent of your

injuries were as a result of this bomb blast?

MS CLEMENSON: I have 70 percent deafness, I must wear a hearing-aid. I've had

two ear operations, both have failed; I have got burns on my face which only

become visible when I am upset; I have about 90 percent body burns all over. My

whole torso is completely scarred due to the fact that I had a silk shirt on which

caught fire; I have electrical cable scarring on my upper body where the cables fell

down on top of me and I was electrocuted. My abdomen was blown apart from just

under where you bra-strap would be to where your panty-line runs across, that


whole area was blown open. I lost half of my large and small intestines; I lost half

of my large and small bowels.

I was also told that had it not been for the surgeon that was present at the hospital I

would have had to have had a colostomy. I am completely embedded with

shrapnel. My right thigh was completely stripped of flesh and muscle, down to the

bone; my phenol artery was severed, I had to have several blood transfusions. I

now have an acrylic plate covering the few vessels which are still there. I have no

feeling in my right leg; I had several large pieces shrapnel removed from my leg. I

had a big hole in the back of the right leg which needed to be stitched and there

was no muscle left there. My feet were both burnt; I had minor shrapnel injuries

which I required stitching for on my lower calves.

I had such internal that injuries that they do not know yet whether I will be able to

carry children. I have had constant surgery for the last ten years. I am now

currently waiting for an operation to remove the acrylic plate in my leg because it

is working its way out and I have been told I stand a 50 percent chance of actually

losing my leg from the hip downwards because they do not know if they will be

able to do the operation successfully.

They plan to cut me from my right shoulder-blade down to my left hip - open my

back and take a large muscle out and do a muscular graph on my upper thigh. But

due to the damage to the blood supply they do not know whether the graft will

take, so they will not know whether or not I will be able to keep my leg. I have

been diagnosed with severe post-traumatic stress disorder and I go for counselling

to see a psychiatrist once every two weeks. I have done so for the last 18 months.

I have severe cellusitis in my right leg which causes me a great deal of pain and I

am often hospitalised through it. I have been unable to work through clinical

depression as well as my injuries. I sustained a full nervous breakdown; I have

constant flashbacks and nightmares, and basically my life is in a mess.

ADV STEENKAMP: Ms Clemenson you've heard the testimony yesterday of the

applicants. Can you indicate to the Committee why you are opposing the

application?

MS CLEMENSON: There was no political motive, I do not believe they disclosed

the full facts. I believe that what they said was blatant lies. They have ruined my

life and they have ruined my family's life, and I will never ever forgive that.

ADV STEENKAMP: Have you ever belonged or supported any political

organisation or movement while you were still in South Africa?

MS CLEMENSON: No Sir I was only 14, I was not aware of any political

organisations, or even understand the politics.


ADV STEENKAMP: So at the time of the injury you were 14 years old?

MS CLEMENSON: Yes Sir.

ADV STEENKAMP: Ms Clemenson can you maybe just indicate, how did it

happen that you visited the Wimpy Bar at that specific time during these - why,

what happened?

MS CLEMENSON: I was out shopping with my father and his fiancee. We were

going clothes shopping, we were due to go for lunch at the Squirrels Nest. Time

was pressing on and we had made arrangements to meet friends, but obviously we

had missed them. We happened to be in the plaza because my father was looking

for a new jacket, and we were in the clothes shop next door, and I was hungry

basically and I insisted on going for a Wimpy because I like their Wimpy burgers

and we used to go there frequently from school.

ADV STEENKAMP: Am I right in saying that you were actually sitting next to the

person that was actually killed in the Wimpy Bar?

MS CLEMENSON: Yes Sir I asked Mary-Anne to move places so we could sit

down.

ADV STEENKAMP: You previously indicated that you think there was no

political, or there is no political motive for the applicants. Can you just elaborate

on that, why you're saying that? I mean the incident occurred - these applicants are

saying they did it because it was part and parcel of the struggle as it then existed.

How do you feel about that?

MS CLEMENSON: I don't believe it, I think that they were just looking for

extreme soft targets and that they were animals wanting to make themselves

known and going about it the completely wrong way. They had absolutely no

political motive whatsoever because they attacked children, they attacked whites

and they attacked blacks.

ADV STEENKAMP: And then lastly, can you remember how busy was the

Wimpy at that stage just before the incident?

MS CLEMENSON: Yes Sir, it was absolutely chock-a-block.

ADV STEENKAMP: Okay. Thank you Mr Chairman, no further questions. Thank

you.


CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any questions Mr Koopedi?


MR KOOPEDI: No questions for this witness.


CHAIRPERSON: Ms Clemenson you were a resident of South Africa at the time?


CHAIRPERSON: You are now a resident of England?


CHAIRPERSON: Did you emigrate because of this blast?

MS CLEMENSON: I went back to England with my mother because the Red

Cross were unable to fund my medical fees anymore, and my mother and myself

were very, very scared, so we went back to the United Kingdom to my other family

that was still there and I had all my further surgery back in England.

CHAIRPERSON: How would you feel if any one or all of these applicants who

now admit to having caused the blast were to approach you and make their peace

with you? How would you - what would be your attitude towards that?

MS CLEMENSON: I would not accept it because I do not believe that they are

genuine. I think they are just saying what they are saying to get amnesty, or

attempting to get amnesty to walk away. Their lives are intact, they may have

committed a number of offences, but they do not go home with the nightmares that

I have at night time; they do not close their eyes and see the Wimpy Bar; they do

not smell the burning flesh; they do not ...(indistinct) when they go out in the

...(indistinct); they do not see the horror on my family's faces when I undress and

they see my scars. I am unable to have a relationship with somebody because I am

so repulsed myself by my body, let alone let somebody else see it. There is nothing

that could ever put that right.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you.

ADV STEENKAMP: May the witness be excused Mr Chairman thanks.

WITNESS IS EXCUSED

ADV STEENKAMP: The last witness I will be calling will be Mr Victor Serrano

Mr Chairman, Honourable Members. Mr Chairman there is also a request that the

son of Mr Serrano will be assisting him during his testimony if there is no

objections to it.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)


ADV STEENKAMP: Sorry Mr Chairman, it's Victor and then Serrano - S-E-R-R-

A-N-O. He will speak in English Mr Chairman.

Mr Chairman just before we start, maybe for the record and for the relevance of

this witness, this witness is the father of the late Mary Serrano who died in the

incident and it was the only deceased in the bomb blast. Thank you Mr Chairman.

VICTOR SERRANO: (duly sworn in, states)

EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Serrano

just before we start, you are currently a retired person. Can you indicate to the

Committee what was your occupation during 1988?

MR SERRANO: Mr Chairperson in 1988 I was a factory manager in

telecommunications organisation company in Boksburg.

ADV STEENKAMP: Am I also right in saying that the person - you are the father

of the person that was killed, can you give - and that was your daughter. Can you

give her full details to the Committee please.

MR SERRANO: My daughter Mary-Anne D'Oliveira Netto Serrano.

ADV STEENKAMP: It's D'Oliveira Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Oliveira.

ADV STEENKAMP: And can you indicate to the Committee how old was she

when she was killed?

MR SERRANO: My daughter was 21 years old.

ADV STEENKAMP: Can you remember how it happened that she visited the

Wimpy Bar at that specific day of the incident?

MR SERRANO: Mr Chairperson it was usual, not just Mary-Anne, but sometimes

myself, my wife and the children to, we used to go to Benoni at the time, do

shopping, whatever, and we always stopped at the Wimpy Bar around this time to

have some food and refreshments. On this particular day my daughter Mary-Anne

she decided to go by herself. She went to pay some accounts and obviously again

the usual, she went to the Wimpy Bar. I believe she was expecting some friends,

some ex-colleagues from the South African ...(indistinct) where Mary-Anne was

working, did work before, and that's it.

ADV STEENKAMP: Just before we go to the applicants itself, you've indicated to

me that Mary-Anne was busy or was in a planning session of being married?


MR SERRANO: Yes Mary-Anne she was engaged a week before and she planned

to be married in December.

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Serrano you've listened and you've heard the evidence of

four applicants, all four of the applicants, can you tell the Chairperson and

honoured members why you are opposing the application?

MR SERRANO: Mr Chairman, Honourable table, I cannot understand why a bomb

so powerful as it was described yesterday was placed in a restaurant which at that

time in 1988 ...(indistinct), it was a little new South Africa of today.

As I stated before I myself with my family we used now and again to go to Wimpy

Bar to have a cold drink and so forth, and it was quite, I felt very good there

because it's a very small place which incidentally I find very strange that police

could meet there because we could almost hear the conversations in tables. The

tables were so close to each other that sometimes it was difficult to talk very loud.

Anyway, with a grandeur of people there of all races and even the waiters they're

always so kind, always full of jokes. In fact one of them is here today. And now

somebody, just for the sake perhaps of creating news to commemorate a specific

day for a specific organisation, goes and places a bomb, a super limpet mine.

No, I'm sorry, that was done purely for sensation, maybe to show that yes, my unit

is doing something. Nothing can justify terrorism that kills and maims innocent

people, particularly when the terrorists know very well what they're going to do.

I'll say even the motives presented by the applicants, I and my wife and my son, we

feel that attack on Wimpy Bar was a senseless, coward, terrorist act which served

no purpose at all, except to make news to commemorate a particular day of a

particular party or organisation.

Jesus while he was crucified he said "Father forgive them because they don't know

what they are doing". Now you people, the applicants, they knew very well what

they were going to do. I have to be - all of us, we have to be very careful, if you

allow me Mr Chairperson to mention this, you have to be very careful with

Esmarie, my wife. She never recovered. My wife at any time can have a stroke and

there is medical reports to confirm that.

My wife since that day, and because of the problems, the family, we're alone, we

haven't got any other family in this country - incidentally I'm a South African

citizen, thank you very much. I became immediately a South African citizen

because I was convinced that sooner or later something like the Truth and

Reconciliation Commission which I always believed could do, could find, could go

into the matter, and thank you, they are here today.

My wife has very high blood pressure and ...(indistinct), you cannot control that,

blood pressure, and she has to take medicines every day faithfully because


according to our doctors, and this can be proved, my wife can never recover, her

heart is bumping, bumping at a very high rate. So I cannot forgive him, I cannot

forgive the applicants. I'll never forget it. Of course it is impossible to loose such a

lovely person as my daughter was. She had no political affiliations, and this will

live with us forever.

It could be by accident that she was in a cross-fire. There was no cross-fire in

Wimpy Bar, there was nothing there. If I am ordered to plant a bomb for a

particular, in a particular place to address a particular group of people or person, I

make sure that people or person are there before I trigger the thing. That was not

done. So you see Chairperson, Honourable table, I cannot forgive you.

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you Mr Chairperson that will be the evidence of Mr

Serrano.


CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi have you got any questions?

MR KOOPEDI: No questions for the witness thank you.


CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Sir.

ADV STEENKAMP: May the witness be excused Mr Chairperson?

WITNESS EXCUSED

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairperson that will conclude the case for the victims in

both the Wimpy and the Katlehong incidents where people were injured on whose

behalf I've called these witnesses. I thank you for your indulgence Mr Chairperson.

Thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi have you got any submissions to make before we

adjourn?

MR KOOPEDI: I would ask for some indulgence. I have prepared a closing

submission to yourselves. However I would ask for a few minutes to be able to see

whether one incorporate the evidence that has come in today in the submission.

The adjournment I'm asking for should not be for more than 5 minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: Well maybe you can use the time that Mr Steenkamp is going to

make his submission to decide what you want to amend. Mr Steenkamp?

ADV STEENKAMP ADDRESSES: Mr Chairperson if I can make a short

submission on behalf of the victims Mr Chairperson if you'd allow me.


The basic case of the applicants were Mr Chairperson, that their political

motivation was that they identified the Wimpy Bar as a legitimate military target

because it was frequented by Security Police. The view of the victims are Mr

Chairperson, that first of all the applicants didn't make a full disclosure - at least on

the evidence of the third applicant Mr Ndlovu who admitted when he planted the

bomb there was no security personnel in the Wimpy at all. The view of the victims

are at that stage there was no ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: That's not what he said, he said he did not see any.

ADV STEENKAMP: I mean he didn't see anybody. The additional problem is Mr

Chairperson that according to the victims they don't understand how attack on a

civilian soft target like this could be described as a legitimate target. It is still the

view of all the victims in both these incidents Mr Chairperson that the applicants'

application my not succeed, it must fail for the pure fact that they had difficulty to

answer direct questions; they had difficulty to explain their political motive

properly; they didn't make a full disclosure in the amnesty application which was

originally presented before the Commission, although they submitted new

statements.

It's still the view of the victims Mr Chairperson that they are not in the position to

accept the applications of the applicants as it stand at this moment, and to conclude

their feeling is that they application of all the applicants must fail before this

Committee. As you wish Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: It seems to me that the opposition to the application centres

around the blasting of the Wimpy Bar restaurant. What - have you got any

submissions in respect of the other events for which application is made?

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairperson as - appearing for the victims, I'm only

appearing for the victims in the Katlehong and the Wimpy Bar incidents. With

regard to the other incidents Mr Chairperson, I don't have any submissions

whatsoever.

MS KHAMPEPE: But you as the Leader of Evidence Mr Steenkamp,

notwithstanding the fact that there are no representations for the other incidents

other than the Wimpy Bar, what is your view with regard to the applications in

relation to the other incidents as they stand? What is your personal view as the

Leader of Evidence?

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairperson I was actually coming to that. My view is

Mr Chairperson, to be fair to the applicants as well, that we were not able to

oppose those applications at all on the pure fact that we could not submit any

factual evidence to oppose that at all. So my view is Mr Chairperson, that the

evidence of the applicants as far as other incidences must go, must stand

uncontested. As you wish Mr Chair.


CHAIRPERSON: Judged on its own?

ADV STEENKAMP: Judged on its own Mr Chairperson, on the merits of the case.

I hope that will answer the question Mr Chairperson.

MS KHAMPEPE: And do you think that having regard to the criteria, they admit

the criteria set out in terms of Section 20 Sub-Section 3?

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairperson my view is, and my only view, it's only my

personal view, is that the evidence as it stands is uncontested. Regarding the

requirements of Section 20 as stipulated in the Act, the only basic requirements is

to have a political motivation and furthermore to make a full disclosure. The bomb

blasts, the pile-ons and further on, the police officer they actually caught actually

supported the evidence in that regard as far as I'm concerned. He indicated that

they were used; they knew that targets were like pile-ons and throw-away stations

...(indistinct). So in actual fact the witness that was called by myself is actually

supporting that evidence. Nothing else except if you want to ask me anything else

Mr Chairperson. Thank you Sir.

MR KOOPEDI ADDRESSES: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Honourable

Committee Members it is my humble submission that all four applicants before

you should be granted amnesty. The four applicants seek amnesty for the actions of

the Johannes Nkosi Unit ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi have you got that all written out, typed out?

MR KOOPEDI: It's not, having regard to the time that I had. It is written out but

not typed up. I will endeavour to make copies and give them to yourselves.

CHAIRPERSON: I'd prefer for you just to give us headings rather than read the

whole thing out.

MR KOOPEDI: What I have before me is no more than four pages. If you would

bear with me, thank you. As I have stated the four applicants before you seek

amnesty for the actions of the Johannes Nkosi Unit and those acts can be found on

page 10 of the summation presented by the Commander of the Unit.

However their applications overlap to other actions by their sub-units. However the

applicants were able to make contact only with one such sub-unit which was the

Basil February Unit in Duduza, and could only give details about the actions of this

unit. Even though the applicants could not obtain any further details and the

whereabouts of other sub-units, they still did not conceal to you Honourable selves

the existence of these sub-units, and they further disclosed their level of

involvement with this unit.


As it is clear that amnesty can only be granted for specific actions it is my

submission that the applicants should be granted amnesty also for their

involvement in the Basil February Unit. With regards ...(intervention)

MS KHAMPEPE: Do we have information, do we have sufficient information

with regard to the specific offences committed by that sub-unit? Has any relevant

and sufficient information led before us with regard to those acts?

MR KOOPEDI: I will say the answer to that is two-fold Honourable member in

that the applicants have enumerated, have specified their offences or acts of the

Basil February Unit to the best of their knowledge. Now what I'm asking for is that

amnesty should be considered for their involvement up to that level of assisting

and supplying whatever weaponry to this unit.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes I thought you were asking for amnesty in relation to the

attacks on counsellors that were alleged to have been committed by the February

Unit.

MR KOOPEDI: On the contrary, what I - what we're asking amnesty for is our

involvement with that. Now I am not sure whether anyone can interpret that to

overflow to the actual execution of those acts, but however the applicants feel that

they trained this unit; they supplied this unit with weaponry and they taught them

all sorts of things, and it's only fair to ask for amnesty in that it is believed, that if

the applicants had, that the unit, the sub-unit has asked for amnesty, that unit is

going to say to your Honourable selves, if they come before you, that they were

trained by this unit, the Johannes Nkosi Unit; and we believe that it would be a big

error not to include and seek amnesty for our involvement or the applicants'

involvement with the Basil February Unit.

MS KHAMPEPE: Are you asking for amnesty for having illegally possessed

weapons and ammunition?

MR KOOPEDI: To add on that, it's that, but not only that. But we have, if you like,

instigated this other unit to go and do certain acts.

MS KHAMPEPE: There is no evidence that they ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You see Mr Koopedi it's unnecessary for members of this panel

to ask those questions, but we find ourselves in that position where we have to ask

those questions. Someone hasn't done his homework, because you ask us now on

behalf of your applicants to grant amnesty. Now for what must we grant amnesty?

What crime are these applicants asking to be pardoned for?

MR KOOPEDI: I think what they are asking to be pardoned for is to posses the

weapons, the hand-grenades that were used, to supply these weapons, and also to

give orders to this unit to carry out attacks.


MS KHAMPEPE: There is no evidence that an attack was carried out as a result of

the orders given by your clients. We don't have that evidence.

MR KOOPEDI: If you will allow me I will not deliberate that point, however I

thought it's incumbent on me to stress that the applicants are interested in the

activities of their sub-units.

CHAIRPERSON: You've made the point as far as you can make it.

MR KOOPEDI: Yes. I'm indebted Chairperson. Now I have with regards to

activities of the other sub-units which we do not have details on ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Well then skip that.

MR KOOPEDI: As it pleases you Chairperson. During cross-examination of the

applicants yesterday my learned friend advocate Steenkamp presented a newspaper

cutting which purported to state ANC policy on the attack on the Wimpy Bar in

Benoni.

CHAIRPERSON: Before you proceed, let us get one thing straight, I don't think

you need to argue on anything else but the Wimpy aspect because I think it's

virtually been conceded that there's a better than good chance on the successful

application in respect of the other events. The Wimpy one seems to be the focal

issue for which we want to, on which we want you to argue.

MR KOOPEDI: I'm indebted Chairperson and you will notice that my entire

address will revolve around that issue. Now I have gone through the ANC's

submissions, the written and oral submissions which were made to the TRC, and

there is nowhere that the ANC states that the attack on Wimpy was a result of a

mix-up within the ANC structures. And because there has not been any evidence to

corroborate what comes out of that newspaper cutting I would request that Exhibit

B be disregarded in all its aspects as it bears no authority and authenticity.

MS KHAMPEPE: Is there any evidence on the ANC's submissions that you have

referred to that support the actions taken by your clients?

MR KOOPEDI: I am not able to pinpoint the relevant page, but I believe it will

suffice to say that in the voluminous submissions that have been given, handed in

to the TRC, the ANC has acknowledged that Wimpy, the Wimpy Bar in Benoni

attack was their operation, was an ANC operation. They have not distanced

themselves from that operation. Now there is ...(indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: It's fine to say they did not distance themselves. Did they

associate themselves with it?


MR KOOPEDI: Indeed they did, the Wimpy is listed as one of the attacks that

were carried out by ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No that is so, I don't think it is in dispute that any of these

applicants are members of Umkhonto weSizwe and ANC, but the drafters of that

submission, is it specifically stated - I will check it, but I'm hoping that you can

help me here, I don't recall the exact wording, is it stated in that submission that the

ANC in its policy associated itself with the bombing or blasting of Wimpy, or have

they just listed the Wimpy blast in Benoni as an event that was caused by members

of the ANC?

MR KOOPEDI: On the submissions as I can recall, Wimpy appears only as listed,

and not as, there are no further elaborations. However I would with your

indulgence, wish to show further that there is more than listing of Wimpy, there is,

there was association with this act by the ANC.

MS KHAMPEPE: I think it will be better for you Mr Koopedi to do that, because

if I recall the submissions and the listing of various incidents that are contained in

that submission, they are contained therein because the ANC has associated

themselves with regard to a number of them, as listed in the submission. So I think

it would be better for you to check and give us more information with regard to the

point you are making.

MR KOOPEDI: Thank you Madam Commissioner. If I may go on, re-visit the

issue. Now I also wish to draw the attention of this Honourable Committee to a

publication named Seshaba. I believe you would know that this was the ANC's

newsletter whilst in exile. I would refer you to the January issue of Seshaba of

1983, page 1 thereof, and I have made copies of this publication and other

publications I'm going to be referring you to.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) there's two issues that concern us in this

application and it's based on the opposition. Firstly on what basis is it alleged that a

bomb was blasted in that Wimpy for political reasons; and whether any of the

applicants or all of them have made full disclosure in compliance with the Act.

Those are the two issues we want to hear. We are quite aware of what certain

Seshaba's and the - all the documents of the ANC. We are also aware of the then

president of the ANC, what he said about taking the fight to wherever we needed

to take it. Address us on the merits of this application.

MR KOOPEDI: This is indeed what I am endeavouring to do, I am trying to show

you Honourable Committee Members that from these publications and other forms

of communication it will be seen as to why and how the applicants descended on

Wimpy. It will also be explained and this is an endeavour to show that it was - the

attack on Wimpy was - had many facets to it. The attack on Wimpy was a political

action ...(intervention)


CHAIRPERSON: I will be very surprised if you are able to prove that to us

because your own clients tell us that the reason Wimpy was blasted because they

were after the Security Police - for no other reason.

MR KOOPEDI: May I also with respect remind you Honourable Chairperson that

it was in fact elaborated on at some stage and during the testimony that it was not

only to get at the security personnel, but it went beyond that. It went towards the

commemoration - the 67th commemoration of the South African Communist

Party; it went towards spreading the necessary propaganda and the issue that was

termed "like taking away the honeymoons from the TV screens", and I would urge

strongly so that the Committee members should please consider that the applicants

before you did not attack Wimpy simply for the one reason, there were a number

of reasons.

MS KHAMPEPE: That in mind Mr Koopedi, I'm with you. Having that in mind,

are you then able to crisply address us on what basis was Wimpy targeted - having

all those reasons in mind, are you able to crisply address us on that. What was the

basis for choosing Wimpy as a target, what ...(inaudible), and why is it considered

a legitimate target, having regard to the Seshaba issue that you've alluded to, and

having regard to the political objectives that you have stated was intended by your

applicants, what was the reason why Wimpy was targeted for purposes of

propagating the objectives of your clients?

MR KOOPEDI: I am a little lost in what you have suggested, which is whether I

am able to crisply address you on that.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me make it easier for you to understand then. If a bomb blast

which I've got serious doubts about was to commemorate a birthday or a particular

date of the South African Communist Party, why was Wimpy the target for that,

why not the Union Buildings?

MR KOOPEDI: I would with respect urge the Honourable Committee Members to

not only single out the reasons, and consider each reasons for attacking Wimpy in

isolation. The evidence before you has been that there were a number of reasons

that led to Wimpy. Initially ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Give us those reasons, let's list it. It was seeking out security

policemen; commemorating a particular significant day of the South African

Communist Party, what else?

MR KOOPEDI: An armed propaganda tactic.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, what else?

MR KOOPEDI: A respond to a call by the leadership of the ANC to take war into

the white areas, and I think those should suffice in terms of the reasonings.


CHAIRPERSON: The last three, how does Wimpy become a target for that?

MR KOOPEDI: Evidence was led before you that initially the idea was to focus on

the security personnel in Benoni who was responsible for the mayhem in the East

Rand. Now that is how we come to Benoni, because that is where the headquarters

was. But then as events turned out, the security personnel were seen to be

frequenting Wimpy, and as evidence was given to yourselves that at Wimpy this is

where they would be most vulnerable, and that has not been hidden to yourselves.

And that is why people then decided to go to Wimpy.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi I've just been talking to one of my colleagues

...(inaudible)

PROBLEMS WITH RECORDING EQUIPMENT - INAUDIBLE

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi we feel that we're asking you questions that you are

not able to readily at this point in time answer satisfactorily without having the

benefit of the documents that you refer to. Would it be not better to invite you to

make written heads or written submissions to us by next Wednesday, and submit it

to Cape Town head office.

Deal with the issues that we've raised with you, in addition to one important issue

that we want you to address specifically. It's the question of proportionality. Would

that be better - not better to do that?

MR KOOPEDI: I will gladly accept that proposition.

CHAIRPERSON: We will await your heads of argument then, but deal with those

issues that we've raised with you in addition to the issue of proportionality.

We've come to the end of this hearing. We hope to be able to make a decision on

the issues very soon after receiving Mr Koopedi's argument. And I want to thank

the logistics officer for arranging this hearing. Also special thanks to all the

interpreters, it is a thankless job, it is a difficult job. To the applicants for taking

advantage of the opportunities to come to terms with life. And in particular I want

to address the victims and those people who have lost love ones. Unfortunately this

country has experienced a terrible life over the last couple of hundred years.

There are other people who have similarly lost loved ones, especially during the

times, the height of the apartheid regime. That does not, and I don't intend to

suggest, that what happened in the events which we are concerned with is justified.

If for nothing else, for humanitarian reasons one can appreciate the feelings and the

hurt that you experience, and one can only hope that in an endeavour to bring to

fruition what we started in this country in 1994, that we can, with time, come to

terms with what has happened.


I'm not going to suggest forgiving or forgetting, that is a matter for each individual

person, but I can only hope that with time the emotional aspects of your lives will

tend to be remedied. I'm not too sure what we're going to find or what decision

we're going to come to in this matter, I can only draw your attention to the fact that

this Committee intends to apply the law as best it can, and whatever decision we

make will be in terms of that law, and probably in the interest of this country.

I thank those victims and those who lost their loved ones for participating in this

extraordinary and unusual process. It is intended to bring people together like we

should have been many hundreds of years ago, but as I said it was an unfortunate

experience of this country, and it is the duty of each of us to press on so that we

rectify the wrongs as best we can.

This hearing is now closed, I thank you.

HEARING ADJOURNS

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

Documents

TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION … · TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION AMNESTY HEARING TRANSCRIPTS BENONI 2 (7 - 8 September 1998) Wimpy Bar bombings PART 1 PART 2