This resource is hosted by the Nelson Mandela Foundation, but was compiled and authored by Padraig O’Malley. It is the product of almost two decades of research and includes analyses, chronologies, historical documents, and interviews from the apartheid and post-apartheid eras.

To search the O'Malley archive please click here.

Name: Machihlile Wilson Baloyi - Witness

11-05-1999: Day 7

Matter: Boipatong Massacre

ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: Is the position that the TRC is not ready to argue the application?

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Chairperson, Chairperson, that is the position. The TRC is not in a position to argue the application at this stage. I am still communicating with the National Legal Officer of the TRC, Adv Paddy Prior in Cape Town. There is an information that I expect him to furnish me which information, part of it Chairperson, has been requested by the applicants. It is upon me receiving that information, that we will be in a position to go on, thank you sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there any objection if this application stands down? No objection, yes, very well. Is there any objection?

MR BERGER: No objection.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes very well, the application will then stand down until the TRC is ready to argue the matter. Yes Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson, before we call our first witness, we have a document which we would like to hand in as Exhibit BB. It is, you will recall Chairperson from Exhibit T we sent out numerous letters to amongst others, Iscor, we have received a reply from Iscor, and we would like to hand that bundle in as Bundle BB.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you received a copy of this document? Have you? All right, okay, this will be Exhibit BB, all right. Yes Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: Sorry Judge, I am getting instructions from all over the show at the moment.

CHAIRPERSON: But where is the seat where the witnesses are going to sit?

MR BERGER: That was what we were also thinking about, we thought perhaps it should be on our side.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: Adv Thomas has just arrived as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Could perhaps either, I suppose you want to have an eye contact with the witness, Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: Perhaps if the witness could sit on the corner, on the edge and face you, we will be able to have eye contact, and we will all move up.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, because otherwise what you can do, you could move onto the edge so that the witness comes more towards the other side, but I will from this position, we will have enough view, sufficient view of the witness.

MR BERGER: Ms Cambanis says that she will sit behind for the time being, and then we will shuffle chairs as we go on.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well, okay. Perhaps what we should do during the break, could we organise an extra chair so that they can sit whilst waiting for their turn.

MS THOMAS: Chairperson, I was wondering if this is an opportune time for me to place myself on record and to introduce myself to the entire Committee. I am acting here on behalf of the ANC, them being an interested party in these proceedings, and needless to mention Mr Chairperson, that I arrived late because not familiar with this place, I got horribly lost, but ultimately one manages to find the place. My name is Lindi Thomas from the Pretoria Bar.

CHAIRPERSON: Ma'am, are you representing the ANC in these proceedings or only in the application?

MS THOMAS: In the application.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. The request of the TRC, that application has stood down until hopefully at half past eleven, when the matter will then be argued, okay.

MS THOMAS: I do understand that Chair, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.

MR LAX: If you can just switch off that microphone please, thank you.

MR BERGER: Sorry about that Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Is everyone reasonably comfortable?

MR BERGER: Yes, it looks like it. Chairperson, we gave our learned friends today a short list of witnesses who we intended starting with. The first few names on the list, unfortunately the witnesses haven't arrived, so we are going to start of with Mr Wilson Baloyi.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: He was a name that we gave yesterday, so I beg leave to call Mr Wilson Baloyi.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Would you please get him connected please. Mr Baloyi, what language do you speak?

MR BALOYI: Ii do speak English and Zulu, but I am Shangaan.

CHAIRPERSON: What language would you like to give your evidence in?

MR BALOYI: I will attempt to speak Zulu.

CHAIRPERSON: Please give us your full names?

MR BALOYI: I am Machihlile Wilson Baloyi.

CHAIRPERSON: Please spell that name?

MR BALOYI: Machihlile.

CHAIRPERSON: Baloyi.

MR BALOYI: Wilson Baloyi.

MACHIHLILE WILSON BALOYI: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may be seated. Yes, Mr Berger.

EXAMINATION BY MR BERGER: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Baloyi, could you tell the Committee where you lived on the 17th of June 1992?

MR BALOYI: I resided at 732 Bafokeng Street.

MR BERGER: In Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: In Boipatong, yes.

MR BERGER: And at the moment, where are you living?

MR BALOYI: I am still residing there.

MR BERGER: In June of 1992, just before the massacre, who were you living with?

MR BALOYI: On the 17th of June, when we were attacked, I was at home.

MR BERGER: No, no, but let's talk about before the attack, during the beginning of June, who was living with you at home?

MR BALOYI: I stayed with my children.

MR BERGER: Their names?

MR BALOYI: My wife, Mary Baloyi and Pitso Baloyi. Pitso was a Policeman. There is also Silo Baloyi as well as Howard Baloyi and Mqapi Baloyi as well as Bertha Baloyi, as well as Cleopatra's mother, Mandu Baloyi.

MR LAX: Sorry, can you just repeat the last name please, I just didn't catch the last person.

MR BALOYI: The last person was Mandu Baloyi.

INTERPRETER: Sorry, did you say Mandu or Mandlu?

MR BALOYI: Mandu Baloyi.

MR BERGER: How old was Pitso at the time?

MR BALOYI: I cannot recall, but they are now grown up. He went for Police training when he was 17 years old.

MR BERGER: So he was an adult?

MR BALOYI: Yes, we are all adults.

MR BERGER: And Silo?

MR BALOYI: Silo is younger than Pitso. I cannot really estimate their age.

MR BERGER: And Howard?

MR BALOYI: Howard is 17 years old.

MR BERGER: At the moment?

MR BALOYI: Yes. He only applied for his identity document just now.

MR BERGER: And Mqapi?

MR BALOYI: Mqapi is around 16 years old.

MR BERGER: And Cleopatra?

MR BALOYI: She must be 12 or 13, I do not know the ages off by heart.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, just a minute. What did you say is the name of, is her name, is it, I thought you said Cleopela? What is her name?

MR BALOYI: Cleopatra.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, okay, I see. All right.

MR BERGER: And Mandu is Cleopatra's mother?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct. Mandu must be over 37 years.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, I want to take you back to the 17th of June 1992. Is there anything that happened that you witnessed before the massacre?

MR BALOYI: Firstly at about five o'clock, I was telephoned by Father Patrick. He said it seemed as if the people from kwaMadala hostel are going to attack Boipatong or Bophelong.

INTERPRETER: He wants to know whether he can proceed with his evidence?

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, did you say Bophelong or Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is what he told me, he said it seemed they were going to attack on that day.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, I wasn't sure whether you said he said they were going to attack Boipatong or he said they were going to attack Bophelong. What did he say to you?

MR BALOYI: He said he was not certain whether they were going to attack Boipatong or Bophelong, but they were going to attack a place, some place between those two townships. Thereafter I informed my wife that it appeared as if Inkatha was going to attack and that afternoon, later on that evening when I was watching TV, at about twenty past ten in the evening, I heard a noise in the streets. At first I thought it was comrades just walking passed the street. I told my wife and children that they should stay up, they should not go to bed because an attack was apparently imminent. Therefore my wife told my children not to wander around. At that same time, a Police van arrived, it stopped right in front of my garden.

MR BERGER: Where were you at that time?

MR BALOYI: I was just seated, fully dressed, watching TV.

MR BERGER: If you were watching TV, how could you see the Police van?

MR BALOYI: My window is big and I could hear the engine running and my window has a lace curtain, so you are able to see what is happening outside, but that person who is outside, cannot see inside the house.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, can I just ask you to speak a bit slower, because the Interpreter has to keep up with you.

MR BALOYI: Okay.

MR BERGER: What did you see through your window?

MR BALOYI: I saw a Police vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: Just a minute, what is the word you used?

MR BALOYI: It is a Police vehicle with a back door.

CHAIRPERSON: No, what is the name that you just used, what do you call that?

MR BALOYI: We know it is a "koyoco".

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR BALOYI: A casspir is a smaller vehicle.

MR BERGER: So this vehicle that you saw, looked bigger than a casspir to you?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it was much bigger than a casspir.

MR BERGER: Yes, please continue.

MR BALOYI: It moved off, thereafter there was a noise in the street and I looked through the window, but I didn't see anything, I just heard a noise. After a while as I was still looking, I saw a large number of people approaching.

MR BERGER: Could you describe these people?

MR BALOYI: They were a large crowd, some were carrying TV's, others were carrying different items.

MR BERGER: What were they doing?

MR BALOYI: They were walking along the street and as they came near my house, they went into the Nqwani household and some went into the Buwa household. I was watching.

MR LAX: Can you just slow down a little bit, I am finding it hard to keep up with you and I am missing bits and pieces. What was - you said - what was the first house you said they went into, I didn't catch the name?

MR BALOYI: Nqwani, Victor Nqwani's house.

MR BERGER: What street would that be?

MR BALOYI: Bafokeng Street. They also went into Buwa's house.

MR BERGER: Would that also be on Bafokeng Street?

MR BALOYI: Yes, also on Bafokeng Street.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, please slow down. I was watching, because these two houses are opposite mine.

MR BERGER: All right, what were they doing in those houses, did you see?

MR BALOYI: They first broke the gates, they broke the windows, I was watching at the time.

MR BERGER: You didn't run away?

MR BALOYI: I will come to that later.

MR BERGER: Right. Please continue?

MR BALOYI: These windows were big, at Buwa's house they did not use the door to gain access into the house, but they just went in through the windows, because those windows were big. They broke the door at Victor's house. We were watching, some of them were walking passed the street. After they had finished at Victor's house, they went out, the people at Buwa's house also went out. Somebody called one of my children, Silo. He said Dududu, Morene Lucky, these people used to stay with Inkatha members or they used to dance with the IFP members at the hostel.

MR BERGER: Who was that person who was calling out to the young people?

MR BALOYI: This was Mtwana. These are all his children.

MR BERGER: When you talk about ...

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, I don't know if I misunderstood you, who is this person who was calling out your children?

MR BALOYI: Mtwana Zulu.

ADV SIGODI: Yes.

MR BERGER: And the names that he was calling out?

MR BALOYI: He was calling him by Dududu, which was a nickname, Silo's nickname.

MR BERGER: What did Silo used to do with Mtwana Zulu?

MR BALOYI: They used to do traditional dance together.

MR BERGER: Where did they used to do that?

MR BALOYI: All over, but they used to practice at kwaMadala hostel.

MR BERGER: How did you know that it was Prince Zulu?

MR BALOYI: I was watching them, they were outside.

MR BERGER: Did you actually see him?

MR BALOYI: I told my child not to go outside, I told him to go and hide with his mother.

MR BERGER: No Mr Baloyi, my question is did you actually see Mtwana Zulu outside your house?

MR BALOYI: I know him very well, I saw him.

MR BERGER: How did you know him very well, from where?

MR BALOYI: He is married to one woman who stayed four houses away from mine.

MR BERGER: Did he used to live in Bafokeng Street?

MR BALOYI: Please repeat that question?

MR BERGER: Did Mtwana Zulu used to live in Bafokeng Street?

MR BALOYI: The house in Bafokeng Street belongs to his in-laws. He used to come there regularly. He had a house at Majola Street.

MR BERGER: What happened - slowly please - after you heard Mtwana Zulu calling out the names of the youngsters?

MR BALOYI: He did not come to my house, the people who were at Buwa's house, went out. The people who left Nqwani's house, then came to my house. They broke down the gate and the broke all the windows. My door was broken, by that time I was standing. They entered the house, I was just looking at them.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, could you describe what they looked like?

MR BALOYI: The people who entered the house had red headbands on.

MR BERGER: Anything else that you noticed?

MR BALOYI: One took a hi-fi, one took a box of records, one approached me, he had an axe.

MR BERGER: Please continue.

MR BALOYI: I stood in front of my bedroom door, he approached my directly and he wanted to hack me. I went into the room. As he tried to come into the room, I slammed the door on him.

MR BERGER: Yes?

MR BALOYI: He fell onto the sofa, he got up and came to me, approached me. I tried to get him to the room, I was holding onto the door. He tried to hack me again, I still slammed the door on him, and he fell again. When he fell, a suitcase that he had been carrying, burst open.

MR BERGER: We are not getting interpretation.

INTERPRETER: I was requesting the witness to repeat what he had said.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, just before you repeat what you said, Mr Baloyi, are you saying that this person had an axe and at the same time he was carrying a suitcase?

MR BALOYI: When they entered, there were three of them, they had brought it along, and they put it on a table. They were just trying to kill me. I saw the one person taking a hi-fi, the other took a box of records, they had just put the suitcase there. When I slammed the door on him, he fell onto a chair, he got up, approached me again wanting to hack me, I still slammed the door on him, and he fell again and then he fell on the suitcase, which then burst open.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MAPOMA: Mr Baloyi, are you able to hear the Interpreter speaking to you?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I can hear.

MR MAPOMA: I noticed that your earphone is not properly on in the ear.

MR BALOYI: I can hear from the right ear.

MR MAPOMA: Okay.

MR BERGER: Slowly please Mr Baloyi.

MR BALOYI: Okay.

MR BERGER: Please continue.

MR BALOYI: When the suitcase opened, it was full of women's shoes as well as drinking glasses.

MR BERGER: Did the attackers continue to go for you?

MR BALOYI: It was just one person who was attempting to hack me.

MR BERGER: What was happening in the rest of the house if you know?

MR BALOYI: They did not enter into the other rooms. They just remained where I was in the sitting room.

MR BERGER: What happened then?

MR BALOYI: He tried to hack the door, but I closed it. He continued hacking the door, trying to get it open. The door still has those marks up to today. I showed it to my children.

MR BERGER: Did they manage to get through the door?

MR BALOYI: No, they were unable to enter the room.

MR BERGER: Did they eventually leave your house?

MR BALOYI: Somebody was calling, he said "the time is up, we should leave now, leave what you are doing." He spoke in Zulu.

MR BERGER: Did you hear any other languages spoken that night?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR BERGER: When was that?

MR BALOYI: At that very same time, when they were calling the others, somebody said in Afrikaans "maak gou", which means hurry.

MR BERGER: That voice that you heard shouting "maak gou", are you able to say if it was spoken by a black person or by a white person?

MR BALOYI: The people who attacked me, spoke in Zulu and that voice was clearly a white person's voice.

MR BERGER: The Afrikaans?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR BERGER: What happened then?

MR BALOYI: They all left and went into the forest.

MR BERGER: What did you do?

MR BALOYI: As I went out, because the door was already broken, I stood in my yard.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, what was stolen from your house?

MR BALOYI: They stole records and children's clothing which was on the chair. The hi-fi, they broke it outside but they did not take it with.

MR BERGER: Besides the door and the hi-fi, what else was destroyed in your house?

MR BALOYI: The glasses that were on display on the sideboard as well as the glasses that had been in that suitcase that they brought along.

MR BERGER: Was anyone, any member of your family, anyone staying with you, injured during the attack?

MR BALOYI: All persons in my family, had hidden in the toilet.

MR BERGER: So nobody was injured?

MR BALOYI: Mandu was just injured when she stepped on the glasses that had been part of the glasses that had been broken.

MR BERGER: All right, Mr Baloyi, let's go back to, you have now come out of your house, the attackers have left your house, what did you do?

MR BALOYI: I saw as they were walking off into the veld, as they were going back to kwaMadala.

MR BERGER: Where were you standing?

MR BALOYI: As I was standing outside, things were happening very fast. I went back to the house checking if no one was injured amongst my children and I realised that no one had been injured because they had hidden in the toilet.

MR BERGER: And then what did you do?

MR BALOYI: I went on to the garage's rooftop.

MR BERGER: Yes, what did you see?

MR BALOYI: I was able to see everything that was happening out there in the veld.

MR BERGER: Could you also see to Amatolo Street?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I saw it clearly.

MR BERGER: Your house is near the corner of Bafokeng and Thembu Streets, is that right?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And the street, the street to the north of yours is Amatolo?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And beyond Amatolo is the firms?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: What did you see if anything, happening on Amatolo Street?

MR BALOYI: At Amatolo I saw the very same Police vehicle that had been standing in front of my house, parked under the tree there.

MR BERGER: How many Police vehicles did you see?

MR BALOYI: I saw a casspir and two "koyoco's".

MR BERGER: And what were these vehicles doing?

MR BALOYI: Let me just finish off - as the IFP people were walking along the veld, they were being led by two of these vehicles. Two were on the side of the firms.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, I am sorry, we are not getting the interpretation.

MR LAX: Sorry, what has he said so far, we haven't heard a thing since the side of the fence? The side of the veld or side of the fence, veld?

INTERPRETER: Firms.

MR LAX: Oh, firms, thank you.

INTERPRETER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, we want to record what you are saying.

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Please speak slowly and allow the Interpreter to interpret what you say.

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Otherwise some of your evidence will get lost. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I do.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you please start again, your Counsel asked you what did you see, just start from there.

MR BALOYI: As I was standing on top of the garage, I saw that vehicle, a "koyoco" parked under a tree in Amatolo Street. It drove off from that street and went directly to the gate, to the gate in front of the Metal Box factory where the other two vehicles were also parked. The Police got off those vehicles and they fired shots in the air.

CHAIRPERSON: Who fired shots, did the Police?

MR BALOYI: A Policeman fired, it looked like fire.

MR BERGER: Yes?

MR BALOYI: It was a huge light and you could see it suddenly, the scene became bright and you could see what was going on.

MR BERGER: This was the shot fired by the Policeman into the air, which lit up the area?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR BERGER: Please continue.

MR BALOYI: They then left and these two vehicles helped them, they had eliminated the place and they were walking along Umzimvubu towards the main road.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, the Police vehicles that you describe were moving along Amatolo Street, is that what you said?

MR BALOYI: Those are separate.

MR BERGER: Now the ones that were moving along Amatolo Street.

MR BALOYI: It was just one, others were parked under a tree, that is at the Metal Box gate. It was a casspir and a "koyoco" vehicle, and when the one from Amatolo reached there, it was then three vehicles in total.

MR BERGER: Where were the attackers at that stage?

MR BALOYI: They were in the veld, they were just moving along in the veld.

MR BERGER: Then you spoke about Police vehicles in Umzimvubu Street, is that right?

MR BALOYI: I did not know where these came from, but there were two of them. These were the vehicles that had escorted them.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me get this, there was what you call a "koyoco" which earlier on during that evening, had parked next to your house?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And then there was a casspir and a "koyoco" which were parked at or near the gate of the Metal Box?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And then there were two "koyoco's"? Are those the ones that were travelling along Umzimvubu?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Which were providing light to the attackers?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR BERGER: Where were the attackers in relation to the vehicles on Umzimvubu Street?

MR BALOYI: As they were in the veld, they were walking along and it was dark in the veld, but on the other side, there was light as well as in the township, therefore they were following the casspirs, those vehicles, because they provided light for them. They went towards the footbridge, there is a furrow there.

CHAIRPERSON: Did the "koyoco", the two "koyoco's" that were travelling along Umzimvubu, did they remain travelling along Umzimvubu?

MR BALOYI: They went along the tar road, it was closed but they used that same road towards the robots.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, you mentioned Trek and it wasn't interpreted, are you talking about the garage?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, but were they still in Umzimvubu when they reached ...

MR BALOYI: The street is Umzimvubu from the township until you come to the robots.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well, okay.

MR SIBANYONI: What your legal representative wanted to know from you was, where were their (indistinct) cars, on Umzimvubu Road in relation to the "koyoco's", were they in front of the "koyoco's", on the side or at the back?

MR BALOYI: The "koyoco's" were not travelling very fast, they were driving slowly. After crossing the furrow, the "koyoco's" then left.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, you spoke about the street that runs out of the township passed the Trek garage to the robot?

MR BALOYI: The street from the township does not go passed the garage, it actually meets or intersects with this other street, at the robots. I am saying this tarred road from the township is Umzimvubu and it only ends at the robots, but that road is now closed, a school has since been built there.

CHAIRPERSON: Are these robots near the Trek garage?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR BERGER: Isn't that street Noble Boulevard?

MR BALOYI: Noble Boulevard is the other one that proceeds towards Cape Gate and that Noble Boulevard meets with Bakoena Street near Slovo Park.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi, I am going to ask you to explain to the Committee why you came to the conclusion that the Police vehicles were escorting the attackers.

MR BALOYI: It was obvious to me that the Police were accompanying these people because they were not arresting them. They had just killed people and they were not arresting them, instead they were walking along with them.

MR BERGER: And then did you witness them, or what did you witness after that?

MR BALOYI: As I was watching, they moved on, along the footpath, and they walked and moved shall I say, behind the nursery firms. Others moved in front of the nursery firms and they were being followed by these "koyoco's" as they were proceeding towards the compound. People had come out and they were watching. Even though people do not want to come and testify, but they were watching. We had been staying awake and guard till late, we would go to sleep at round about one o'clock.

MR BERGER: Besides the vehicles that you saw, the Police vehicles, were you able to identify any of the occupants of those vehicles? Did you see the occupants of any of those vehicles?

MR BALOYI: No, no. I did not see them.

MR BERGER: And then they left and returned to kwaMadala, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR BERGER: Is there anything else about the attack that you feel you have left out, that you haven't spoken about?

MR BALOYI: There are several things that I have forgotten.

MR BERGER: Do you mean you can't remember now?

MR BALOYI: I do remember, but I am saying with your permission yes, I can continue.

MR BERGER: Please continue.

MR BALOYI: As these vehicles were proceeding, entering the compound, a "koyoco" came back and when it came back, we were now trying to get into cars, people who had been injured from the Buwa household and this "koyoco" drove passed us as we were busy and it stopped at Hlubi. One white Police and one black Police came out and they took a corpse and put it in the "koyoco" and we were trying to get some of these injured people into the cars and they on the other hand, were putting into the "koyoco", a corpse.

MR BERGER: Did the ambulances arrive after that?

MR BALOYI: An ambulance came and we took members of the Buwa family into this ambulance.

MR BERGER: Can you remember roughly what time that was?

MR BALOYI: I think it was about twenty passed ten and after that, one did not have time to look at the watch because we were concentrating on what was happening. The ambulance came after some time.

MR BERGER: So the twenty passed ten is a time that you put for the start of the attack?

MR BALOYI: No, no.

MR BERGER: Sorry?

MR BALOYI: That is when they came to my household, because I was watching television.

MR BERGER: You say that is when the attackers reached you?

MR BALOYI: That is when they started attacking Victor as well as Buwa's households.

MR BERGER: Before the attack and earlier in the day, or in the evening, did you see anything strange in the township?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did see something.

MR BERGER: What was that?

MR BALOYI: Two "koyoco's" came moving along the road on the side of the firms, there were two ambulances that were following the "koyoco's" and these vehicles took the direction of Cape Gate.

MR BERGER: This was before the attack?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR BERGER: Do you know what happened to those vehicles and ambulances?

MR BALOYI: I did not hear anything, but I later on heard that there were sirens wailing around Slovo, but we don't know what was happening there.

MR BERGER: Thank you Mr Baloyi, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BERGER

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Strydom?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chair. Mr Baloyi, how old are you now?

MR BALOYI: I was born in 1920, the 7th of February.

MR STRYDOM: So you are 79 years old, is that right? Have you ever stayed in Senqu Street in Boipatong or not?

MR BALOYI: Senqu? I don't know that name. What street is it intersecting with?

MR STRYDOM: Maybe I can ask you just like that, it may be easier, how long have you been staying at 732 Bafokeng Street?

CHAIRPERSON: Will you just spell the name of the street that you have just mentioned?

MR STRYDOM: Senqu. It intersects with Bapedi Street.

MR BALOYI: That street intersects with Bakoena, further down, at Slovo. I reside on the other side, this side before Slovo.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, how long have you been staying at 732 Bafokeng Street?

MR BALOYI: I came into the township in 1955.

MR STRYDOM: And have you been staying in the same house ever since?

MR BALOYI: I used to stay at Majola Street at number 216.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know another person by the name of Wilson Baloyi that stays in Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: Which street?

MR STRYDOM: In Senqu Street.

MR BALOYI: I know all the Baloyi's in Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: You see, I want to put to you that ...

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer?

MR BALOYI: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Senqu Street?

MR BALOYI: No. There isn't such a name, such a street in Boipatong, I know the whole of Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't there a street called Senqu Street?

MR BALOYI: Senqu?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Senqu Street?

MR BALOYI: Yes, there is Senqu.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what you are being asked is, do you know of any Wilson Baloyi who stays in Boipatong, particularly in Senqu Street?

MR BALOYI: The one that I know, stays in Bapedi Street and other one used to stay at Barolong Street, in Barolong Street, but he has since left. I am the only Wilson Baloyi.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, listen carefully to the question. We gather from you that there are other persons with the surname of Baloyi in the township, is that right? Is that right or not, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What Counsel is asking you is do you know a person with the name of Wilson Baloyi who stays in Boipatong, in particular in Senqu Street?

MR BALOYI: No, I don't. The only one Wilson Baloyi, I know, stays in Bafokeng Street.

MR STRYDOM: Have you ever worked at Cape Gate Construction?

MR BALOYI: No.

MR STRYDOM: You see the reason why I am asking you this, I've got a statement here which we got out of the Police docket, I just want to establish if it is a statement made by you. The person here is mentioned as Wilson Baloyi, 57 year old person residing at 231 Senqu Street, Boipatong, employed as a labourer at the Cape Gate Construction, so that is definitely not you, is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: No, I never worked at a construction. The one person that I know to be working at Cape Gate, a Baloyi that I know who works there, stays in Majola Street.

MR STRYDOM: After the attack on Boipatong, have you made a statement to any person in regard to the attack?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did.

MR STRYDOM: Can you remember if you only made one statement or more than one statement?

MR BALOYI: There are many of them that I have made.

MR STRYDOM: Do you remember to whom did you make the first statement after the attack?

MR BALOYI: I went to some Attorneys in Vanderbijlpark.

MR STRYDOM: How long was that after the attack?

MR BALOYI: It had not been long after the attack, even though I cannot be certain of the months that have lapsed after the attack.

MR STRYDOM: Do you still know the name of that firm of Attorneys where you made the statement?

MR BALOYI: They called me to come and make statements, I did not go there on my own.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but once you got there, you made a statement, I just want to know if you know the name of that firm?

MR BALOYI: No. No, I don't know it.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know why the Attorneys called you to come and make a statement there?

MR BALOYI: It is not Attorneys, it is in court, we just call them Attorneys, we don't know where they came from.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, you will have to explain. Did you go to, did you mention Vereeniging or Vanderbijl, let's just get clarity on that, where you went to to see these people that you call Attorneys.

CHAIRPERSON: Vanderbijl.

MR STRYDOM: Vanderbijl? Did you go to the court in Vanderbijl, the Magistrate's court building?

MR BALOYI: No, we didn't go to the Magistrate's office, but yes, we went to the court and we went to an office where everything that was being said, was written down, just like as you are writing now.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know if it were people from the Attorney General's office, State officials?

MR BALOYI: I don't know, I don't know, I had never been involved in any offences.

MR STRYDOM: When you made that statement to these people, did you tell them everything in the same fashion you told the Committee now?

MR BALOYI: They were asking me questions, the same way as you people are doing here.

MR STRYDOM: Did you feel free to give all the answers?

MR BALOYI: I had to speak freely, because I am the one who was attacked.

MR STRYDOM: That is the first statement. Did you give a statement after that, do you remember?

MR BALOYI: I am saying there were many people who had come to make statements. Many Police would come and take statements. I was hoping that this would be taken further.

MR STRYDOM: And all the statements you gave, you told the Police or whoever took the statements, your full version of what happened at Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: And you signed these statements, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: I cannot recall whether I signed.

MR STRYDOM: Some of these people you gave statements to, you said was also the Police, is that right?

MR BALOYI: No, all my statements were given to the Police.

MR STRYDOM: You say that all your statements were given to the Police, didn't you also give a statement to the ANC Peace Desk in Boipatong itself?

MR BALOYI: At the time the people of the ANC would come to take statements and get our version of the occurrence.

MR STRYDOM: So, you did not only give statements to Police, but also to other institutions like the ANC?

MR BALOYI: They were asking questions, I am not suggesting that they took statements.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, are you Tsonga speaking?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Do you remember that you made a statement on the 27th of July 1992.

MR SIBANYONI: Excuse me Mr Strydom, before he answers that question, Mr Baloyi, if you say you are (indistinct), are you specifically saying you are Tsonga because even Venda's say they are (indistinct)?

MR BALOYI: I am Tsonga.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you.

MR STRYDOM: Do you remember giving a statement to the Police on the 27th of July 1992 at Boipatong itself?

MR BALOYI: I am saying the Police came, it was very difficult to monitor the dates, because there was conflict, there was fighting.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you suggesting during July 1992, there was fighting?

MR BALOYI: I am saying at the time, the entire Boipatong was sick after the attack.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, we understand that there is no one who had the opportunity at the time, to record the dates and the time when statements were taken, but what you are being asked is whether do you recall making a statement to the Police in July of 1992, the answer to that question is either yes, I recall or I don't recall. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: I did give the Police a statement, but I cannot commit myself to July. I am not certain.

MR STRYDOM: That statement that you gave the Police, did they come to your house to take the statements?

MR BALOYI: Some came to my house and I was refusing to give them a statement because I was furious.

MR STRYDOM: You did not want to cooperate with the Police when they asked you to give statements, is that what you are saying, at a certain stage?

MR BALOYI: I did not trust them because I saw them on the night of the massacre.

MR STRYDOM: So initially you were not prepared to give them a statement? Did you later on give the Police a statement or not, which you had signed? It is a statement which they had taken and you signed it?

MR BALOYI: I later on gave them a statement, the very same Police.

MR STRYDOM: Why were you prepared to give a statement at that stage?

MR BALOYI: They pleaded with me saying they wanted to know what happened, that is why I gave them the statement.

MR STRYDOM: Will it be a convenient stage?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes indeed, we will take the tea adjournment and return at half past eleven.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma, are you ready?

MR MAPOMA: Mr Chairperson, regrettably I am not yet ready, I have just spoken to Mr Prior now, they are still compiling the documents and then they are going to fax it.

CHAIRPERSON: On Tuesday last week, I indicated that the application would be argued at nine o'clock today, is there any reason why they are not ready now?

MR BALOYI: Mr Chairman, speaking for myself, at this moment where I am sitting, I am not in a position to explain. The problem that I have is that all this information was transferred to our Cape Town office and I expressed to them the urgency of this matter and I explained everything to them, and also that this matter would be argued today, but unfortunately I am as disappointed Chairperson, I regret.

CHAIRPERSON: Who appears for the ANC here? Are you available Ma'am, tomorrow morning at nine o'clock?

MS THOMAS: I could make myself available Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, very well. This application will be postponed to tomorrow morning at nine o'clock at the instance of the TRC. Whether the TRC is ready or not, the application will proceed tomorrow.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you please Mr Zuko convey to the TRC in Cape Town that whether those documents are ready or not, the application will proceed tomorrow morning at nine o'clock. They have had more than enough time to prepare those documents, thank you.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You are excused Ma'am.

MS THOMAS: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

MACHIHLILE WILSON BALOYI: (still under oath)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: (continues) Mr Baloyi, I was asking about statements you had made. Do you remember a person by the name of Constable T.J. Matengane as an Interpreter when a statement was taken at your house in Bafokeng Street?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I remember this Police Officer said they were from Germiston.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the name of the ...

MR STRYDOM: Matengane, and he acted as an Interpreter to translate from Tsonga to English, do you remember that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Do you remember if he just acted as an Interpreter or is he the person who took the statement from you and simultaneously interpreted?

MR BALOYI: He interpreted and he also wrote down what he was writing. They are the same Police Officers that I had first refused to give a statement to.

CHAIRPERSON: When you spoke to Mr Matengane, was there another Police Officer present?

MR BALOYI: He was in the company of a white Police Officer.

CHAIRPERSON: All right, and was Mr Matengane interpreting what you were saying to this white Police Officer?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: And did you feel free to tell the Policemen there everything you knew about the incident?

MR BALOYI: At that time, I did not feel free because I was in pain because all the windows had been broken and the air would come into the house.

MR STRYDOM: Do you say it was too cold to give a proper statement, or a full statement, is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: I did give a statement on what I knew. I did not explain everything to him but I just explained about what happened at my house.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but I want to know why did you not explain everything to them?

MR BALOYI: He did not enquire about everything else.

MR STRYDOM: But didn't he ask you to tell him what you know about the attack on the 17th of June 1992?

MR BALOYI: No, he just enquired about what had happened at my house that the damage had incurred.

MR STRYDOM: Did he ask you to tell him what you saw on that night?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did tell him that I saw the IFP and white Police Officers as well as casspirs and "koyoco's".

MR STRYDOM: And after the statement was written down, did you sign that statement?

MR BALOYI: I am not sure. I could have signed it, but I am not certain.

MR STRYDOM: Was the statement read over to you after it was taken down?

MR BALOYI: They did, I did hear what they were saying, but I was not in a position to listen very carefully.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say because you were in pain?

MR BALOYI: What I mean is that at the time when they asked questions, they were just asking questions, but at the time I was feeling pain because I had no money to replace everything that had been damaged.

MR STRYDOM: The pain that you felt, was it a physical pain or a pain because you felt bad about what had happened?

MR BALOYI: Firstly if you are in emotional distress, the entire body is also affected.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, that is not the question that - you are being asked whether was this a physical pain that you are talking about, or some other pain?

MR BALOYI: It was emotional pain.

MR STRYDOM: Were you happy with the Interpreter, that he could do his job properly?

MR BALOYI: He interpreted well because he spoke fluent Shangaan, but my heart was still sore.

MR STRYDOM: Are you happy that everything you said, was written down and taken up in the statement?

MR BALOYI: The statement was not read to me, I do not know what they wrote down.

MR STRYDOM: But Mr Baloyi, earlier on you said that the statement was read to you?

MR BALOYI: Yes, what I am saying now is what I know to have written what I said when they took the statement.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but let's ask again. After the statement was taken, maybe before you signed, was this statement read to you?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they did read it.

MR STRYDOM: And you were happy with what was written down?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I was satisfied that they had written what I had told them.

MR STRYDOM: So everything you had told them, was written down, is that right?

MR BALOYI: I do not know whether they did write everything.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, you were giving the information then they wrote it down and then they read the statement to you, so you could hear if everything you said, was written down?

MR BALOYI: What I am saying is they read what they had written down what I had said before, to them, and I agreed that I was happy that it was what I had said to them.

MR STRYDOM: Maybe I must put it this way, nothing important which you had mentioned, was left out?

MR BALOYI: I did not really take notice.

MR STRYDOM: Did you tell the person that took the statement about the participation of Mr Vanana Zulu during the attack?

MR BALOYI: As I mentioned before, yes I did tell him as it happened.

MR STRYDOM: And when the statement was read back to you, was that portion contained in the statement?

MR BALOYI: They did read, but I cannot say at this point whether that portion was read back to me, or whether I heard it or whether they had omitted it.

MR STRYDOM: Do you regard it as an important part of your statement, the fact that you recognised Prince Vanana Zulu in Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: I am saying when they approached my home, two houses were first damaged, that is Victor Nqwani and Buwa's house. He was standing outside on the lawn.

MR STRYDOM: And all this detail, you gave to the person who took the statement?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did tell them.

MR STRYDOM: Did you tell them that prior to the people that arrived, the attackers that arrived in the vicinity of your house, "koyoco" stopped at that house or close to your house?

MR BALOYI: It was parked in front of the garden, I was watering my garden.

MR STRYDOM: At what time did you water the garden, was it already dark or was it still day time or what?

MR BALOYI: I said we were waiting because we had been aware that they were on their way.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but that doesn't answer the question, when you watered the garden, was it already dark or was it still day time?

MR BALOYI: It was around six, seven.

MR STRYDOM: Being winter time, then it must have been dark, is that correct?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, just for the record, he said six, seven, eight, it wasn't interpreted.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, so being winter time, it was at night when you watered the garden, is that right?

MR BALOYI: I am not sure whether you regard seven as night or not, I am not in a position to respond to your question.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, maybe you can give me the answer because I have been trying to establish if it was dark or if it was still light. When you watered the garden, was it dark or not?

MR BALOYI: I was watering the garden, the grass. When I started it was not dark, but eventually it got dark.

MR STRYDOM: At that stage, according to you, you knew that there was a possibility of an attack on Boipatong or Bophelong that night?

MR BALOYI: As I said before, the Priest who had been sitting down there, telephoned me and informed me that his Parishioners had told him that the IFP would attack either Bophelong or Boipatong. That is what I said before.

MR STRYDOM: I missed that, who told him?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, the question that was asked of you was did you tell the Police that you saw a "koyoco" pulling up in front of or next to your house?

MR BALOYI: As I said before, I told them everything that had happened, even including the "koyoco" vehicles.

MR STRYDOM: That "koyoco" vehicle, where did it come to a standstill in relation to your position where you were watering your garden?

MR BALOYI: Do you see where I am sitting, my garden would be out there. There is a brick fence and there is grass outside the fence. That is where the casspir parked. Even the white people who arrived the next morning, could see where the vehicle had been parked.

CHAIRPERSON: When this "koyoco" came, were you still outside watering your garden?

MR BALOYI: No, by that time I was already in the house.

MR STRYDOM: Can you give an indication how long before you saw the first attackers, did you see that "koyoco" in front of your house?

MR BALOYI: They followed the vehicle, it came and first parked and as the people approached near to the house, it drove passed towards Amatola.

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Baloyi, the question was can you remember how long it took between the time the vehicle parked and the time the attackers came. How much time passed?

MR BALOYI: It was not long before they arrived. It was just a few minutes.

MR STRYDOM: But you testified earlier that you watered the garden between six, seven and eight, so after you had finished watering the garden, you went into the house and shortly thereafter, did you see this "koyoco" or not?

MR BALOYI: After watering the garden, I went into the house and the "koyoco" came thereafter, that is when the attackers were approaching from behind. As they came nearer the house, the "koyoco" drove off towards Amatola and parked under a tree.

CHAIRPERSON: When the "koyoco" stopped in front of your house, next to your house, you were inside your house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I was in the sitting room.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you sitting down or were you standing?

MR BALOYI: I was standing watch because something was going to happen, I was standing next to the window, watching.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see the people coming behind the "koyoco"?

MR BALOYI: Yes, very clearly.

MR STRYDOM: So you were not watching TV?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I was. My windows are big, they are that big. The TV was about that distance away and there was a hi-fi next to it.

MR STRYDOM: You were standing and you were watching TV, is that what you say?

MR BALOYI: I am saying as I was watching TV, I could also see through the window because the TV is close to the window. But when I heard the noise, I stopped watching TV.

CHAIRPERSON: When you first saw the "koyoco", were you standing at the window or were you sitting down?

MR BALOYI: I was seated.

MR STRYDOM: Now let's take it step by step, you are sitting down, watching TV, what is the first thing now that happens after that in relation to what you have heard and what you saw afterwards?

MR BALOYI: The first thing that I saw was the "koyoco", secondly people approached and they damaged these two houses that I was talking about.

MR STRYDOM: Just stop there. In your seated position, could you see the "koyoco"?

MR BALOYI: Very clearly. My window is huge and it is low. You are even able to see a person walking outside.

MR STRYDOM: Now the window that you are referring to, is that the window on the front side of your house, facing the street?

MR BALOYI: The two windows that I am speaking of, face the street.

MR STRYDOM: Were you sitting in the dining room?

MR BALOYI: I was in the sitting room, not the dining room.

MR STRYDOM: Sorry, I wanted to say sitting room. Yes, you were sitting in the sitting room and that's got a big window you say?

MR BALOYI: It is not just one big window, there are many. I was just watching through this one window.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, and these windows did they have only lace curtains or other curtains as well?

MR BALOYI: It does have other, it has a lace curtain and another curtain but I always open the curtains so that you can just see through the lace.

MR STRYDOM: From your seated position, you could see the "koyoco" through the lace curtains in the street, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes, very clearly.

MR STRYDOM: When you saw this vehicle, what did you do?

MR BALOYI: I told my children that the Police have arrived, so you should be ready, keep watch.

MR STRYDOM: Ready for what?

MR BALOYI: I had already heard that an attack was imminent.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but now you see a Police vehicle, how did you know that the Police will be part of the attack?

MR BALOYI: The Police were involved in this, they started during the day and fired teargas. They closed all the holes that we had made on the road. They came with tractors and closed up all those roads and they chased the comrades away.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see that, that they chased the comrades away?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I saw it because we had also taken part in digging up these holes. We were trying to prevent the "koyoco's" from travelling on that road.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you want to prevent "koyoco's" travelling in those roads?

MR BALOYI: We did not want the Police in the township because they harassed people.

MR STRYDOM: Were you happy with the policing which was done by the Self Defence Units?

MR BALOYI: Yes, we were very happy about that.

MR STRYDOM: Am I correct in saying that at that stage, at that time, you were very negative towards the Police?

MR BALOYI: Yes, we did not want them.

MR STRYDOM: What did you personally witness during the course of that day, the Police do in the township? You already said that they filled up holes which were dug in the roads, what else did you personally see?

MR BALOYI: I did not see anything else, I just saw them filing up the holes and I later saw them lighting up the area so that the Zulu's would be able to walk free.

MR STRYDOM: When did you see the area being lit up?

MR BALOYI: When they were at the Metal Box, near the gate. The casspirs all parked around there, they shot something in the air, something like fire and the area lit up. That is what I saw the Police doing.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, what I am trying to establish, the things that happened during the course of the day, before the attack.

MR BALOYI: The occurrence during the day was the filling up of those holes by the tractor, the tractor was being escorted by the "koyoco".

MR STRYDOM: So this evidence you gave about teargas, you heard from someone else?

MR BALOYI: Some of these teargas canisters fell on my premises, I still have them to date, witness to this incident.

MR STRYDOM: Was that during the course of that day, prior to the attack that those canisters fell into your yard?

MR BALOYI: It was on the very same day.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see who threw these canisters into your yard?

MR BALOYI: They were shooting, not black people, it was whites, the white Police people and the comrades fled into our yards and they were being pursued by the Police.

MR STRYDOM: When was that during the course of that day, can you give a time?

MR BALOYI: It was in the afternoon, the tractor started filling up the holes around three or four and later on, these other vehicles came firing this teargas canisters.

MR STRYDOM: Who did they fire these canisters to?

MR BALOYI: They were firing at the comrades, getting them out of the way.

MR STRYDOM: And these comrades, where were they standing in relation to your house?

MR BALOYI: My house is the second from the point, I don't know how to measure. Our houses are small, they don't have big yards and they would stand there and we would guard from our homesteads.

MR STRYDOM: Were they standing in front of your house?

MR BALOYI: Not in front of my house, but a little distance from my house. I am referring to the fourth row of chairs, that is the distance where the furrow had been dug out.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger, can you just give me the distance from that side to where, I think he is referring to the fourth row of chairs from where you are?

MR BALOYI: You see from the person who is wearing a white jersey, that lady there, and my next door neighbour's house would be on this other side and here you would be having the fence.

MR BERGER: Between 15 and 20 metres approximately.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, did you say between 15 and 20 metres?

ADV SIGODI: 15 and 20 metres.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Thank you Mr Berger.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you. So these comrades were standing about 15 to 20 metres from your house when you saw the Police came and fired teargas canisters at them.

CHAIRPERSON: I thought you say 15 to 20 metres?

MR STRYDOM: Yes 15 to 20.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, I thought you said 50?

MR STRYDOM: No, no, 15 to 20, is that right?

MR BALOYI: I am saying that is correct because when they fled, they jumped fences into my yard.

MR STRYDOM: And this happened at approximately if I remember correctly, half past four in the afternoon, is that what you said?

MR BALOYI: The tractor came to fill up the holes in the company of a "koyoco" and another one came thereafter, this is the one that was firing at the comrades.

MR STRYDOM: Was it still during day time?

MR BALOYI: Yes, around six o'clock.

MR STRYDOM: And then that tractor left which filled the holes and the "koyoco" left with the Police?

MR BALOYI: It vanished into other streets, I don't know where it went to.

MR STRYDOM: If the comrades wanted to regroup, they had ample time to regroup up to a stage before the attack?

MR BALOYI: They would come together and mill around fires and they would flee on seeing a "koyoco", they would flee into people's yards.

MR STRYDOM: And later they will regroup, isn't that so?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct. They were not stationed in one place, they were moving around.

MR STRYDOM: Tell me, this firing of canisters to the comrades, was that a thing that happened from time to time, was it a thing that used to happen to disperse them or did it only happen on that one day?

MR BALOYI: It was common place.

MR STRYDOM: And the filling of holes that were dug in the road, were they filled from time to time by the Police or other people?

MR BALOYI: It had never been filled up by other people before, it was filled up by the Police on that day.

MR STRYDOM: These comrades, did they use to build barricades or barriers in the road so that vehicles could not travel there?

MR BALOYI: That is exactly as you put it, we had also dug out trenches, not only the comrades.

MR STRYDOM: Those barriers were removed from time to time by the Police, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, what I want to know is how did you gather after you saw these things the Police did on that day, that they will be part of an attack later on during that day?

MR BALOYI: I do not get your question quite well.

MR STRYDOM: You testified that when you saw the "koyoco" outside your house, you realised that the attack is now about to start and then I asked you but how did you know that the Police would be involved in the attack and you said that earlier on, during the day, teargas was fired and holes in the roads were repaired, and therefore you could say that the Police would be part of the attack? But in the light of what you have testified that it was not unusual that the Police would fire teargas, and it was not unusual for them to break down the barricades, on what basis can you say that the Police were involved, or that you expected that the Police were going to be involved?

MR BALOYI: I will put it this way maybe you will understand, I am saying we used to guard the area, like receiving a phone in my house. A phone, a telephone call to the effect that Boipatong was going to be attacked and it dawned on me that this suspicion is indeed true, because of the deeds of the Police, the closing up of the trenches so that these "koyoco's" can move about.

CHAIRPERSON: Just listen to the question. You see you have told us that in the past, barricades would be erected at the township, including digging the holes and that the Police would come and remove those barricades and from time to time, the Police would disperse the comrades, do you remember that?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now when you saw the "koyoco" later that evening, the one that stopped next to your house, you warned your family that the attack was about to start. What Mr Strydom wants to find out is how did seeing the Police with the "koyoco" outside, indicate to you that Boipatong was about to be attacked? Do you understand what I am saying?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I understand. Earlier on I said on receiving the phone call, I was informed about the imminent attack and for all the while we did not know that we were going to be attacked by Inkatha, but on that day I heard. Now on seeing these actions, that is what came to my mind that indeed, these people had come and the closing up of the trenches by the Police and the removal of the barricades, all of these things were such that things were different in their actions that day because they would shoot or fire at people with teargas canisters on sight. As they were continuing closing up the trenches, we were looking, we were not asleep.

ADV SIGODI: Is it your evidence that when you got the telephone call from the Priest, he said that possibly Boipatong or Bophelong would be attacked by residents of kwaMadala hostel? Is that what you said or did you specify who was going to attack the township?

MR BALOYI: He was saying that there is one among the two townships that was going to be attacked.

ADV SIGODI: Did he say who was going to attack the township?

MR BALOYI: He said Inkatha was going to attack us.

ADV SIGODI: Now if he said that it was Inkatha that was going to attack, why did you think that the Police were going to attack you when you saw them, why did you link the Police with the Inkatha when you saw the "koyoco" in front of your house?

MR BALOYI: Because earlier on when they started firing these teargas, they were indiscriminate and some of this teargas would go into people's houses.

CHAIRPERSON: We understand that the Police shot teargas, but what you are being asked is that the warning given to you was that it is the IFP that was going to attack either Boipatong or the other township. What you saw standing next to your house was a Police vehicle, is that right?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: It was not an Inkatha motor vehicle, was it?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it was not an Inkatha vehicle, but they used to work in collusion with the IFP, they would frequent the hostel from time to time.

CHAIRPERSON: So the Police were working with the Inkatha?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they did.

CHAIRPERSON: When the Police came earlier that day, shooting the teargas at the comrades, you did not think that was the beginning of the attack?

MR BALOYI: I did think so.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: You just said that the Police used to frequent the hostel, what do you mean by that?

MR BALOYI: What I am saying is that I would see the "koyoco's" going to the hostel, they would come through the township, head straight for the hostel. The Vaal Command would come to the township and they would also go to the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: But what is sinister about that, I mean that is the main road going to Iscor, that can be part of a normal patrol so is there anything sinister in your mind, about that?

MR BALOYI: The other vehicles would not go straight to Iscor. They would just go and park in front of the hostel at the parking lot.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see them there?

MR BALOYI: It was not for the first time that I saw them do that.

MR STRYDOM: Could you see from your house at 732 Bafokeng Street, what is going on in front of the hostel?

MR BALOYI: I do not mean that I saw them parked at the hostel, but from my house I can see as far as the robots.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. Mr Baloyi, it seems to me what you want to suggest is that the IFP and or kwaMadala hostel was in cahoots with the Police, is that what you are saying, for a long time?

MR BALOYI: Yes. Very well.

MR STRYDOM: Why do you say that?

MR BALOYI: Because when we were attacked, they were there.

MR STRYDOM: So only at the stage when the township was attacked, did you form that opinion that the Police and the IFP were working together?

MR BALOYI: It confirmed that they were working together because they travelled together after the attack.

MR STRYDOM: I will return to the house, you say that you saw the "koyoco" outside and you thought that was the beginning of the attack. Did you tell your wife that?

MR BALOYI: Yes. I told her that the people who were going to attack us, have arrived. The engine was not even running. Normally when they travel along the road, they will make a lot of noise, the engine would make a lot of noise, but on this particular day, it was just silent.

MR STRYDOM: Did you tell your family to run away or not?

MR BALOYI: I told them to go into the toilet because it was big and it had a steel door. I also told Dududu to go into the toilet as well, and that they should lock the door and wait there.

MR STRYDOM: Did you move to the window to have a better look?

MR BALOYI: My dining room looks like this space here, whether you are seated or standing, you can see outside.

MR STRYDOM: So did you remain seated, is that what you say?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not continue sitting.

MR STRYDOM: What did you do, Mr Baloyi, that is what I want to find out?

MR BALOYI: I stood by the window and looked at the street, I also went into the bedroom and looked through the window. I was just keeping watch all over.

MR STRYDOM: So this "koyoco" was clearly visible, did it have its lights on?

MR BALOYI: No, the lights were on dim.

MR STRYDOM: Before that stage when you saw the vehicle, did you hear any shots being fired in the township or anything of the kind or was the first sign for you that there was an attack, when you saw the vehicle?

MR BALOYI: The shots were fired at Nqwani's home, the house that they went to as I was watching through the window.

MR STRYDOM: But before you saw the vehicle, did you hear any shots being fired or not?

MR BALOYI: No. I did not.

MR STRYDOM: When you looked through the window and you saw this vehicle, apart from the vehicle that had its lights on dim, what else can you say about the occupants, about anything else in relation to this vehicle?

MR BALOYI: No, it is not possible to see the occupants. You can't see properly, you cannot identify a person.

MR STRYDOM: So it was dark, is that what you are saying? Was it dark?

MR BALOYI: No, there was sufficient light. You could see everything.

MR STRYDOM: What source provided the light outside?

MR BALOYI: I hope you know what the township looks like, there are tall electric poles and they provide light, you can see just about everything.

MR STRYDOM: Those Apollo lights, are those the lights that are there?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Isn't it so that the closest Apollo light to you, is the light in Batswana Street?

MR BALOYI: Oh, you know because from Batswana Street, it casts a very bright light to my area or to my house.

MR STRYDOM: If I put it to you that the Apollo light is more or less in front of house 790 Batswana Street, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: I know the area.

MR STRYDOM: That is why I am asking you, do you agree with me?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: If this light was so bright, why didn't you see the people in the vehicle?

MR BALOYI: The windows of that vehicle are not very big, you cannot see a person or an occupant properly. You just see them a bit.

MR STRYDOM: What was the colour of this vehicle?

MR BALOYI: I am not a Police Officer to know the different colours. The Police are the people who know the colours very well.

MR STRYDOM: But these "koyoco's" and other Police vehicles used to patrol the streets of Boipatong during that time, isn't that so?

MR BALOYI: No, they would not patrol, they would just be parked in front of our houses.

MR STRYDOM: So it was absolutely nothing strange to see one of those vehicles in the township, isn't it so?

MR BALOYI: It was not strange, but because of the attack, I would say it was surprising.

CHAIRPERSON: If these "koyoco's" used to come and park in front of your houses, why are you not able to tell us what the colour of this "koyoco" was?

MR BALOYI: I will put it this way, white people are very clever. After they had attacked, the "koyoco's" or after an attack, all these "koyoco's" would be resprayed in a different colour. Therefore you cannot really speak about the colour, because they would respray all of them.

CHAIRPERSON: Before they were sprayed, what colour were they?

MR BALOYI: The casspirs are yellow, the pick up vans, Police pick up vans are also yellow. The casspir has a blue stripe as well as a blue light on top. The "koyoco's" have a back door. The colours are sometimes grey and some have the same colour as Police camouflage uniforms.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, the "koyoco" has more than one colour.

MR BALOYI: Yes, the "koyoco" that would normally come, the Vaal Command would have a yellow colour. The Police "koyoco's", they are grey but they seem to have other spots, just like the Police camouflage.

MR STRYDOM: It seems to me you know quite a lot about these vehicles and the colour that used to travel in that township, so can I gather from that that they used to frequent the township during that period?

MR BALOYI: You cannot compare what happens now, to the time that has passed. I am only speaking on what happened then.

MR STRYDOM: I am also referring to that period. Is it so that those vehicles used to travel there on a very regular basis in the township?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they would normally park there near the Metal Box. That is where they were on the 17th.

MR STRYDOM: Isn't it so that the holes that were dug and the barriers that were put up, can't really stop those huge vehicles travelling in those streets?

MR BALOYI: We were not just stopping or preventing vehicles, but the "koyoco's", the vehicles that used to travel along the township and be involved in the killing of people.

MR STRYDOM: But what I put to you is that those barriers and holes can't stop those vehicles travelling in the township, isn't it so?

MR BALOYI: Yes, we only stopped the Police vans.

CHAIRPERSON: Was your question not that these barricades and holes could not stop these motor vehicles?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, that is the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, would you please repeat the question to the witness.

MR BALOYI: From the 17th, the barricades were no longer effective.

MR STRYDOM: The question is before the 17th, these barricades and holes could not stop these Police or military vehicles travelling in the Boipatong township?

MR BALOYI: They did prevent them.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, what is being put to you is that these barricades that were erected in the township, did not stop Police vehicles from coming into the township?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they used to come into the township and they would manoeuvre around these barricades.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. To get back to the colour of the vehicle, the "koyoco", in front of your house, you testified that you thought now that the attack was about to start, was it important for you to look properly to see whose vehicle was standing outside, the Police or the Vaal Commando or the military or whoever?

MR BALOYI: I could see it clearly, that it was a Police vehicle. I am not a child, but I saw it clearly that it was a Police vehicle, I know those vehicles.

MR STRYDOM: Why do you say it was a Police vehicle?

MR BALOYI: They used to pass by the street.

MR STRYDOM: Is that the only reason why you thought at that time that it was a Police vehicle?

MR BALOYI: It is not that I thought it was a Police vehicle, I saw that it was a Police vehicle.

MR STRYDOM: But you can't give the colour of that vehicle?

MR BALOYI: I did not concentrate on the colour, but I was concentrating on the people coming to attack me.

MR STRYDOM: Just to get clarity, do you know a hippo vehicle?

MR BALOYI: The hippo has an open roof and a Police casspir has a blue light on top, it is yellow in colour and has a blue stripe.

MR STRYDOM: And the only difference between a casspir and a "koyoco" is the position of the door, is that correct or not? Let me just rephrase, what I want to understand is the difference between a casspir and a "koyoco".

MR BALOYI: I cannot speak much about those two, it is my child who is a Policeman who can clearly differentiate between the two, whether the doors are different or not, it is something that I would not know.

MR STRYDOM: According to you is a casspir and a "koyoco" one and the same thing?

MR BALOYI: No, they are not.

MR STRYDOM: How do you distinguish between the two then?

MR BALOYI: The "koyoco" is big.

MR STRYDOM: It is bigger than a casspir, is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: That is how I see it. I don't know whether it is bigger in age or what, but that is how I see it.

CHAIRPERSON: You have said that the "koyoco" is big, did you say that?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, it is big.

CHAIRPERSON: What do you mean when you say it is big?

MR BALOYI: That is what I have said. It is something that is big. I do not know how I can explain it to you or measure it, but it is bigger than the casspir.

MR LAX: Is it taller, is it wider, is it greater in size? We are trying to understand.

MR BALOYI: It is big, it is tall.

MR STRYDOM: The "koyoco's", do they have blue lights or not?

MR BALOYI: No, I haven't seen it. What I did see was the white people who were shooting on top.

MR STRYDOM: When did you see white people shooting on top?

MR BALOYI: At the gate at Metal Box, on the very same day, the 17th.

MR STRYDOM: If you say on top, were they standing on the roof, because its got a roof, this "koyoco"?

MR BALOYI: They were standing on the ground, they had gotten off the vehicles and they were shooting, pointing on top.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know the word "nyala"?

MR BALOYI: The "nyala" is the smaller one, but I am not sure, I do not want to commit myself, it is only the Police and the military personnel who know precisely what colour the vehicles are.

CHAIRPERSON: You have given evidence here, telling us about a Police motor vehicle that stopped next to your house.

MR BALOYI: That was a "koyoco".

CHAIRPERSON: What Counsel is trying to find out is whether you can distinguish between the various motor vehicles. If you can, you will tell us yes, if you cannot, you will say so. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes. The vehicle that was parked in front of my house was a "koyoco", not a "nyala".

MR STRYDOM: During the course of that night of the attack, did you see a "nyala" at all?

MR BALOYI: I saw it when the vehicles were already parked at the gate, that is at the Metal Box gate, I did not see it inside the township.

MR STRYDOM: And you must correct me if I am wrong, is that "nyala" smaller than a casspir?

MR BALOYI: They are two different Police vehicles. There is a bigger and a smaller one. In fact there are three, there is a Police van, then the small and a bigger Police vehicle.

MR STRYDOM: But you said that you saw a "nyala" later in front of Metal Box. All I want to know is is that vehicle, the "nyala" vehicle you are referring to, is that a smaller vehicle than a casspir?

MR BALOYI: Yes, but I do not want to commit myself to this. All I am saying is that the vehicles that I spotted there, were two "koyoco's" and a smaller vehicle with a side door, and it had a light on top as well as a stripe on the side.

MR STRYDOM: You testified that you told your wife and children to go and hide themselves.

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Were they hiding themselves from the moment when you said that there is a vehicle outside and the attack has now started until after the attack?

MR BALOYI: When I told them this, it was not just that they all went there at the same time, they had to inform everybody who was in the house.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, that is not the question, the question is were they hiding themselves for the full duration of the attack until after the attack?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they were in the toilet, they did not leave the toilet.

MR STRYDOM: At what stage did your wife come out of the toilet? What were you doing at that stage?

MR BALOYI: I went outside to check if it was safe and to just check on what had happened inside the house.

MR STRYDOM: Did you go back then to tell your wife and children that it was safe now to come out?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: And your wife, did she come out of the house with you?

MR BALOYI: Not a single one was left in the house or remained in the house, they all went outside.

MR STRYDOM: At that stage, could you still see the Police vehicles at Metal Box, when your wife came out?

MR BALOYI: Yes. They were still parked there. They were still waiting for everyone amongst the attackers to arrive there and they would thereafter leave.

MR STRYDOM: Your wife must have seen, like you did according to you, some of the attackers and these vehicles?

MR BALOYI: She only saw the vehicles at a distance, but she did not see the attackers.

MR STRYDOM: Could you still see the attackers?

CHAIRPERSON: At what stage?

MR STRYDOM: At the time his wife was now also outside, when she saw the military vehicles. Could you still see the attackers?

MR BALOYI: There were some who were still on their way, because they were carrying items.

CHAIRPERSON: You are asking him about military vehicles?

MR STRYDOM: Sorry, I would just refer to the vehicles, the Police vehicles.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Da Silva, I would have thought you would have been the first one to complain. Yes, very well.

MR STRYDOM: The Police vehicles that you are referring to, when you saw them, your wife saw them according to you? You could still see attackers but she couldn't, is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: My wife was more concerned with the children, she came out and she looked out for a while and then she went back into the house, to check on the children.

MR STRYDOM: Did you point the Police vehicles to her?

MR BALOYI: She saw them for herself, I did not have to point them out to her.

CHAIRPERSON: When you say your wife was looking after the children, where were they, were they inside of the house or outside the house?

MR BALOYI: When they left the toilet, there was broken glass all over the floor. My wife just went out momentarily to check outside and she went back to the ... They did go out, but we had to stand guard, be aware if these people were still hiding somewhere and they are going to come back.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see - at a later stage?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they did.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I see it is one o'clock, will this be an appropriate stage because I want to turn onto something else.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well, thank you. We will take the adjournment and return at two o'clock.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION:

MACHIHLILE WILSON BALOYI: (still under oath)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Strydom.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: (continued) Thank you Chairperson. At the stage when you saw the "koyoco" outside your house, did you hear any people crying outside?

MR BALOYI: No.

MR STRYDOM: At a later stage did you hear people crying or not?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: After you saw the "koyoco" you sent your wife to go and hide, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct and the children as well.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. Is your wife's name Mary Baloyi?

MR BALOYI: As it appears there, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: You are aware that she testified during the criminal trial, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: She testified in Pretoria, I was not there.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer?

INTERPRETER: She testified in Pretoria, I was not there.

CHAIRPERSON: Did your wife testify at the criminal trial?

MR BALOYI: Yes, there was a criminal proceeding or criminal prosecution that was going on in Pretoria, I think that could have been the one.

MR STRYDOM: At the stage when the attack on your house started, your wife must have been in the bathroom for some time, hiding? Is that correct?

MR BALOYI: I said when they attacked or as they were just about to attack, I instructed my wife to prepare the children and take them to the toilet where they had to hide.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but you testified already and I don't want to repeat my questions but that was the stage when you saw the "koyoco" outside?

MR BALOYI: I said the "koyoco" came first and the noise was a distance away, it was still at Bafokeng and it came moving slowly until it grounded to a halt in front of my house. From then it moved to the tree at Amatola Street.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, so apart from seeing the "koyoco" in front of the house, you heard it coming along, is that what you are saying?

MR LAX: He said he heard a noise, Mr Strydom.

MR STRYDOM: Well, the noise you heard, what noise was that?

MR BALOYI: It was a noise of people whom I thought perhaps were comrades, because they used to sing all the time, or most of the time.

MR STRYDOM: And then you sent your wife to go and hide herself and the children?

MR BALOYI: I did not send her at that time, no, not at that time. We were hearing this noise all together, I only sent her away when we started hearing windows being shattered. Not windows at my homestead, but windows in those two houses. That is when I actually could now make out as to who these people were.

MR STRYDOM: So at the stage when your house was attacked, your wife was hiding?

MR BALOYI: When my house was attacked, I had already told them to hide in the toilet.

MR STRYDOM: Apart from the fact that you told her, was she still sitting next to you in the dining room or not or in the sitting room, sorry, in the sitting room or not?

MR BALOYI: She had been trying to take the children to sleep. Had she been found doing that, perhaps they could have killed them all.

MR STRYDOM: What are you testifying that she had tried to put the children to sleep at this stage? What do you mean by that? I thought you said earlier on that you told her to hide herself and the children?

MR BALOYI: We had a small baby and the baby was three weeks old, and there were children as well. Some of them were woken up actually.

MR STRYDOM: Can you state today where your wife was at the stage your house was attacked?

MR BALOYI: You see, I don't know how to put it because you don't know my house. She was standing in the kitchen and she heard this noise when the Buwa and the Victor households were being attacked, then she was standing in the corridor and when they knocked the gate, that is when the gate was knocked down, I told her to take the children to the toilet.

MR STRYDOM: But at that stage you already told her that you saw a Police vehicle outside or a "koyoco"?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you, your wife, when she testified in Pretoria at the criminal trial, she said nothing that you told her that you saw a "koyoco" outside. She doesn't mention it at all.

MR BALOYI: I am hearing this from you.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, just for record purposes, I am going to refer to Volume 22 of the typed criminal record.

CHAIRPERSON: Just before we get to that, Mr Baloyi, it would be very helpful if you would answer the questions directly. If the answer is yes, you say yes, if it is no, you say no. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I understand that.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, I just want to get this clear. When you saw the "koyoco" outside, you told your wife that the attackers are here, is that right?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I told her.

CHAIRPERSON: And you told them that they must hide, they must go into the toilet and hide?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I said they should prepare themselves to go and hide in the toilet.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Did she go immediately after that warning, to the toilet?

MR BALOYI: No, she did not go to the toilet at that very same moment, because the children were also puzzled as to what was happening.

CHAIRPERSON: Then you testified about three people I think you said, who came into your house.

MR BALOYI: There were three of them who came in after breaking the door.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Did they break the gate?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it was broken.

CHAIRPERSON: Now when they broke the gate, your wife was not in the toilet?

MR BALOYI: Yes, she had not been to the toilet as yet.

CHAIRPERSON: When the gate was broken, you again warned her to go and hide in the toilet?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Strydom?

MR STRYDOM: What is it, the three people, let me rephrase ...

MR LAX: Before you, you were going to give us a reference to that bit of evidence you put to him.

CHAIRPERSON: What did you put to him?

MR STRYDOM: I want to put his wife's evidence at the criminal trial, at page 2556. The first thing that I want to put to you is that your wife said nothing about you telling her about the "koyoco" outside.

MR BALOYI: I think it was up to her at the time of making the statement, I was not there.

MR STRYDOM: Your evidence in this forum was "I informed my wife that it appeared as if Inkatha is going to attack us", that is after you saw the "koyoco" outside?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did say that because I received a phone call to that effect.

MR STRYDOM: Your wife testified further after she was asked to explain what had happened that night, she said "well, initially I heard people crying outside in the street."

MR BALOYI: She said what things she thought appropriate.

MR STRYDOM: And then she went ahead to say "I was still sitting with the children in the house ...

INTERPRETER: I am sorry for the interruption Chairperson, may the witness please repeat the answer.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Strydom is doing now, he is reading to you what your wife is supposed to have said when she gave evidence at the criminal trial, do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: So what he is doing, he is merely reading to you what your wife said. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: She stated that she was still sitting with the children in the house and the next thing, she saw stones being thrown, well she didn't see the throw, but just saw stones coming into the house, through the window and then she took the kids and went to the toilet. To summarise she says she was sitting, the next moment she heard a noise, the next moment stones were flying into the house and then she went to the toilet? Is that how it happened?

MR BALOYI: What I know is this, that at roundabout ten o'clock, many children are already asleep and those who would still be awake, are the older ones. I told them that we are now being attacked and I said to Dududu that she should accompany the mother to the toilet to hide themselves. I was sitting there with a young boy with whom I used to sit there. The rest of them were preparing for sleeping.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, that I understand but all I am asking you is this, what I have put to you and what your wife testified, is that correct that she was sitting there, she heard a noise and the next moment stones flew into the house and then she went to the toilet to hide?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it is true that stones did come into the house through the windows, but I don't know about the rest of the things that she said.

MR STRYDOM: So when the stones came into the house, was she still sitting or not?

MR BALOYI: She was standing next to the kitchen.

MR STRYDOM: Did you tell her that the Priest phoned earlier that day?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that she mentions nothing of the kind in this testimony of hers.

MR BALOYI: I know very well that she could not have spoken everything that I told her. She only testified about things that she witnessed herself.

MR STRYDOM: You testified here that she came out of the house after the attack and she could also see Police vehicles. I want to put to you that nothing of the kind is stated in her testimony, or appears in her testimony?

MR BALOYI: It was difficult at the time to speak about these things. My wife was frightened, she could not have spoken about these things.

MR STRYDOM: So do you say that according to you, her testimony does not tell the full truth?

MR BALOYI: I cannot tell her truth. I only know what I am saying.

MR STRYDOM: Because I want to put to you that what you are saying, is not the truth, and she told the truth.

MR BALOYI: I am telling you now, I can take you now to show you evidence of what I am talking about.

MR STRYDOM: I am not saying your house was not attacked, what I am putting to you is that you did not see the "koyoco" outside at the stage when you testified, and you did not see the attackers walk alongside with these Police vehicles. That is the part of your evidence that you made up.

MR BALOYI: I saw them, I am not fabricating this. I can take you along right now to show you where I was seeing them from.

MR STRYDOM: Your wife was asked about casspirs but she was asked the following question -

" ... Did you hear the sound of vehicles, heavy vehicles for instance a casspir which passed by the house?"

That was the question and her answer -

"... No, the only sound that I heard was shots that were fired."

MR BALOYI: That is her testimony, because the casspirs were not making a noise as they were moving, because they were moving slowly and there was the breaking of windows going on at the same time.

MR STRYDOM: That I understand but according to you, she saw these vehicles not far from the house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, she said she saw these vehicles? I am the one who saw these vehicles and pointed them out to them. I pointed it out to everyone who came early the following morning.

MR STRYDOM: Now to return to that statement I asked you earlier on about, and just to refresh your memory that is the statement where the Interpreter was Mr Matengane.

MR BALOYI: I have answered that one.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that also in this statement, you say nothing about that "koyoco" vehicle that came to a standstill there in front of your house.

MR BALOYI: I don't know, if he did not include that, that is his mistake.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I would have thought that we would have been entitled to a copy of that statement.

MR STRYDOM: I am going to hand it out right now. Chairperson, this is a typed copy which was obtained from the Police docket, can it be handed out as Exhibit CC?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, what is being put to you is that in the statement which was taken from you with Mr Matengane interpreting, you made no mention of a "koyoco" which stood in front of your house, do you understand that? Do you understand the question?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I understand.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know why it is not there?

MR BALOYI: We spoke many things and they wrote many things.

CHAIRPERSON: But as far as you can recall, you told them about the "koyoco"?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did.

CHAIRPERSON: Where is the original?

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, we are not in possession of the original, this is the only document we could find in the Police docket, we could not find the original. Apparently the full contents of the docket is with Mr Kjellberg, but our investigation could only get this document which is obviously - well, it purports to be a typed document of the original.

CHAIRPERSON: Shall I just enter this statement first.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, if I can just mention, it seems to me that my learned friends did better investigations than us, they got the original, well, a copy of the original, but not the typed one, also available.

CHAIRPERSON: Who is that? If it is there, it is okay, I was just curious to know whether we do have the original.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson, if I can just show this written document to the witness to identify his signature.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, I am going to show you a photocopied document.

MR BALOYI: Yes, I am waiting for that.

MR STRYDOM: The statement that was taken, can you identify your signature, I saw two places where you possibly signed?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I am the one who signed here, not here. This is my signature and this one too, and this one too. These ones, no, I don't know these two.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, just for the record, on the first page, numbered 1, Mr Baloyi has indicated that the signature at the bottom of the page is his, but not in the left hand margin; at the bottom of page 2 he has indicated his signature, it is his; the bottom of page 3 he has indicated that it is his signature, but not his signature in the left hand column; and no signature on page 4.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, are you happy that that is the statement that was taken from you when Mr Matengane acted as Interpreter?

MR BALOYI: Yes, those are my signatures. I cannot account for places where I have not appended my signature.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger, the signature that he has admitted, would that be the one where there are just two initials, is it MB?

MR BERGER: Yes, it is the two initials at the bottom of the page. Nothing in the margins, but all the initials at the bottom of the page, it would appear.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Would you at some point make copies of the other document, I think it is marked, of the copy of the hand-written statement and make it available, perhaps tomorrow morning?

MR STRYDOM: We will do so, I can even do better now, I've got the true original here with me, so I will make copies using this document.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed, would you do that. Very well.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, I want to read to you the first three paragraphs of this document.

CHAIRPERSON: Has anyone checked whether the typed one is an accurate document?

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I haven't checked that because I didn't have the original, but I will read from the original.

CHAIRPERSON: It is difficult, we only have CC here which is the copy.

MR STRYDOM: I will compare it Chairperson, and inform the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so that we don't put to the witness what may not be accurate.

MR STRYDOM: It reads here -

"... On the 17th of July 1992 I was in my home, at above address, watching television."

CHAIRPERSON: Do you perhaps have a copy of this for the Interpreters, an extra one?

MR STRYDOM: Yes Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, what he is doing now, he is reading from the statement that you are supposed to have made to the Police, do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I understand.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Strydom.

MR STRYDOM: I am not sure if the first paragraph was interpreted, I will just start over.

"... On the 17th of July 1992, I was in my home at the above address, watching television. The time was 22H20."

That is twenty past ten.

"... I heard a noise outside and went to the window. I saw a group of people carrying television, video's and suitcases. The group were moving out of the location in the direction of the Faraday Road."

I see you shaking your head, do you want to comment at this stage?

MR BALOYI: If given a chance, yes, I can talk.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, what are your comments?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom, what will be helpful to the witness if perhaps, I don't know do you intend reading the whole statement first before getting him to comment?

MR STRYDOM: No Chairperson, I will read portions and ask questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think you should do that.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. I have read to you this first portion and I saw you start shaking your head. What is wrong with this statement so far?

MR BALOYI: I do not accept the word or the name Faraday, there is no Faraday Street in Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: Apart from that, would you say the rest is in order?

MR BALOYI: That name is incorrect, therefore I conclude that the person who took the statement must have written all false information.

MR STRYDOM: So because there is one mistake, you say the rest must be false, is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: Faraday is far away. He cannot bring Faraday to Boipatong, that is not it.

CHAIRPERSON: We understand that, but so that we can move faster, listen to the question and answer the question. What Counsel is asking you is, simply because there is reference to Faraday Road which is incorrect, are you saying the rest of the statement is incorrect? Do you understand the question?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I cannot, Faraday is in Vanderbijlpark and therefore I cannot talk about Vanderbijlpark when I am in Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: Answer the question, what he wants to find out is just because Faraday Road is wrong, are you saying the rest of the statement or everything that is in the statement, is wrong?

MR BALOYI: I will be very, very choosy so that I admit to things that I know.

MR STRYDOM: What is stated here is that the group were moving out of the location in the direction of the Faraday Road. In relation to your house, would you say moving out would be in the direction of Faraday or not?

CHAIRPERSON: I thought his evidence was that there is no Faraday Road in Boipatong?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, well that is the point, I am not saying - I don't think the statement states it is in Boipatong, it is just in the direction of Faraday. Can you indicate in relation to your house, where is Faraday, is that outside the township or where is Faraday?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know a road called Faraday?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Where is this road?

MR BALOYI: From the Traffic Department you proceed towards that direction, this one is Frikkie Meyer.

CHAIRPERSON: Frikkie Meyer, yes, and where is Faraday Road in relation to this?

MR BALOYI: It starts at the circle and proceed towards that direction.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Am I correct in stating that Faraday Road is somewhere close to Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: It is very far. Faraday is very far.

MR STRYDOM: If you refer to the Traffic Department, do you refer to the testing ground?

MR BALOYI: It is Faraday this side and Frikkie Meyer that side.

MR STRYDOM: Is it close to the testing grounds, because I know where the testing ground is?

MR BALOYI: The testing ground is nearer, closer to Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what he wants to find out is in relation to the Traffic Department, where is this Faraday Road?

MR BALOYI: It is all close by.

MR STRYDOM: What is more important is that it is stated here that you went to the window because you heard a noise, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: You did not go to the window to go and have a look at the vehicle outside?

MR BALOYI: Yes, when I heard the noise and I looked out the window, I saw the vehicle parked there.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what he wants to find out is what is it that caused you to go to the window to look outside.

MR BALOYI: I heard a noise, that is why I went to look out through the window.

MR LAX: The question is what noise did you hear? What kind of noise did you hear?

MR BALOYI: It was just people making a noise, I did not understand whether it was people who were singing or what?

CHAIRPERSON: At that stage, was the "koyoco" already there?

MR BALOYI: I said when it left that road, it went straight to Amatola.

CHAIRPERSON: What Counsel is doing here, he is going through with you the statement that you made to the Police we are told. This is just the beginning of the statement where you are recounting what you saw and heard. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: He has read to you a portion of the statement in which you say "I heard the noise outside and I went to the window". Do you recall that?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what I want to find out is when you went to the window, was the "koyoco" already there?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it was parked.

CHAIRPERSON: Had the "koyoco" gone away?

MR BALOYI: I do not understand, please repeat. Please repeat that.

CHAIRPERSON: You told us that when you heard the noise, you then went to the window. Is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I would like to know when you went to the window, was the Police vehicle, the "koyoco" still parked there or had it already left?

MR BALOYI: It was still parked there.

MR STRYDOM: So just to have everything clear, the first thing you saw, was the "koyoco", then you heard noise?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Then you moved to the window?

MR BALOYI: No. When I heard the noise, I went to the window. As I looked through the window, I noticed that the "koyoco" was parked there.

MR STRYDOM: So you could not see the "koyoco" from where you were sitting?

MR BALOYI: I was able to see, but I went to the window because of the noise and I still saw it parked there.

MR STRYDOM: The first time you saw the "koyoco" was when you went to the window, is that what you are saying?

CHAIRPERSON: No, as I understand his evidence, what he is saying is that whilst sitting down, he could see the "koyoco". He heard the noise and then went to the window and when he went to the window, the "koyoco" was still there. Is that what you are saying Mr Baloyi?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: In your evidence in chief when Mr Berger asked you questions, you testified as follows in relation to the "koyoco", you said -

"... it moved off, thereafter there was a noise in the street. I didn't see anything, I just heard the noise. And then I saw a large group of people."

How do you explain that?

MR BALOYI: I am only relating what I know. Bafokeng Street is a big road, it is a long road so that when there is some commotion, you would hear the noise. I first saw the "koyoco" and then when I heard the noise, I went to investigate through the window and I still saw that "koyoco" parked there.

MR STRYDOM: The "koyoco" was still parked there?

MR BALOYI: Yes, even right now, I can take you to show you exactly where it had been parked. It even travelled on my garden.

CHAIRPERSON: We understand that there was a "koyoco" there, but all that he wants to find out is whether when you went to the window and you heard the noise, was it still there, yes or no?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it was still there.

MR STRYDOM: I also want clarity about one aspect, you say the "koyoco" was right in front of your house?

MR BALOYI: I do not quite get you, do you mean in front of the house or in front of the garden?

MR STRYDOM: In the street but opposite your house?

MR BALOYI: It was not parked on the street, but on my lawn, that very same lawn that I had been watering.

MR STRYDOM: Just next to your fence?

MR BALOYI: I do not know how to explain it to you, you do not know the area.

MR STRYDOM: I have been there over lunch time, I know exactly. Was it next to your fence?

MR BALOYI: Yes, very close.

MR STRYDOM: So it must have been very close to your window, is that not so?

MR BALOYI: As I mentioned before, it is not just one window that faces the street, there are three windows facing the street.

MR STRYDOM: If I put to you that the "koyoco", if it was parked on your lawn, and you were inside the house, the "koyoco" was approximately this distance I am from you, from you at that stage, very close?

MR BALOYI: Yes, exactly where you are seated, that was the distance. The window would be where I am seated and the lawn will be in between. Behind where you are, would be the street and at the wall at the back there, would be the Nqwani and Buwa households.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. So just for record purposes, I estimate this to be about five paces, five metres approximately.

CHAIRPERSON: From where you are up to where Mr Baloyi is?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, maybe six.

CHAIRPERSON: It can't be six paces.

ADV SIGODI: Four.

MR BERGER: I would have thought it is about half the distance we measured before, which would make it about seven and a half to ten.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I would have thought so.

MR STRYDOM: Ten? Well, I am a runner and to cover ten metres, is a long distance, but I will measure it during the interval and place the correct distance on the record.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MR STRYDOM: But in any event, what I want to put to you at such close range, you must have seen who the occupants were if there were any people in the vehicle at that stage?

MR BALOYI: I want to tell you straight, what you are saying is not true. If a person is inside a "koyoco", you cannot identify them, you can tell maybe that they are black or white, but you cannot tell the identity with accuracy.

MR STRYDOM: But can you say the people in the "koyoco", were they black or white?

MR BALOYI: If I were to say to you they were white, what would you say, because there were white people inside.

MR STRYDOM: So you saw white people inside the "koyoco", is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: That is not what I said in the statement, I said it was a "koyoco", I did not specify whether it was white people or not.

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, Mr Baloyi, please answer the question. If you can say whether there were white people or black people inside the "koyoco", tell us, if you don't know, say so, it is not going to help you to argue with Mr Strydom. We expect you to give evidence here because that is what you said you wanted to do.

MR BALOYI: This is my response, the people that I saw were seated in front of the "koyoco" and they were white.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you state earlier on that you could not see the people in the "koyoco"?

MR BALOYI: I am referring you to the occupants.

CHAIRPERSON: There were people at the front and there were people at the back?

MR BALOYI: I could see the people in the front, but not the people at the back.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, his evidence Mr Strydom is that he couldn't see clearly the people that were at the back, but he can state that those who were in front, were white people.

MR STRYDOM: And you still maintain that over that distance, you could not identify the colour of the vehicle?

MR BALOYI: You have to pardon me, I am not in a position to state the colour.

MR STRYDOM: When you looked through the window and you saw the people for the first time, what were they doing? I am referring now to the attackers, not the people at the "koyoco" vehicle?

MR BALOYI: That large crowd of people were carrying items and they were headed towards the hostel. Some of them went into the Nqwani and Buwa households. After they left the Nqwani household, they came to my home, my home was the last house that was attacked.

MR STRYDOM: These people, can you identify them, how do you identify them, what can you tell the Committee about them, apart from that they carried stuff?

MR BALOYI: No, I was not concentrating on what they looked like, what they wore.

MR STRYDOM: What were they wearing?

MR BALOYI: Which people?

MR STRYDOM: The people who carried the televisions and the hi-fi's and the other goods.

MR BALOYI: They were in private clothing, some were wearing over-all's, different types of clothing.

MR STRYDOM: Did they have any distinctive markings?

MR BALOYI: What marks?

MR STRYDOM: Did they wear something similar amongst the group?

MR BALOYI: I said they were in different types of clothing, the people who entered my home, were the ones who had been wearing headbands.

MR STRYDOM: The people that entered your house, were they wearing white or red headbands?

MR BALOYI: I responded to that question, I said they had on red headbands, but their clothing I cannot really comment on that.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, and the group outside you already said that the only people you could identify with headbands, were the people that came into your house, so I can gather from that that the people from outside didn't have headbands on?

MR BALOYI: Some of them did have them.

MR STRYDOM: The witness said the only people he saw with headbands, were the people who came into his house?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: No, he never said that.

CHAIRPERSON: He just answered you that some of them had and some of them didn't.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. The people outside, the group you saw with the goods, can you describe their headbands?

MR BALOYI: I said the people on the street were carrying different items, TV's and the like, some were wearing headbands and some were not.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, those people outside who wore the headbands, can you describe those headbands?

MR BALOYI: I said those headbands were red in colour and moreover there isn't, there was no time to check on what every person was wearing.

MR STRYDOM: The group outside, did you just see black people? I am not referring to the people at the "koyoco", I am talking about the group with the goods?

MR BALOYI: The people who were carrying goods, were black.

MR STRYDOM: Were there white people in the group amongst the people that carried the goods?

MR BALOYI: I am referring to black people, not white people. I did not see any white people carrying the goods.

ADV SIGODI: The question is amongst the black people, were there any white people, it doesn't matter if they were carrying goods or if they were not carrying goods, did you see any white people?

MR BALOYI: There was no white person amongst the group that were carrying goods.

CHAIRPERSON: There is a group of people that you saw when you looked through the window, some of them carried certain items, you mentioned televisions and you mentioned clothing. In that group of people that you saw, do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Were there any white people?

MR BALOYI: I just saw the people who were carrying the goods, but there were people who were walking along the sides of the road who had been wearing balaclavas, but I could not tell whether they were whites or not.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you personally see any white people when you looked through the window?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not.

MR STRYDOM: You mentioned something about balaclavas, can you just tell us more what you saw about balaclavas?

MR BALOYI: Those were the people who had been walking on the sides of the streets, but I cannot really comment on them, because I did not see them properly.

MR STRYDOM: Again I want to refer you to your statement, it is written here -

"... the group of people was made up out of blacks and whites. The white people had balaclavas on and everybody in the group had white bands around their heads."

What do you say about this allegation that the group was made up out of blacks and whites?

MR BALOYI: I am saying there were people who walked along the streets, who did not go into the premises. I stated that those could have been white people.

MR STRYDOM: But you did not know if they were white people, why would you have stated that that could have been white people?

MR BALOYI: When they were still at Buwa's household, a "koyoco" approached from kwaMadala and a white Police Officer came in the company of a black Officer and they were loading a dead body onto a Police vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: And this white man, he had a balaclava on which covered his face?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You are nodding, I want to hear whether it is yes or no. This white man was wearing a balaclava which covered his face?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, you are referring to a vehicle that came after the attack, that removed the body of a person, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: We were very busy, trying to take the people who had been injured away, it returned, one "koyoco" returned to collect the dead body.

MR STRYDOM: Why do you say the "koyoco" returned?

MR BALOYI: It was coming from the hostel and we were standing outside. We were not in the house, we were outside.

MR STRYDOM: How do you know it is the same "koyoco" that came back?

MR BALOYI: All "koyoco's" are the same.

MR STRYDOM: So therefore all you can say is a "koyoco" came back, you cannot say it returned or the same one came back, isn't it so?

MR BALOYI: I do not know. I think you know better how these vehicles operate or what type they are.

MR STRYDOM: I just want to put to you that your evidence in front of this Committee differs from your statement in that you clearly states here that there were blacks and whites and that white people had black balaclavas on and everyone in the group, had white bands around their heads. Do you have any comment?

MR BALOYI: I did not state that they were wearing white bands. There were white people around because there were white people in that "koyoco".

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but we are not referring to the people in the "koyoco", we are referring to the people in the group and I am putting to you that you are now trying to get out of this corner by stating now that there were white people in the "koyoco".

MR BALOYI: I have stated before that there were people walking along and they were wearing balaclavas.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, let me explain this to you - this is what Counsel wants to find out from you, listen carefully to the question. If you don't understand the question, say so. You have now told us that the group that you saw when you looked through the window, part of that group was walking on the side and that some of those people who were walking on the side, wore balaclavas. Do you recall that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is so.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you couldn't see whether they were white or black, is that right?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: You confirmed that you did not, when you looked through the window, see any white person amongst the group, is that right?

MR BALOYI: The ones who are walking in the middle of the street, yes, there was no white person amongst them, but the ones who were walking on the sides, I am not sure whether they were white or not.

CHAIRPERSON: But you yourself did not see any white either in the group or on the side?

MR BALOYI: I did not see any white person, but when ...

CHAIRPERSON: Shall I finish the question first because I haven't finished the question.

MR BALOYI: I did not see white people.

CHAIRPERSON: Now in the statement that Counsel has just read to you, you say the group that you saw, was made up of black people and white people. Do you understand the question so far?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I do.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what he wants you to explain is, if from what you have told us you did not see white people in the group, those who were walking along the side, wore balaclavas and you couldn't see whether they were white or black, why then did you say in your statement the group that you saw, consisted of whites and blacks? Do you understand the question?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so what is the answer?

MR BALOYI: My response is this - when I saw that white person who came later to collect the dead body, I realised that those people who had been walking alongside the road, must have been white too.

MR STRYDOM: When you later saw the people that came to fetch the body, how many white people did you see?

MR BALOYI: I said there was one white person and a black Police Officer, so there were two in total.

MR STRYDOM: That white person, was he wearing a balaclava?

MR BALOYI: As I have already mentioned, he was wearing a balaclava.

MR STRYDOM: Now one further aspect ...

CHAIRPERSON: Just before, the white man who returned, is that the one who went to - is it the - Buwa's residence?

INTERPRETER: Please repeat that.

CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry, as I understand your evidence, the reason why you say - you said in your statement there were white people in the group - is because later on, after the attack, you saw a "koyoco" driven by a white man who wore a balaclava and this is the "koyoco" which had come to collect a body as I understand it?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Where was this body being fetched from, is it from the Buwa's residence?

MR BALOYI: From the Radebe household. It is the Hlubi household. That house is sixth from my home.

MR LAX: Not the Buwa household?

MR BALOYI: No, Buwa's household is opposite mine.

MR LAX: I am saying it is not the Buwa household, it is some other household?

MR BALOYI: No.

MR STRYDOM: Is it from the house on the corner where Hlubi and Bafokeng Streets meet?

MR BALOYI: No. From my home, you go down Bafokeng Street.

MR STRYDOM: Is that house in Bafokeng Street, is that right?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it is in Bafokeng Street.

MR STRYDOM: 722 Bafokeng Street, is that the house?

MR BALOYI: 732?

MR STRYDOM: 722?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: So you never told the person who took the statement that the group had white bands. Can you give any indication where the statement taker will get that information from?

MR BALOYI: The Police could not be trusted at that time, they will do as they pleased.

MR STRYDOM: So what you are saying is that the Police wrote here white bands, whilst you told them red bands, is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: I told them that they were red bands, if they wrote white, who was going to dispute that?

CHAIRPERSON: What Counsel is trying to find out from you and again, let me please ask you to answer the question directly, he has all the right to ask you these questions, if you know the answer you will tell us the answer, if you don't know the answer, say you don't know the answer. What he is putting to you is because you didn't tell the Police that the attackers wore white bands, did the Police of their own accord, simply wrote white bands when you had told them red bands? That is the question.

MR BALOYI: I told them that I saw them wearing red headbands, some of them did not have them on.

MR STRYDOM: You testified earlier that this statement was read back to you, why didn't you correct the statement or the words "white bands"?

MR BALOYI: I stated before that Police questioned me on many issues, so it is possible that they may not have understood some of what I told them and they wrote whatever.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, isn't the situation that when you saw the attackers, that you also went to hide yourself and therefore you didn't see much?

MR BALOYI: I would have not gone to hide, because I do not know if I was going to die or not. I just wanted to protect my family, it did not matter whether I died or not.

MR STRYDOM: What kind of weapons did you see amongst the group that was outside your house?

MR BALOYI: Which group are you referring to?

MR STRYDOM: We are talking about the group of attackers, the people that you saw outside, carrying certain goods, some with red bands, I am referring to that group.

MR BALOYI: Most of them had spears in their possession, and home made axes.

MR STRYDOM: Is that the only kind of weapons that you saw?

MR BALOYI: Yes, those are the only weapons that I did witness for myself.

MR STRYDOM: In your statement it is stated here -

"... they also had panga's, spears, axes, knopkieries and big, long firearms with them."

Would that be incorrect?

MR BALOYI: I did not see any firearm with regards to the group that was walking along the street. The ones who were walking alongside the street, they were carrying long firearms.

MR STRYDOM: If I refer to the group, I refer to all the people outside, that were walking on the side of the road, in the middle of the road, the totality of people outside the house, excluding people that could have been in the "koyoco". If I refer to the group, I refer to that group. What kind of weapons did they have?

MR BALOYI: I saw spears, home made axes, the people who were walking on the side of the road had firearms.

MR STRYDOM: What kind of firearms?

MR BALOYI: I do not know anything about big firearms, I cannot say.

ADV SIGODI: The interpretation was not complete, he mentioned that it was, the firearms, they were carrying them facing upwards.

MR LAX: Did you get that Interpreters? Adv Sigodi says that the firearms were pointed upwards when they were carrying them?

INTERPRETER: Yes, we do.

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

INTERPRETER: We beg your pardon for that.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know an AK47 rifle?

MR BALOYI: I normally see the Police and soldiers carrying firearms, but I cannot tell what type they are.

MR STRYDOM: And the kind the people were carrying that were walking on the sides, would you say that is the kind that you know see as an AK47 or won't you be able to say that?

MR BALOYI: They just carried long firearms and they were wearing black tracksuits.

MR STRYDOM: Did you say that all the people that walked on the side, were wearing black tracksuits?

MR BALOYI: They were not many, I just saw a few. There was no time to start counting them.

MR STRYDOM: How many people would you estimate formed the total group, that now again, if I refer to group, that is people in the street, on the sides, the total group, how many?

MR BALOYI: There could have been 500.

MR STRYDOM: And you told the Police when the Police took the statement, that the group consisted out of approximately 500 people, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: I did say that they were about 500, in fact they were more than that.

MR STRYDOM: And you also told the person who took the statement that you identified Vanana Zulu?

MR BALOYI: I do not know that name Vanana, I know him by the name Mtwana Zulu.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but in any event you told the statement taker that the one person you can identify is Mtwana Zulu?

MR BALOYI: What I am saying is I told him everything that he came and stood by the gate and called out to my son, he said Dududu, Morene, and he said Lucky, these are the boys that they used to perform the traditional dance with.

MR STRYDOM: All I want to know you told the Police who took the statement, the same information you gave us regarding Mtwana Zulu?

MR BALOYI: Yes, as I have just explained it to you, that is what I told them.

MR SIBANYONI: Excuse me Mr Strydom, who said Morene?

MR BALOYI: It was Mtwana.

MR STRYDOM: When the statement was read over to you again, didn't you find it strange that that reference to Mtwana Zulu did not appear in that statement?

MR BALOYI: No, I would not know about that.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what he wants to put to you is that in the statement that you made to the Police, there is no mention of Mtwana.

MR STRYDOM: Can you give any reason ...

MR BALOYI: I do not know about that, but he did call out to my son. I told my son to go hide himself. He called out to three boys.

MR STRYDOM: Did you tell the three boys to go and hide themselves?

MR BALOYI: These boys used to dance with him, he used to teach them the traditional dance. I do not know why he was calling out to them.

MR STRYDOM: That is not the question, the question is when Mtwana called the names of the boys, did you tell them "go and hide yourselves"?

MR BALOYI: One was at the neighbour's house and the other was further on down at Nqwani's house. He just called out their names.

CHAIRPERSON: What he wants to know is, when Mtwana Zulu called the names of your two sons, did you tell your two sons to go and hide?

MR BALOYI: I only told my son Dududu who was with me in the house.

MR LAX: Can I just ask something? The other two names Morene and Lucky, who are they?

MR BALOYI: They are the boys who used to dance, to perform this traditional dance, the Tsongola dance with him.

MR LAX: Are they your sons or do they belong to other families, what is the story?

MR BALOYI: They are not my sons, they are the neighbours.

MR LAX: Thank you.

MR STRYDOM: And Dududu is one of your sons?

MR BALOYI: Yes, he is my son.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see Mtwana standing outside your house?

MR BALOYI: I said he did not stand outside my house, when they come out of Buwa's household, he called out these names. I was watching them when they attacked these two other houses.

MR STRYDOM: You already testified Buwa's house is just opposite yours, so he was standing - was he standing in the middle of the street between the two houses?

MR BALOYI: He was standing on the lawn and he called out to them, calling Dududu, Lucky, Morene. We were watching him. The people were coming out of Victor's house and they proceeded to my gate, which they broke. The people who came out of Buwa's house, did not come to my house, they just left.

MR STRYDOM: I am not talking about other people, I want to know about Mtwana. Was he standing on your lawn or on Buwa's lawn?

MR BALOYI: He was standing on the Buwa's lawn.

MR STRYDOM: And was he facing in the direction of your house?

MR BALOYI: He was just calling the names as they were coming out of the gate. I did not notice which direction he was facing.

MR STRYDOM: So you did not see his face, is that what you say?

MR BALOYI: I am saying to you right now, I know that you are Mr Strydom, I knew Mtwana from a long time ago and when he got married to that lady who stays in my neighbourhood, I know him.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, the question is ...

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see his face as he was standing at Buwa's lawn?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did see his face.

MR STRYDOM: But you said he was not facing you or the direction of your house, how did you manage to see his face?

MR BALOYI: If you are facing that direction, would you not be able to see my face? Would you only be able to see my face if I face you directly?

MR STRYDOM: Are you saying you saw him from the side, is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: I saw him just as I am seeing you now.

MR STRYDOM: But I am facing you Mr Baloyi, did you see him as you are seeing me now, that is you saw him face to face or did you see his side?

MR BALOYI: When he called out Lucky, these three boys were at different houses.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see the side of Mtwana's face when he called out the names?

MR BALOYI: I am saying that I saw him. Yes, I saw him whether from the side or in front, but I saw him.

MR SIBANYONI: But on that day did you see him from his side or from his front of his face?

MR BALOYI: If you are looking at me, would you not be able to see what this person looks like?

MR SIBANYONI: May I just explain to you Mr Baloyi that as the Chairperson has requested you that if you answer the questions directly, that will shorten the cross-examination for you, but if you are not doing that, it is going to take long because Mr Strydom would like to get certain information from you. If you respond immediately, directly as he is asking you, that will enable him to finish the cross-examination earlier. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I do.

MR SIBANYONI: If I can ask, were you looking at him from his side or from directly in front of him when he was calling the names? Were you able to see his face from the front?

MR BALOYI: I just saw him in front.

MR SIBANYONI: Okay.

MR STRYDOM: The other two names, Morene and Lucky, you say they are not your children. Which houses do they stay at?

MR BALOYI: They are the neighbours.

MR STRYDOM: Direct neighbours, that is to say the house directly next to you or lower down the street, or what?

MR BALOYI: The last house.

MR STRYDOM: The last house in the direction of Frikkie Meyer Boulevard?

MR BALOYI: The last house towards Madala.

MR STRYDOM: Is that Lucky that stays there?

MR BALOYI: Lucky's house is next door to Nqwani's.

MR STRYDOM: Which one of the boys stay there then, Morene then, that is at the last house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, Morene stays at the corner. His surname is Dube. Lucky stays at a house next door to the Nqwani's.

MR STRYDOM: I don't know that house, is it lower down the street in Bafokeng, towards Slovo Park?

MR BALOYI: I cannot compare Slovo Park with Bafokeng. They stay in my neighbourhood.

MR STRYDOM: How many houses from you does Lucky stay?

MR BALOYI: Lucky's house is next door to Nqwani's and my house is in the other direction.

MR STRYDOM: So is the house on the other side of the street, opposite you? Just before you answer this, maybe we can shorten this, can you give the number of the house?

MR BALOYI: I do not know the number.

MR STRYDOM: The question I want to ask you, can you give - I want to put to you that Mtwana was not in Boipatong that night. Do you want to comment on that?

MR BALOYI: I do not think that he was absent as a person who was in charge of the hostel, there was no way he was not there.

MR STRYDOM: Are you saying that the reason why you say he was there, is because he won't let those people from kwaMadala go alone, he would go with them, he is a leader? Is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: Yes, as I said before, his in-law's house was also in the area. They did not go there, just went and attacked my home.

CHAIRPERSON: This is not what you are being asked. It was just put to you now that Mtwana Zulu was not present during the attack and your response was he could not have been absent because he was the leader, is that right?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know a person by the name of Moses Mthembu?

MR BALOYI: I know the induna who used to stand guard at the gate.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see him that night of the attack in Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not see him.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know what kind of clothes Mtwana was wearing that night, can you give any description?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not notice.

MR STRYDOM: So what you are saying is that Mtwana shouted the names of Dudu, Morene and Lucky and thereby announcing his presence in Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: I do not know how to tell you this, I said these people used to be involved in this traditional dance together and we never thought that he was capable of doing this type of act. We knew very well that it was him who called out to these boys, I saw him clearly.

MR STRYDOM: What I am in fact putting to you is ...

CHAIRPERSON: Just a minute, what do you mean when you say we knew that no other person could have called them, other than Mtwana? What do you mean when you say that?

MR BALOYI: As he stood there when he called out to these boys, he is the one person who knew all their names.

MR STRYDOM: And according to you, he was not hiding the fact that he was in Boipatong because he shouted names of known people to him, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is what surprises me.

MR STRYDOM: And when he shouted Dudu's name, you said he must go and hide himself?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: How far does - you mentioned that Mtwana's in-law's lived close to your house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, the fourth house from mine.

CHAIRPERSON: Is Mtwana Zulu known in and around your area?

MR BALOYI: Even a young child knows him.

ADV SIGODI: Can I just clarify something? When you saw Mtwana Zulu and when you heard him calling out to your son, was this after your house had been attacked?

MR BALOYI: It was before it was attacked. That is why I saw them clearly.

ADV SIGODI: And how many people, how far were the attackers when you saw him?

MR BALOYI: The crowd that had been carrying goods, was all over the street.

ADV SIGODI: So the crowd that was carrying the goods, how far was it from your house?

MR BALOYI: Some distance away, but not too far.

ADV SIGODI: How far were they from Mtwana's in-law's?

MR BALOYI: They were near, I can say they were about the fourth house away. That is the estimate I can give, but they went into Nqwani and Buwa's households. When they came out of these houses, they joined the other group.

ADV SIGODI: How many people were in the street, was the street full of people at that time?

MR BALOYI: As I estimated, there were 500 or more, there were many.

ADV SIGODI: I know that there were many people, but how far were they from your house, were they already opposite your house or were they still coming towards your house when you saw Mtwana, at the time when you saw Mtwana Zulu?

MR BALOYI: they were still approaching.

ADV SIGODI: How many people were in the street opposite your house when you saw Mtwana Zulu? I am not talking about the attackers, I mean how many people were there in that vicinity where Mtwana Zulu was?

MR BALOYI: I saw them as they were approaching, there were many of them. At that time I was watching them as they were attacking the Nqwani and Buwa households. That is before the other group arrived. After they had finished the attack on these two households, they left carrying goods. When the people left Nqwani's household, they came to my house.

CHAIRPERSON: Listen carefully, we know from your evidence that there were approximately 500 people going passed your house that evening, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: We also know that there were people who were walking along the side of the road?

MR BALOYI: I think there five or four.

CHAIRPERSON: What my colleague wants to find out from you is, at the time when you saw Mtwana Zulu, how many people approximately were in front of your house, do you understand the question?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I do understand you now. I was not in a position to count them.

CHAIRPERSON: You told us, we know, that at least those who were walking along the side were approximately five, right?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, that were in there, were they five, ten or was the street full of people?

MR BALOYI: The just broke windows and did not get into the house. I am not in a position to say how many they were. That is when I started to see Mtwana.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's take this step by step, you have said you now understood what the question was, right, what I explained to you ...

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What my colleague wishes to know, approximately how many people would you say were in front of your house at the time when you saw Mtwana Zulu? Do you understand the question?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: We understand that at about that time, people had already started attacking the houses, Victor Nqwani's house, is that right?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And there were people in Buwa's house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And you saw Mtwana after these two houses had been attacked, is that right or not?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now when you saw Mtwana Zulu in front of your house, approximately how many people were in the road next to your house, do you understand the question?

MR BALOYI: Yes. The other group had not as yet arrived, it was just the people who had gone into the houses. There could have been five people each who went into these houses.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, must I carry on at this stage?

CHAIRPERSON: I am sure you are about to finish?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, about this Mtwana issue, just two questions basically.

CHAIRPERSON: I mean your cross-examination?

MR STRYDOM: Unfortunately not Chairperson. There are certain other aspects I will have to ask.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MR STRYDOM: I hope thereby limiting my learned friend's cross-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you just carry on and at a convenient point, will you let us know, then we will rise at that point. Do you want to close this Mtwana aspect?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, let me do that. Do you then say that Mtwana was also one of the people that went into the houses opposite you?

MR BALOYI: I am not saying he attacked those houses, I just saw him outside there.

MR STRYDOM: Did you first recognise his voice or did you first see him?

MR BALOYI: We were standing by the window watching him.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what he wants to find out is what is it that made you recognise Mtwana? Is it because you first saw him or is it because you first heard his voice? Do you understand the question?

MR BALOYI: I first heard his voice, thereafter I saw him.

MR STRYDOM: If I put to you that there is a chance that you are making a mistake because the light was not good, you were looking from inside the house and add to that, that I put to you that Mtwana was not there, isn't there a possibility that you are making a mistake?

MR BALOYI: I am saying it was not dark, there was sufficient light, it was as bright as daylight. It was at night, but the lights are very bright. It is as if it is daylight.

CHAIRPERSON: When you heard his voice, you were standing next to your window and looking through the window?

MR BALOYI: Yes, we were watching as they were attacking those two houses. As the windows were being broken in those two houses, we were watching.

CHAIRPERSON: And it was whilst you were standing there, that you heard his voice?

MR BALOYI: Yes. When they left Buwa's house.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, yes.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, were you inside or outside the house?

MR BALOYI: I was inside, in the sitting room.

ADV SIGODI: And did you have the lights on in the house or were your lights switched off?

MR BALOYI: The lights were switched off inside the house.

ADV SIGODI: Did you have your windows opened or closed?

MR BALOYI: We made sure that the windows were closed in such a way that if you are outside, you cannot open the window, but we could still hear what the people outside were saying.

ADV SIGODI: But wasn't there a lot of noise?

MR BALOYI: As I mentioned before, the noise was coming from Bafokeng Street, there was a big noise.

ADV SIGODI: And this crowd that was coming, that was about four to six houses away from you, this large crowd, were they not making a lot of noise?

MR BALOYI: I think the people who making the noise, could have been the residents. I am not sure whether it was the attackers or the residents.

ADV SIGODI: Were they singing or chanting or did you notice anything like that?

MR BALOYI: No, it sounded like people were screaming, but it was a noise.

ADV SIGODI: It was coming closer to your house, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: We have heard evidence that the attackers were shouting (indistinct), did you hear that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they did say that and they also said kill the dogs.

ADV SIGODI: When did you hear this?

MR BALOYI: As they were near Buwa's house.

ADV SIGODI: And you were inside the house, you could hear this whilst you were inside the house with your windows closed?

MR BALOYI: As I mentioned before, we closed the windows, but in such a way that you could still hear what people were saying outside.

ADV SIGODI: How far was Mtwana Zulu from your house when you heard him calling out to your son?

MR BALOYI: Do you see that wall, would you not be able to see a person that far away? You can.

ADV SIGODI: Could you hear?

CHAIRPERSON: You have a lot of pacing to do Mr Strydom, would you pace this distance which the witness has indicated. Did you say it is from where you are sitting to that wall, there where there is a red and black curtain?

MR BALOYI: No, where there is that (indistinct), I don't know whether it is a stove or something else. Yes, I even see someone there.

CHAIRPERSON: So it is the distance from where you are sitting to that wall over there behind the legal representative for the applicants?

MR BALOYI: Yes, the street will be in between, Bafokeng Street was in between.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: So that would be about ...

MR STRYDOM: I will do the measurement.

ADV SIGODI: Okay.

MR STRYDOM: This dancing with the boys - sorry are you just busy?

ADV SIGODI: I just wanted to clarify the hearing aspect, and you say that they had started stoning the windows at Nqwani's house and at Buwa's house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

ADV SIGODI: At what stage did Mtwana Zulu call out to your son?

MR BALOYI: When they emerged from Buwa's house.

ADV SIGODI: Did he also come out from Buwa's house?

MR BALOYI: I do not know, I just saw him standing on the lawn.

ADV SIGODI: And you could hear him quite clearly calling out your son and the other two?

MR BALOYI: I do not doubt that for a minute. That is my son.

MR STRYDOM: At that stage, wasn't your son hiding already with your wife?

MR BALOYI: They were still standing next to the kitchen and I told him that he should now go and hide.

MR STRYDOM: This dancing that your son did with Mtwana, was that at the stage he already stayed at the hostel, or was that still when he lived at Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: This dance started a long while ago, many children in the township were taught.

MR STRYDOM: So is the answer Mtwana was still living in Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: You would not know whether he lived in Boipatong or not, because sometimes he would be there at Bafokeng Street until such time that he got his own house at Majola Street.

CHAIRPERSON: When you saw him on that day, when last had you seen him, could you recall?

MR BALOYI: They didn't use to come to the township any more, because they were afraid of being killed.

MR STRYDOM: And the kids, your child and the other children, didn't go to kwaMadala hostel either?

MR BALOYI: No, they no longer went to the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Did you tell your wife that you saw Mtwana outside your house on the night of the attack?

MR BALOYI: What I said is that she would not confirm or say that she saw him, but she did hear his voice.

MR STRYDOM: Did she tell you that she heard his voice?

MR BALOYI: We were standing together there, she heard his voice very well.

MR STRYDOM: If she heard the voice, did she also see him then?

MR BALOYI: I do not know, I cannot comment on whether she him or not.

MR STRYDOM: This is a very important aspect, surely you would have discussed this afterwards? Did she tell you I saw Mtwana standing in the street like you did?

MR BALOYI: What we discuss is different from what we saw. All I can say is that I saw him.

MR STRYDOM: I will conclude by stating that your wife didn't say anything when she testified about Mtwana Zulu outside your house, she didn't say that she heard his voice, she didn't say that she saw him, she didn't say that you told her that he was outside.

MR BALOYI: What I am saying is that many people who know what happened, are unwilling to come before this Committee because they are afraid that they would be killed by the Police. She herself used her discretion in deciding what she told.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, I don't want to argue with you, but I can understand if she was afraid to mention the Police, but why would she hide the name of Mtwana?

MR BALOYI: I do not know.

MR STRYDOM: Will this be a convenient stage?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Baloyi, you will have to come back tomorrow for further questions. Do you understand?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I will be present.

CHAIRPERSON: We will rise and we will reconvene at nine o'clock tomorrow morning.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

12-05-1999: Day 8

Matter: Boipatong Massacre

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: ... which is the response by the TRC to the letter of 5 May 1999, by the applicant's attorneys. Did everyone receive a copy of this document?

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, I have not received a copy. I understand that there are three other colleagues of mine that have not received a copy. I received a document approximately 10 minutes ago and I've tried to glance at it, but I haven't even had the opportunity of glancing through it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Is this just a separate document?

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, I received this document from Mrs Pretorius, which appears to be the document and I haven't had an opportunity of even glancing ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Does it go to page 38, do you know?

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, mine's not paginated.

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Chairman, I have not received a copy yet. That copy is Mr Strydom's, I think, that Mr da Silva has. Up to now I haven't received a copy either. And may I speak for Mr David Mey, he is sitting in the hall and he hasn't received on either.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BOTHA: Mr Chairman, it seems to me that I haven't received on either. I went through the notes that Mr du Plessis got yesterday and we don't have copies.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR BOTHA: We don't have one either, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: I did receive one, thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom?

MR STRYDOM: I received a copy.

MS TANZER: I did too.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma?

MR MAPOMA: I've got a copy, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malindi?

MR MALINDI: Chairperson, I have a copy.

CHAIRPERSON: When did you receive it?

MR MALINDI: I received it yesterday.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, Ms Cambanis and I both received separate copies yesterday.

MS THOMAS: Chairperson, I received mine this morning. I haven't had an opportunity to go through it yet, but I do have a copy.

CHAIRPERSON: I do not know the extent to which this document would be relied upon in opposition to and support of the present application. So it seems to me that all the legal representatives must be given enough time to go through the document, to the extent that it may be relevant to the application which we were scheduled to hear this morning.

Is there any reason why these other legal representatives who didn't receive this document were not furnished with one yesterday?

MR MAPOMA: Thank you, Chairperson. Mr Chairman, there's actually no reason why they were not given that document I must say and I regret that quite sincerely. I'll try to apologise to the other parties who have not been given that information, I mean that document. Unfortunately Chairperson, the circumstances under which we distributed the document were not very much conducive for everyone to get them because we only made them available when we were, after the adjournment and unfortunately some of the colleagues had already left at that time because immediately when the adjournment was made people just packed and left. We are going to endeavour to make those copies available to them as soon as we can.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have anyone assisting you with making photocopies?

MR MAPOMA: Yes, Chairperson, I'm being assisted by the secretary and Mr Jan Eck(?).

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR MAPOMA: And Mr Jan Eck, the Investigator. I rely entirely on them in fact for making copies available.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Isn't there supposed to be a Logistics Officer?

MR MAPOMA: There's supposed to be one.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there one, do we have one?

MR MAPOMA: Yes, we do.

CHAIRPERSON: Why can't he assist?

MR MAPOMA: She also was part of the assistance in making copies.

CHAIRPERSON: When can you have those documents? Could we have those documents made available to the legal representatives by tea time?

MR MAPOMA: Yes, Sir, I will undertake to do that.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, very well. What is your attitude, Mr...?

MR STRYDOM: I think it would only be just and fair if my colleagues have the opportunity of perusing the document, having it available. I will not rely too much in argument on the document, as I've indicated to my learned friend, but Chair I don't have a problem with that.

There's one aspect though that I'd like ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: The application as I understand it, is being brought by yourself only.

MR STRYDOM: On behalf of all the applicants.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed. So they have no part to play in this application, you're other colleagues?

MR STRYDOM: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MR STRYDOM: Chair, just one aspect, did you mention that the document comprises 31 pages?

CHAIRPERSON: 38.

MR STRYDOM: I have one of 37.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, that's a matter for arithmetic. Alright, how much time Ma'am, do you think you will need to go through that document and be ready?

MS THOMAS: Chairperson, it doesn't appear to be a very long document. I would say 20 to 30 minutes. I don't even know what it contains, but I would say 30 minutes is reasonable.

CHAIRPERSON: Well it's not just a question of reading the document, it's a question of reading the document and then considering your position in regard to the document. So I'm not too sure that that process would take 30 minutes.

MS THOMAS: I'm in agreement. By saying 30 minutes, I was just trying not to cause undue delay to the proceedings. I'm in full agreement, one would indeed further have to take instructions on the basis of the contents of the document, so it might take much longer than 30 minutes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Well that's what I'm trying to find out from you. ...(indistinct) we're going to do. We will excuse you from attending. We'll give you enough time to go through that document and to consider your position, and then would you let us know by 11 o'clock whether you will be in a position to proceed with the matter if the matter is argued at 11H30 today.

MS THOMAS: I will indeed do so, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: ... or whether you prefer - because I think that the number of options, one is to have the matter argued at 11H30, otherwise we can have the matter argued at 2 o'clock when we come back from lunch.

MS THOMAS: I will indeed give an indication, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Otherwise we can have the matter argued at half past four, when we finish hearing the evidence. So these are the three options, okay?

MS THOMAS: I will keep the options in mind, Chairperson. I will indicate what my position is to you at 11 o'clock.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, but if you are not going to be ready today and you would prefer to have the matter argued tomorrow, which is Thursday, you let us know.

MS THOMAS: I will do so.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, but at least we need some indication.

MS THOMAS: At 11 o'clock?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, at least just to give us your own assessment as to where you stand.

MS THOMAS: I will do so, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, do you have any objection to the...?

MR LOWIES: Not at all, Chair, not at all.

CHAIRPERSON: You're not being persuaded by the half past four option, are you?

MR LOWIES: No, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. What about your colleagues?

COUNSEL: Mr Chairman, I'm in a very difficult position ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed, yes.

COUNSEL: I can't make any comment. I haven't read or looked at the document properly so ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed. Very well. We will then resume with the testimony of Mr Baloyi. You are excused Ma'am from attending.

MS THOMAS: Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Is it possible, Mr Mapoma, to get the further copy - do we have the other copies ready in the meantime?

MR MAPOMA: Unfortunately no, Chairperson, the missing copies, I don't have them. They are going to be recopied.

CHAIRPERSON: Could we have those copies being made in the meantime, so that at least by 11 o'clock we are ready to distribute them.

MR MAPOMA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I've got a copy here which is - well, unfortunately my copy has already been marked, so it's no longer in the public domain. Mr Berger, how many pages does your copy have?

MR BERGER: I have 38, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You've got 138?

MR BERGER: 38.

CHAIRPERSON: 38?

MR BERGER: Thirty eight.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, okay. Mr Lowies, you've got to recount your pages.

MR LOWIES: Chair, I will check. I don't want to make my problem everybody else's. I'll check.

CHAIRPERSON: It may be an arithmetic problem.

MR LOWIES: With me it's possible.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Would you have Adv Sigodi's copy then?

DISCUSSION REGARDING COPIES

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, may I remind you that you are still under oath?

MACHIHLILE WILSON BALOYI: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: (cont)

Thank you, Chairman.

Mr Baloyi, your neighbour that lives opposite you, is that John Buwa, spelt B-U-W-A?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: He lives at 807, Bafokeng Street.

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: He testified during the criminal hearing ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: I don't know because they were frequenting the court.

MR STRYDOM: Just for record purposes, his testimony appears in volume 20, on page 2291.

CHAIRPERSON: What is this house number?

MR STRYDOM: 807, Bafokeng Street.

He testified that he heard shots being fired before the people entered his house. Now I want to know, did you hear any shots? You referred to noises yesterday, but did you hear any shots just before you saw the crown outside Mr Buwa's house?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not hear any shots at Buwa's place. I only head shots at Nqwale's place.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, before I forget, I measured the distances. The first distance that was estimated from the witness to myself is approximately seven paces and the distance from the witness to the back wall is 12 paces.

MR LAX: What about the witness to the fourth row there, that's the other distance.

MR STRYDOM: No, that one I didn't measure, I forgot about that one, I will do that in due course.

MR LAX: Okay.

MR STRYDOM: Now you estimated yesterday that there were some people, you said there were some people in front of Mr Buwa's house and you were asked by, I think, Adv Sigodi, to indicate how many people were in that group where you said you saw Mtwana. Now Mr Buwa was asked how many people he saw in front of his house and he said 60 people, would you agree with that figure, approximately 60 people?

MR BALOYI: That was his testimony. The group that I saw outside could have been six to seven, there were not many.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you referring to people who came out of his house, that were six or seven?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what counsel is putting to you is the approximate number of people who were in front of Buwa's house on the street.

MR STRYDOM: I think I'll read the relevant portion, just to make certain what the reference was. Mr Buwa said he heard noises and he heard a shot going off, then he went to his window. Then he testifies as follows: the male persons which he saw on the side of the street, he saw them in Bafokeng Street. And then a question was asked:

"Can you tell the court how many people did you see in Bafokeng Street?"

And then the answer was:

"I estimate 60"

And then he went further:

"Could you see if these persons were armed?"

Answer:

"No, I could not see it clearly because it was dark"

So before his house was attacked he went to the window and he saw 60 people outside his house, did you also see 60 people in front of his house before the house was attacked?

MR BALOYI: I did not see 60 people. There was no time really to count the number of people who were standing there. There were several of them, but they could not have been 60. He is giving testimony about what he knows.

CHAIRPERSON: That evidence is what Mr Buwa saw as he looked through the window. That is before his house was attacked, do you understand that? That is what he is saying. He says, before his house was attacked, when he looked through the window he saw approximately 60 people on the street. I think what counsel wants to find out from you is whether you can comment on that.

MR BALOYI: No, no, I cannot.

MR STRYDOM: You also testified yesterday that the situation of the light was such that you could see as well as in daylight. I want to put to you that Mr Buwa stated at the trial that he couldn't see if these people were armed because it was dark. Do you want to comment on his testimony?

MR BALOYI: I cannot comment on what Buwa said. I am only talking about that which I saw personally. It was so bright you could see a person from a distance. Buwa is only testifying to what he knows.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. After the attack on your house and when you went outside, did you see Mr Buwa?

MR BALOYI: I don't get your question.

MR STRYDOM: You testified yesterday that after the attackers left, you went outside and at a certain stage your wife was also outside, did you see Mr Buwa as well?

MR BALOYI: Yes, yes I saw him, because people were injured there. I am the person responsible for first aid in that street, as well as Mogotso.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. At the time you saw ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Who is the other person?

MR BALOYI: Mogotso.

MR STRYDOM: When you saw Mr Buwa were there still police vehicles in the vicinity?

MR BALOYI: They had already left, they had already gone to kwaMadala Hostel. We could see them moving to the hostel, being followed by the Hippos from behind, and they went to KwaMadala Hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Did you point that out to Mr Buwa?

MR BALOYI: He had been attacked, so he was supposed to have seen it for himself.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that Mr Buwa also made mention in his testimony of a koyoko, but he testified as follows - I'll just put you in the picture. He said at the stage his house was attacked, he ran away and hid him somewhere. Then he said:

"Whilst I was hiding I saw a Koyoko move in the vicinity of the garage in the direction of the town"

And then it was asked of him:

"In which street did the Koyoko move, can you remember?"

He repeated:

"It moved down the street which will take you to the town"

"Is that Frikkie Meyer Boulevard?"

"Yes"

MR STRYDOM: Now that's the only Koyoko he saw. So do you still maintain that you saw all those other koyoko's?

MR BALOYI: I am saying I am not here to testify about what was said, I'm only getting that from you. I saw koyokos and I stand by that evidence.

MR LAX: Mr Strydom, could you just give us the various references of these bits of evidence that you've quoted. You gave us where is evidence started, but you've referred now to two separate portions. If you could just give us the page references for the record.

MR STRYDOM: The first reference is on page 2292, the accused says the first five lines, and the second reference is page 2293, from line 10 to approximately line 17.

MR LAX: Thanks very much.

MR STRYDOM: When the three attackers came into your house with the red headbands, where were you situation in the house?

MR BALOYI: I was inside the house, in the sitting-room.

MR STRYDOM: In your testimony yesterday you said that: "I stood in front of the bedroom door and one of the attackers wanted to hack me, and then I went into the room."

So can you just explain that please, what was your position?

MR BALOYI: I will explain because I was the one who was attacked. My sitting-room is, should I say, similar to this open space here and you have my bedroom door right in front of the sitting-room. I was standing in the sitting-room as they were getting in and I stood at the door to my bedroom and held the door and I was looking at them as this was happening.

MR STRYDOM: And then you testified that you slammed the door on him, on the attacker, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: That is correct. Yes, I am the one who did that. When he came he climbed that step with an intention to hack me and I moved backwards. I wanted him to climb that step so that I could hit him with the door.

After he had climbed the step, I them pushed the door against him and he fell onto the sofa. The sofa is still torn as I speak, but then I fixed it later.

MR STRYDOM: What I basically want to know is, if you closed the door so he ended up in the sitting-room and you in the bedroom?

MR BALOYI: I did not close the door. I did not get inside the bedroom, I was just standing there holding the door like this. I did not close the door in such a way that I could not see them from inside the bedroom.

MR STRYDOM: So you slammed the door but you kept the door open so you can see what was going on in the sitting-room, is that what you're saying? Is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: And then he came back at you again and you did something similar, you slammed the door again?

MR BALOYI: He came back and I moved a little backwards, still holding the door, and I slammed the door against him for the second time now. That is when the suitcase that they had brought along, full of clothes, glassed, flipped open and these things fell out.

MR STRYDOM: So it's not a situation that when they entered you went into the bedroom and locked the door and stayed behind the locked door?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not lock myself inside the bedroom. I could see them as they were taking that box full of records. They took a hi-fi set and those who took those things, the people who took those things went out of the house there and then and this one came to me as the suitcase was down there.

MR STRYDOM: You see, in the statement I referred you to yesterday, Exhibit CC - just to refresh your memory, that's the statement made to, when the interpreter Mr Matengane was used, you said the following:

"They broke open my front door and a black male entered the house. I punched him away and went into the bedroom and locked the door."

...(intervention)

MR BERGER: I'll just check the original.

CHAIRPERSON: Where are you reading?

MR BERGER: If you number the paragraphs it would be easier, and it would be the seventh paragraph.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, okay.

MR STRYDOM: Ja, it's the original I'm just reading:

"I pushed him away and went into the bedroom and locked the door. I won't be able to identify the black male who entered the house"

I'm reading from the original.

Chairperson, I've made copies of the original, maybe I'll just hand them out.

The portion I put to you, which I want to ask you a question about, is this portion. I'll break it down. Firstly, it states that:

"A black male entered the house"

You testified that three people entered the house in this court, in front of this Committee.

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Can you give me an explanation why there's only reference to:

"A black male entered the house"

- in the statement.

MR BALOYI: I don't know.

MR STRYDOM: Then it goes further:

"I pushed ..."

...(intervention)

MR BERGER: Chairperson, in fairness to the witness, if one looks at paragraphs number 8 and 9, there's talk about "they".

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I see that. Let me ask you this way; the three people you say, did they come into the house at the same time, or just one and then later two more, what's the situation?

MR BALOYI: They came into the house at the same time because they broke the door.

CHAIRPERSON: They broke the front door ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: Yes, the front door.

CHAIRPERSON: ... but only one male came to you with an axe?

MR BALOYI: Yes, only one of them came to me with an axe.

CHAIRPERSON: Whilst the remaining two helped themselves to those items?

MR BALOYI: One of them took my hi-fi set and the other one took a box full of records.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I understand.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but the question I really want to ask you is, why did you state here that after this person entered the house:

"I pushed him away and went into the bedroom and locked the door"

Because you testified here that you never locked the door, in fact you sort of reopened the door and pushed him away again.

MR BALOYI: I was doing that. I know what I did. I was holding the door, I knocked him with the door. This person did not know the geography of the house.

CHAIRPERSON: All that you're being asked is, what appears in this statement, do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: I knocked him with the door, not the front door, no.

MR STRYDOM: So you never locked the door?

MR BALOYI: When he held the door for the third time, that's when I held the door.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you lock yourself into the bedroom?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not.

MR STRYDOM: Now when you were attacked, why didn't you lock yourself into the bedroom?

MR BALOYI: I could not have done that because I wanted to see their movements.

MR STRYDOM: When they left what did you do? Immediately after they left the house, what did you do?

MR BALOYI: When they left I also got out of the, I got out of the bedroom and I went to the front door and I watched them as they were leaving. Windows were also broken.

MR STRYDOM: So you say that they were still in the close vicinity of your house and you just came out of the bedroom and started to just casually watch them, is that so?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I saw them as they were leaving.

MR STRYDOM: When you came out what did you see?

MR BERGER: The witness never said "casually watching them".

MR STRYDOM: I'm putting as a proposition to the witness, Chair, but I'll move on.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see these three people leave your house?

MR BALOYI: The first two left as I was watching and one of them was carrying the box full of records and the other one a hi-fi set. And I also saw this one that I was fighting leaving and before he left he took some clothing, children's clothing from the sofa and he left behind the suitcase that he had brought along. And these clothes had come from Mgena.

MR STRYDOM: You must tell me if I'm wrong now, but I get the impression that whilst they were still in the house you came out of the bedroom and that enabled you to see now that they took the things and then left the house, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: As I was peeping through the door I could see them leaving.

MR STRYDOM: Were the lights in the house still turned on or off at that stage?

MR BALOYI: They are the ones who switched the lights on.

MR STRYDOM: So it seems to me that you had ample time to identify these people, to see them, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes, yes. I was waiting for them because I knew.

MR STRYDOM: You knew what?

MR BALOYI: When I testified yesterday morning I indicated that I received a telephone call that we were going to be attacked, so I knew that they were coming to attack.

MR STRYDOM: So in this house, during the attack, you looked at these attackers so as to enable you to identify if needs be at a later stage?

MR BALOYI: You don't have time to look at a person closely in a fighting situation, you are just trying to protect yourself.

MR STRYDOM: But let me ask you this, if the three attackers are brought to you now, will you be able to identify them? - anyone of the three.

MR BALOYI: I will not be in the position. Maybe if I - if he was brought forward so that I know who he is, maybe I would be at peace with myself.

MR STRYDOM: Tell me, do you know why the clergyman, Father Patrick phoned you informing you about the attack?

MR BALOYI: I am a congregant in his church, he is my pastor, he trusts me. When he goes overseas I take charge of the church. When he's not around on Tuesdays I take charge of things in the church.

MR STRYDOM: Now can I just get clarity again, at what stage in relation to this attack, did you come out of your bedroom, finally came out after the attack now? The people came to your house, you said they left, were they still busy leaving or when did you come out of your room?

MR BALOYI: They had already left, but I could see them as they were leaving.

MR STRYDOM: You mean, did you see them outside the house leaving or did you still see them in the house leaving?

MR BALOYI: I went out through the front door and they had left the hi-fi which they had broken on the stoep.

MR STRYDOM: When you went outside what did you see?

MR BALOYI: I saw them as they were leaving.

MR STRYDOM: Where were they?

MR BALOYI: On the open space. I don't know how to explain it, you don't know Boipatong. You see we are at the end of the township, so there is an open space and I could see them as they were leaving. There is grass there. I could see them as they were leaving.

CHAIRPERSON: No, what counsel is referring to, he's not referring to the group, do you understand that, he's referring to the three people who had entered your house. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I understand. They joined the big group that was leaving.

CHAIRPERSON: When you came out of the bedroom, did you see these three people who had entered your house?

MR BALOYI: I said I saw them when they left.

CHAIRPERSON: Were they still inside ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: But I was not just standing, there was no time for that, they were leaving.

CHAIRPERSON: Were they still in your yard or were they on the street?

MR BALOYI: In the street ...

...(end of side A of tape)

CHAIRPERSON: Were there other people on the street at the time?

MR BALOYI: They were moving, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Apart from these three people?

MR BALOYI: When I came out of the house these three joined a group of people that was moving along the street.

CHAIRPERSON: How many people approximately did you see on the street at the time?

MR BALOYI: I am not in the position to say. You see when you look at a throng of people like this, you just cannot say how many they are, there were many. I am saying I cannot estimate how many they were, there were many of them.

All the people who had gone to attack Slovo etc., came out of the township through our street.

MR STRYDOM: Did you hear any noises or any sound as the people left? Just to make it clear, you said now the three attackers joined the group. At that stage, what did you hear?

MR BALOYI: They were walking very swiftly, they were not making a noise.

MR STRYDOM: From the stage - when you still in your bedroom holding the door, up to the time that you went outside to see the group leaving, did you hear anything outside?

MR BALOYI: I did not hear any noise. They were leaving. You see, they were not talking, they were not making a noise as they were leaving. People who were making a noise could have been the people who had been injured behind. They were not making a noise, these people.

MR STRYDOM: So they were quietly moving out of the township at that stage?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: At that stage was there any vehicle in the close vicinity of this group?

MR BALOYI: There was no vehicle on the veld, it was only them moving on the veld and the koyokos were further up in Umzimvubu and there were lights there, they were visible. One could see where they were headed. And this Koyokos, two Koyokos were moving in front of them in Umzimvubu Street.

MR STRYDOM: When you testified yesterday in chief, you said the following - and I've just got a cryptic note: You were testifying about how they tried to get into your room and then you said:

"They left ..."

And then you were asked if you heard any other languages and you said yes, you heard Afrikaans "maak gou".

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: And then you said:

"Then they left and went into the forest"

That's more or less at the time, at the stage when you heard these voices. Now you just told us that people left quietly. When did you hear this "maak gou" then?

MR BALOYI: My house was the last to be attacked and when this "maak gou" was, when I heard this "maak gou", it was after my house had been attacked.

MR STRYDOM: At the stage when the people were moving out?

MR BALOYI: Yes, when they left. Because they were the ones who were still remaining behind at my house and they were being called out by the other people in the group. And when they called, this last person took the items of clothing from the sofa and he left the suitcase that he had brought in.

MR STRYDOM: So do you say that they shouted "maak gou", or somebody shouted "maak gou", when you were still in the bedroom?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not remain in the bedroom, I just held onto the door and I slammed the door on this person and thereafter left.

CHAIRPERSON: When you were holding onto the door, was this the bedroom door?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it is the bedroom door.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you inside the bedroom or outside the bedroom?

MR BALOYI: I was inside in the bedroom.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but then the three attackers left your house and you said you moved outside. Now I just want to know, at what stage did you hear "maak gou", were you still inside the bedroom holding the door, or already outside the bedroom, in the sitting-room?

MR BALOYI: I was standing by the door and all the windows had been broken and because of that you could hear somebody calling from outside. That is when I heard this.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, and that's also the stage when I asked you:

"Did you hear anything?"

"No, no noises, they left silently"

Now I'm putting to you, this story about "maak gou" is just now to insinuate that there were white people also involved.

MR BALOYI: White people were also present. That is the truth. If I had money I would offer R4-million to say that yes, indeed they were there.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see the white people at the stage when you stood there looking through the broken windows?

MR BALOYI: There was no time to stand around, the fighting was going on. You were looking everywhere, you couldn't just stand and just watch.

CHAIRPERSON: He's asking you - well, did you at any stage stand next to the broken windows to look outside?

MR BALOYI: It was possible to see through the window after the windows had been broken, even if you were not standing next to the window.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but when you saw the three attackers joining the group and you saw them with the goods you referred to, was that the stage when you heard the people shouting "maak gou"?

MR BALOYI: When they shouted "uSotho, kill the dogs", they were still emerging from Buwa's house and when the people who had been at Vita's house came to my house and they said: "kill the dogs". After they left my house - when they left my house, that was when somebody called "maak gou".

MR STRYDOM: Let me ask you this, where were you standing when somebody shouted "maak gou"?

MR BALOYI: It was in the sitting-room and there was a door right there and I was standing next to that door waiting, looking at what was happening. I was also looking through the bedroom window because there are two windows in my bedroom.

MR STRYDOM: Why do say two windows in your bedroom? Were you standing in your bedroom?

MR BALOYI: Yes. My bedroom is at the front portion of the house. It is not at the back, it is next to the sitting-room.

CHAIRPERSON: And it is along the road, is it?

MR BALOYI: Yes. When I'm in the bedroom I can see what happens outside as well as I can see when I'm in the sitting-room.

MR STRYDOM: So was this at the stage before you left your bedroom, after the people that were trying to open the door of the bedroom?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: That is when they left. They were being called to hurry up because the time was up.

MR STRYDOM: So at that stage you were looking through the window, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: I was standing there, just right there, I did not go to the window, but I could see through the window.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the bedroom door where you were standing, were you standing at the bedroom door?

MR BALOYI: Yes, in the bedroom.

CHAIRPERSON: And that door opens into the sitting-room?

MR BALOYI: ...(no English interpretation)

CHAIRPERSON: From your bedroom do you go into the sitting-room, yes or no?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Could you see the person who shouted "maak gou"?

MR BALOYI: No, I just heard a voice calling.

MR STRYDOM: At that stage was there just one big group of people moving past your house?

MR BALOYI: As they were walking past the streets, it was not as if they were a group, they were just walking along, just a throng of people.

MR STRYDOM: And you didn't see any whites at that stage, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: The people who were dressed in black were walking along the sides, not in the middle of the street.

MR LAX: The question was, did you see any white people at that stage? A simple yes or no, that's all that's necessary.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, with respect, we've canvassed this before and the witness has explained that the people walking on the sides wore balaclavas and he associated them with whites because of what happened subsequent. That's the context in which this answer must be understood, I would submit.

CHAIRPERSON: That's a matter for argument.

MR BERGER: Yes, but the point is we've canvassed this before, by Mr Strydom ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: What's your answer, Mr Baloyi?

MR BALOYI: I did see white people, those who had been in the Koyoco. Two persons were seated in front of the Koyoco, those people were white. With regards to the people who were dressed in black, I did not see that they were white, but I only surmise so. When a Koyoco returned to collect a body and I saw a white person wearing a balaclava, that is when I realised that those people who had been walking alongside the street must have been white.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, those people walking on the sides, when I asked you about that - we were talking at the time before your house was attacked, do you say that after the attack these people were still walking on the side of the road?

MR BALOYI: I do not know how to explain this. I do not know how to respond to your question.

MR STRYDOM: I'll try to make it easier. I don't want to repeat the evidence, but yesterday I asked you questions:

"What happened before the attack when you looked out and saw the Koyoco and what did you see ..."

... and all that, and you said that you saw a group of people in the road and you saw people on the side of the road, remember that?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. And you said the people on the side, some of them wore balaclavas, is that right?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Now after that, the houses opposite you were attacked and then your house was attacked and some time must have lapsed, isn't it so?

MR BALOYI: My house was the last that was attacked. That is why I was able to see them clearly.

MR STRYDOM: And now after the attack you looked through your bedroom windows and you again saw, according to your evidence, these people in black walking on the sides, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not see them again because they went in another direction.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. I want to put to you - and I'm not going to labour the point, but what I want to put to you, just now when you were asked what you saw when you looked out of the window, you again referred to people in black walking on the sides. Now you're changing your version.

CHAIRPERSON: Well you have to understand that in the context of his evidence, he was being asked in regard to the events that occurred prior to his house being attacked and now he's being asked about the events after his house was attacked. That's why ...(indistinct) had no basis, because he was now being asked, not about the balaclava people that he saw before, but whether he saw them after the attack.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, Chairperson, that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: That is different from what was canvassed.

MR STRYDOM: Ja, that's exactly my point. I'm not going to take it further, I'll argue that, it's a matter for argument, what remains.

In your evidence you used the words:

"They left and went into the forest"

Can you just explain that, why did you refer to "forest"?

MR BALOYI: I would not know what they did there in the forest, they were just walking along. They were going back.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but you must assist me, you know the place better than I do. Is there a forest in the close-by vicinity?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: If you refer to the forest, to which place do you refer?

MR BALOYI: It's an open space, there are no houses and that's where they were walking. We call it a forest because when a person walks through there you are not able to see them properly.

CHAIRPERSON: Are there any trees there?

MR BALOYI: No, there may be one somewhere around there, but there are not many trees.

CHAIRPERSON: But there is a lot of grass?

MR BALOYI: Yes, there is a lot of grass, at that time.

CHAIRPERSON: And is that why you are referring to it as "ihlateni"?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: So the people left and walked towards that open veld between the township and Frikkie Meyer Boulevard, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: And it's in that open veld where you saw the two Koyokos?

MR BALOYI: I saw them at Umzimvubu, which is a tarred road and they were, the Koyokos were turning around that veld.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but I don't understand that because Umzimvubu Street is one of the streets that run through the township and there aren't any streets in the veld, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: If you know Boipatong and you know Umzimvubu, you will check just how far it goes. It ends at the robots.

MR STRYDOM: I want you to have a look at Exhibit J ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: I don't need that, I know that place very well. I ...(indistinct) that area.

MR STRYDOM: Umzimvubu Street ends at the end of the township and it makes a T-junction with Mthembu Street, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: No, the tar road starts from the township until the robots. It was closed at that point and vehicles could not pass through there. That is where the Koyokos were travelling.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. Now seeing that we don't know the area as well as you do, can you show on the map, if I shoe you Exhibit j, what you mean?

MR BALOYI: No, I cannot. I do not want to commit myself to this map, but I do know the area.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but I'm going to try to make this map familiar to you. Just have a look at the map. Can you see Bafokeng Street?

MR BALOYI: Where I stay?

MR STRYDOM: Yes. Have you identified Bafokeng Street?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I see it.

MR STRYDOM: And do you see the second house from the corner there, that will your house, 732?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I can see it.

MR STRYDOM: Three streets lower down you will find Umzimvubu Street, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: And that Umzimvubu Street is a tar road, is that right?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it is a tar road. There is a school around here and it is, this is all tar road until the robots.

MR STRYDOM: Do you see Mthembu Street that forms a T-junction with Umzimvubu Street?

MR BALOYI: Umzimvubu passes through there. That is not the end of Umzimvubu.

MR STRYDOM: So you say that Umzimvubu extends in the direction of KwaMadala Hostel?

MR BALOYI: Yes, towards the small foot bridge.

MR STRYDOM: And does the tar extend to the footbridge?

MR BALOYI: From that footbridge it turns towards the robots.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, so what you are saying is that Umzimvubu will take you right through the veld, that road, to the footbridge close to Frikkie Meyer and then it turns right towards the robots, is that what you're saying?

MR BALOYI: I do not know how to explain it. This road was used by vehicles. It was closed later on, but it remains a tar road.

MR STRYDOM: Just correct me where I'm going wrong. If you drive in Umzimvubu out of Boipatong township and you carry on in the direction of the footbridge, can you carry on with that road till you get to the footbridge?

MR BALOYI: It turns around there. There tar road will be there and the footbridge just somewhere around there.

MR LAX: Mr Strydom, sorry, if one looks at M1, I think what he's trying to describe, I can't say for sure, but there's something apparent there. Maybe if you show him that photograph he may be able to explain because the portion that you're referring him to on the map is blank, there's nothing beyond that and so the context is completely lost.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I understand that. I'm going to show him the map now, but before I do I just want to get him to commit himself on something.

You say that the tar road extends to the bridge, is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: No, I'm not talking about the bridge, I am referring to a small footbridge. That is where the road turns, it bends and then goes towards the robots.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I understand that, but before you make the turn - I understand you can't drive over the bridge, but before you get to the bridge, the portion from the township to the bridge, can you describe that road?

MR BALOYI: You would walk straight and come across the footbridge and then the road turns in that direction towards the robots.

MR STRYDOM: That section or portion from the township before you turn, but up to the bridge, is that a tarred road or not?

MR BALOYI: It is a tar road, it has always been a tar road. It is the main road at Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: I want you to look at the photograph M1. I'll show you my copy, it's the only copy I have. Just have a look at that Exhibit M1 and see if you can orientate yourself. It's an aerial photo.

MR BALOYI: I can't do that, on that one. ...(indistinct) know that place. (sic)

MR STRYDOM: Just tell me, do you understand the photograph or not?

MR BALOYI: I see the photograph but there are some red areas where I cannot make out what those places are. I cannot see properly.

MR STRYDOM: Do you see the township, Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: I just see red areas. If you say that is Boipatong, alright.

MR STRYDOM: I put to you that is Boipatong you see, the very small houses that you call red areas. I want to point number H ...(intervention)

MR BERGER: Chairperson, just for the record, the witness said to Ms Cambanis: "I can't do this". I don't know if that got onto the record. He said it in English.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you show him what, where H is and tell him what that point stands for.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that point H depicts, although you can't see it clearly, that is the bridge, that's the footbridge you've been referring to.

MR BALOYI: Yes. So there's a bend here, an S-bend here.

MR STRYDOM: Ja.

MR BALOYI: To the right.

INTERPRETER: There is a bend to the right.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, and one can make out on that photograph some road or footpath that runs from the township to that point, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: From that open space you can see this area. You can even see the cars travelling along Frikkie Meyer.

CHAIRPERSON: That is from your house?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, alright.

MR BALOYI: You can even see the cars. If maybe there is an accident at the robots you can witness all that from my home.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but all I want you to have a look at on that photograph, you can see there's some footpath or road taking you from the township through to that point H, that's the bridge. Do you see that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I see it.

MR STRYDOM: And you say that road is a tarred road?

MR BALOYI: The tar road starts from the township. It is a very old road that was even there when the township was opened.

MR STRYDOM: Now if you use that road as a starting point, where did you see the Koyokos when you came out and reached the position where you could see ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: I saw them on the tar road, on the same tar road. I'm not referring to any other place, I'm speaking about that tar road that turns as you proceed towards the robots.

MR STRYDOM: Now did you see them close to a bridge or close to the township?

CHAIRPERSON: The footbridge?

MR STRYDOM: Ja, the footbridge.

The Koyokos, did you see them close to the footbridge or close to the township, or in the middle?

MR BALOYI: They were following - the one was parked behind the other. We were watching them. And people were walking along that open space. We were watching them as they drove along.

CHAIRPERSON: With reference to the footbridge, can you say where these Koyokos were?

MR BALOYI: They were close to the footbridge, but one was already up in front.

MR STRYDOM: Had the one already made the turn - sorry.

MR BERGER: Mr Baloyi needs his glasses, and that might make it a bit easier.

MR STRYDOM: I take it he hasn't got them here.

CHAIRPERSON: You don't have to look at the map, just tell us, with reference to the footbridge how far these Koyokos were.

MR BALOYI: As you have already mentioned, when the tar road, when the road approaches the footbridge, it turns around there. There was Koyoco parked next to the footbridge and there was another one in front of that one, further up.

CHAIRPERSON: It wasn't parked, was it?

MR BALOYI: They were driving by slowly. They did not park. They were on duty, so they were not parked.

MR STRYDOM: So the first time when you came out of your house now to look in that direction, that's the first time you saw the Koyokos and they were at that position close to the footbridge, moving slowly?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: And the attackers, where were they?

MR BALOYI: They were moving along in the veld and they were proceeding towards KwaMadala Hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but were they in the vicinity of the two Koyokos or were they behind them or in front of them or what?

MR BALOYI: I do not know how to explain that. Whether they were in front or next to them, I cannot comment on that.

MR STRYDOM: And there are no Apollo lights in that veld area, it's a dark area, isn't it so?

MR BALOYI: The map indicates that there are no lights there, doesn't it? There are no lights. There are lights only at Frikkie Meyer, but they light up the area very well, I can see what's happening around there from my house.

MR STRYDOM: What kind of lights will you find at Frikkie Meyer?

MR BALOYI: There are different lights, some are yellow, some are some other type.

MR STRYDOM: Street lights, is that what you are referring to?

MR BALOYI: I'm not referring to the lights you find in the township, they are the sort of lights you find in town.

MR STRYDOM: Now do you maintain that from your position in the township, you could see what was going on close to the bridge, in the dark?

MR BALOYI: We were watching, we could see people walking along. The area was lit up there. Even though there were no lights in that open space, but you could see, still see people.

MR STRYDOM: Ja.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, the witness had also said the one Koyoco was near the footbridge, the other one had already turned. If one looks at my learned friend's map, that road does turn at the footbridge and the witness said the other one was further up.

MR STRYDOM: Can I just have my map back, I just want to see. I want to put to you that from the township to Frikkie Meyer Boulevard is approximately 350 metres. Now I don't know if you know about metres, but I would say about three-and-a-half soccer fields, a distance of three-and-a-half soccer fields. You can fit them in the length. Would that be a correct estimate?

MR BALOYI: You are the person who measured the place, how am I supposed to know about it?

MR STRYDOM: From your house to Frikkie Meyer Boulevard is not close, it's a long distance.

MR BALOYI: It is not a long distance.

CHAIRPERSON: Just give me that distance again.

MR STRYDOM: 345 metres.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, and this is from where?

MR STRYDOM: From the side of the township to Frikkie Meyer Boulevard.

CHAIRPERSON: Which side of the township?

MR STRYDOM: From Mthembu Street - from the western side of the township to Frikkie Meyer.

CHAIRPERSON: What point on the western side, from what point on the western side?

MR STRYDOM: No, it's just a general - seeing that the township ends with a straight line, it can be from any point at the edge of the township to Frikkie Meyer.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, to what point?

MR STRYDOM: If you take a straight line from the edge of the township, from Mthembu Street to Frikkie Meyer, then it's 345 metres. - approximately.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: When you saw the two Koyokos more-or-less in the area of the bridge, where were you standing?

MR BALOYI: I have to repeat myself 10 times. We were standing outside and we were watching. There were shapes moving. After you have been attacked you will not just look anywhere else, but at where your attacker was going.

MR STRYDOM: I just want to know, did you stand in front of your house or did you move from your house in the direction of Mthembu Street?

MR BALOYI: We were outside. Mthembu Street would be in front and there was an open space around there and this is where people were walking.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put it to you that there were not two Koyokos at that point, as you described it.

MR BALOYI: I hope you know better. What I know is that I saw two Koyokos and some were outside the Metal Box and as I stated yesterday, there was a light that was fired upwards and then the area was lit up and after the people had proceeded towards KwaMadala, the Koyokos regrouped and they also proceed in that direction. If you want to say those were not Koyokos, it is up to you.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that the attackers did leave Boipatong from Bafokeng Street and they did move across that field towards that small bridge, but they were never close to any Koyokos.

MR BALOYI: So what do you want me to say? As I told you, they left Bafokeng, proceeded towards the open space and the Koyokos were right up in front. They had travelled along Umzimvubu and as they were proceeding, the attackers were proceeding, they were going towards them and they went from there towards Frikkie Meyer and then further on towards the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Can you say the attackers made use of that footbridge to get onto Frikkie Meyer Boulevard?

MR BALOYI: Some of them did use the bridge, but a few did not, they went another way towards the robots.

MR STRYDOM: So if you say a few, you say the majority of the people crossed the bridge and only a few went up towards the robots, is that what you are saying?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is what I'm saying.

CHAIRPERSON: Did the majority of people use - did you say the majority of the people used ...

MR STRYDOM: The bridge.

CHAIRPERSON: ... the bridge.

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is the way that they used. Yes, a few went up towards the robots.

MR STRYDOM: When did you see the other police vehicles close to the trees? - that's now in Nobel Boulevard or close to Nobel Boulevard.

MR BALOYI: One of them had been, the one that had been parked at Amatola and another one had been parked under a tree and they regrouped together with a smaller vehicle.

MR STRYDOM: I just want to know, in relation to the time span or the time when you saw the other Koyokos close to the footbridge, now did you see the other vehicles after that, before that or simultaneously?

MR BALOYI: I first saw the vehicles that were outside Metal Box and when that, something was fired, I was able to see the other two.

MR STRYDOM: The other two, where, which ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: I've already mentioned that they were travelling along Umzimvubu.

MR STRYDOM: Could you only see the other two vehicles travelling in Umzimvubu when the flare, or a flare or something was fired?

MR BALOYI: I don't know what to say now. Please listen carefully, please listen carefully. I don't want to repeat this. Two Koyokos were parked outside Metal Box, together with a smaller vehicle, I think it is an Nyala. There were three vehicles there. Two were travelling along Umzimvubu Road. In total there were five vehicles.

MR STRYDOM: Where was this flare fired?

MR BALOYI: They alighted from the Koyoco. They were standing on the ground, that is white people, and they fired this flare. We were watching as they did this.

MR STRYDOM: So white people fired something into the air that lit up the area, is that right?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: All I want to know is where these white people were when this was done.

MR BALOYI: What do you mean? I don't understand you.

MR STRYDOM: Where were they standing? Did you see them standing at a certain place and they fired a flare? - we call it a flare

MR BALOYI: They were standing next to the Koyokos.

MR STRYDOM: Are you referring, I just want to tell - you're referring to the Koyokos that were at that stage close to the footbridge or the other Koyokos outside Metal Box? I just want to know that.

MR BALOYI: I said three Koyokos were parked under a tree near the Metal Box gate. That is where the flare was fired. The other two were just travelling along the streets, this other street, Umzimvubu.

MR STRYDOM: So the flare was fired close to Metal Box?

MR BALOYI: I said the three vehicles were parked under a tree nearby Metal Box. That is where the flare was fired and the area was lit up. The other two were just travelling along Umzimvubu.

MR STRYDOM: How do you know white people fired the flare?

MR BALOYI: I can see that you are white, I could also see that they were white. What do you want me to say? If you see a white person, wouldn't you say you saw a white person?

MR STRYDOM: So from your position close-by your house, you could identify if a person is white or black if that person was standing close to Metal Box?

MR BALOYI: The people who were driving Koyokos were white. I've never seen a black person driving a Koyoco.

MR STRYDOM: Is that why you say a white person fired a flare, because you assume the driver did that?

MR BALOYI: They alighted from the vehicles. I could clearly see that they were white.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, would this be a convenient stage to take the adjournment?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

MR STRYDOM: I'll try to limit myself to half an hour.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

MR STRYDOM: Well I'll try to make it a half an hour.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

MR STRYDOM: I estimate half an hour.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I'm not ...(indistinct)

MR STRYDOM: No, I understand you're not limiting me, Chairperson. I think I'll be another half an hour.

CHAIRPERSON: That will ...(indistinct)

MS CAMBANIS: Chairperson, before the adjournment, may I just correct a wrong instruction I gave to Mr Berger. Mr Baloyi did not say anything about glasses, all he said is that:

"I cannot do this"

Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll take an adjournment now and we'll come back at half past eleven.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

MACHIHLILE WILSON BALOYI: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ma'am?

MS THOMAS: Thank you, Chairperson. I have had an opportunity to consider the documents, peruse them and take instructions on the basis of the documentation and we have come to a conclusion that we may proceed at eleven thirty, if that is suitable to all the members.

CHAIRPERSON: What about the - have you had time to consider those who are assisting you?

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chair, I haven't had any objections to us proceeding at this stage. I don't know what the position of Mr da Silva is, I didn't speak to him.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, in the time available to me, I've had a look at the document. I haven't had a proper look at the document, but in the light of my instructions being that we are not a party to the application and that my clients abide by the Committee's decision, I cannot, in regard to the application proceeding, I cannot see any objection in that line.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Mr Botha?

MR BOTHA: No objection, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you abide by the decision of the Committee?

MR BOTHA: Indeed, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And Mr Lowies is taking the matter on behalf of the, Advocate Pretorius and Mr Strydom, is that right?

MR STRYDOM: Ja, that's correct from my side.

CHAIRPERSON: The two of you have no objection to the matter proceeding?

MS PRETORIUS: No objection.

MR STRYDOM: I haven't got an objection.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Tanzer?

MS TANZER: I too have no objection and also abide by the decision of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Where is Mr Mey?

MR BOTHA: He's sitting here at the back, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Ordinarily I would have preferred to finish with this witness first you know, before we hear argument, but unfortunately one doesn't know how long it will take and I would hate to inconvenience Adv Thomas, who has to come all the way from Pretoria for this argument. Mr Lowies has yet to cross-examine and Adv Pretorius and Adv da Silva and Adv Botha and Ms Tanzer. Mr Mey, where do you stand? Would you just come up to the microphone please. Did you receive the document that was submitted by the TRC yesterday or today?

MR MEY: I've received it late yesterday afternoon, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. What is your position in regard to the application?

MR MEY: I've got no objection if they proceed now and I abide with the ruling of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.

MR MEY: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, unfortunately we have to interrupt your evidence at this stage and deal with a matter which we were supposed to deal with yesterday morning, but because of other difficulties we could not. So we will deal with that matter now and thereafter we will proceed with your evidence. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

WITNESS STANDS DOWN

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Chair, before we start, may I just place on record that the van coming from the prison in Pretoria was involved in an accident this morning, nobody was injured, but according to the prison authorities, Victor has to go back and be seen by a district surgeon, so he won't attend the rest of today's hearing.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Very well, we'll note that. Yes, very well.

MR LOWIES IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Chairman. Chairman, as is clear from the Notice of Application, there are basically three applications in this matter; paragraph 1, paragraph 3 and paragraph 4, each with its own subsection.

Chairman, at this stage I have to inform you that as a result of the documentation that we received yesterday from the TRC, the ones that were handed to us by Mr Zuko Mapoma, the ones that were the subject of discussion, it appears that at this stage, Chairman, prayers 1 and 4 actually fall away. There is a ...(intervention)

MR LAX: One ...?

MR LOWIES: Paragraph 1. That's the amnesty application by Andries Nosenga. The heading is at the application by Andries Nosenga.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, this is the one that deals with, that requires an investigation, is it?

MR LOWIES: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright.

MR LOWIES: And 4.

CHAIRPERSON: And 4.

MR LOWIES: Ja. Chair, I have to - sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that leaves ...(intervention)

MR LOWIES: The declarator.

CHAIRPERSON: What about 2?

MR LOWIES: 2 is a preamble. It's a preamble to 3.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, okay so - oh, 2 and 3 are together?

MR LOWIES: Yes, 2, 3 and 4 are together. 2 you could also regard as a preamble to 4. But as I said ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Wait a minute, 4 falls away, doesn't it?

MR LOWIES: It does.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, so we're left with 2 and 3.

MR LOWIES: That's correct, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And all that you require - it has to do with the declarator?

MR LOWIES: That's correct. However, before I proceed with that, I would just like to mention two aspects pertaining to prayers 1 and 3, if it's convenient to you. Prayers 1 and 4, my mistake.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, let me just make a note of this. Shall we mark this document DD? I think that's the next exhibit. Yes, very well. Okay, very well, so Exhibit DD will the response of the TRC, dated 11 May 1999, together with documents annexed thereto, which is in response to a letter dated 5 May 1999, addressed to the TRC by the attorneys who are acting for the applicants?

MR LOWIES: That's correct, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

CHAIRPERSON: Was this off?

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chairman. Chairman, pertaining to the documentation handed over to us and pertaining to prayers 1 and 4, I must first of all place on record the following and express my gratitude towards the TRC, specifically towards Mr Kjellberg and Mr Mapoma for the information supplied to us, and in his absence also, Mr Prior.

It seems, Chairman, pertaining to those two prayers, that the channels of communication is open. We're not happy with everything that we've received and we will no doubt in the process have communications between the parties, but the channels are so open that I don't think at this stage it warrants an intervention by the Committee and therefore I would say, Chairman, that prayers 1 and 4 should actually fall away because we are in a process and the channels are open regarding that. That is the purpose of what I'm saying to you now with respect, and that is I don't think that it merits any, it's of academic value, it merits any further aspect.

Regarding the declarator which is the 3rd prayer, Chairman, I have to ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, those channels have always been open.

MR LOWIES: I was unaware of it, but it seems like it has been, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You can only blame Mr Strydom and Adv Pretorius for not telling you that the channels are open.

MR LOWIES: I don't think they will accept liability, but I will do so, Chair.

Chair, then regarding the 3rd, may I just as an introduction, say the following - and it had been mentioned in the past before, if one has ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

MR LOWIES: Prayer 3. If one has a look at the annexure to the Notice of Application and the findings by the TRC, there are basically three paragraphs in the annexure which is a concern to the applicants. And those are ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Would you direct my attention please?

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Where does that occur?

MR LOWIES: It's the fourth - my mistake, after page 7, there is an annexure to the Notice of Application.

CHAIRPERSON: I hope I don't have to repeat, that people will cellphones, would they please switch them off.

Is that the ...?

MR LOWIES: The annexure to the Notice of Motion.

CHAIRPERSON: Findings by the TRC?

MR LOWIES: That's correct, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MR LOWIES: The second paragraph, Chairman, is of relevance here:

"The Commission finds that KwaMadala Hostel residents, together with the police, planned and carried out an attack on the community of Boipatong and the surrounding informal settlement, Slovo Park, on 17 June 1972 ..."

It should read 1992, of course, because the TRC was not in existence in '72.

Secondly, in other words the 3rd paragraph:

"The Commission finds that the police colluded with the attackers and dropped them off at Slovo Park."

And then the 5th paragraph, Chairman:

"The Commission finds that the police were responsible for destroying crucial evidence, in that they erased the tapes of the transactions in the control room of the ISU."

And then the 7th paragraph, Chairman:

"The Commission finds that the SAP colluded with the KwaMadala residents in planning the attacks.

The Commission finds further that they obstructed the ends of justice by tampering with the evidence relating to the matter.

The Commission finds further that two of the suspects died whilst in custody of the police."

Now Chairman, as a result of these findings which were published, and as a result of the documentation attached to the affidavit of Fredrech and Malan, my clients were concerned - and this is the purpose of this application, that the matter may have been, or may be prejudged. And please, Chairman, there is no accusation that it is. There is a concern that it may be as a result of the fact that this Committee sits as an extension of the TRC, the Commission. The argument is, in a lay person's mind, the following, but it's one and the same. Now to canvass this further I would submit the following is relevant, and that is why I would submit there is a need for this, yes, I must concede immediately, Chairman, that there is no way that the TRC can review a decision regarding amnesty by this Committee. And that is trite law because it is inaccurate as such, in the Act.

However, Chairman, when one deals with - and you will remember I handed up summaries of three cases, for instance the BTR matter and the MONING matter and so forth, when one deals with a likelihood of bias or a perception, very important I submit, only a perception, then one has - sorry?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, okay.

MR LOWIES: ... when one deals with an aspect such as that, Chairman, the point that I would like to make is, the test is whether a lay person, a lay litigant in the position of an applicant for instance, if we bring it closer to this matter, would have a perception that there may be bias. It goes no further than that.

Now Chairman, my submission in regard to the declarator, or the alternative prayer, which I will discuss, elaborate on just a little bit later, is the following on behalf of the applicants, ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Well just before you go on, let me just make sure that I understand the basis of the applications. Put simply it amounts to the following: The Truth and Reconciliation Commission has issued a report in which it has inter alia made the findings which appear in the annexure to the Notice of Motion.

MR LOWIES: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: The essence of these findings is that the police colluded with KwaMadala residents to attack Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: That is correct, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: That is an issue which is hotly disputed. The Amnesty Committee is an arm of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

MR LOWIES: That is correct, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Therefore, it appears as if the issue of whether the police were involved, has already been decided by the Commission and by implication the Committee.

MR LOWIES: That is correct, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Therefore, the Committee - well, therefore there is a fear amongst the applicants that they may not be judged impartially, consistent with the Constitution.

MR LOWIES: Correct, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: But if the - that's what it is okay. Well if one accepts the proposition, isn't it, is the result not therefore that the applicant would not under any circumstance apply for amnesty, because whatever Committee, albeit a different one, would still remain part of the Commission and by implication would have made those findings and therefore there is no Committee which would be perceived as being impartial and therefore the applicants are not able to approach the Commission for amnesty?

MR LOWIES: The quantum leap from the last portion where I have agreed with you, Chairman, to this submission I would submit is too big. I would like to see, and this is what the applicants are requesting from you, an intermediate situation whereby this Committee gives its viewpoint in public where they can hear it, that this Commission does not, or do, consider itself as being bound by that.

Because Chairman, I would submit that the essence of the application is actually the following; the essence of the application is not one whereby the Commission, this Committee should withdraw or recuse itself as a result of the finding by the Commission. But what I would suggest is very important, and this is in the interest of transparency, that I would suggest inter alia, that once there is a decision like that, which has been widely publicised, the next aspect is, you are with respect seen as an extension, but if this Committee gives a final ruling on an issue which may be in the mind of a lay person, and this is the nature of the declarator, that it does not regard itself as being bound, that is not of course a problem. On the other hand, with respect, Chairman, I can see - and I would definitely have to take further instructions regarding that, if your finding is; I find myself bound by these decisions of the TRC, then of course the whole matter has to be reinvestigated and I will have to get instructions from my clients. But what I'm stating at this stage is the following; I postulate two scenario, either the Committee, if in agreement with what I'm suggesting, makes a declarator stating that it does not consider itself as being bound, in the interest of the applicants, setting their minds at ease, then that is the end of story. The second scenario which I do envisage and which is also possible, is of course that you do find, I would submit highly unlikely that you would find, but still if you do find that you are bound by that decision and you are just sitting here as a rubber-stamp, of course then I'll have to take further instructions, but I don't think that we need to go to that stage at this stage. So what I'm saying ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Why are you submitting that it is highly unlikely that we will find that we are bound by the decision of the Commission?

MR LOWIES: That is a personal opinion and, I see it inter alia as I've mentioned before, I don't want to argue the matter on behalf of the Committee, but I see it inter alia in the fact that you have the specific power in terms of the Act, or nobody has the power to review the Committee's decision, but on the ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: But isn't that a complete answer then to your submission?

MR LOWIES: But Chairman, I would submit that it is necessary that an order in that regard be made in public, where the applicants have a fear ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: But Mr Lowies, you can't blow hot and cold.

MR LOWIES: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: You can't blow hot and cold. If your submission is that having regard to the institutory scheme which governs the Amnesty Committee, the legal position is that the Amnesty Committee cannot be bound by the decision of the Commission, isn't that the complete answer to your submission?

MR LOWIES: I would submit no, Chair, and the reason why, and I have initially referred you to that, the test on whether there is a likelihood of bias is whether a lay person in the position of the applicants would see it as such. Now what I've said is, and I ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, but the position of the lay person, if the lay person does not understand how the Committee works and what is it that can satisfy the lay person, because the legal position is there, you have considered, albeit in a feint tone, that that must be so. Now if that's your position, now what is it that this Committee can do to allay the fears of the lay person that you have in mind?

MR LOWIES: Chair, I would like to phrase it as follows; I would like to say that there are two scenarios as I've indicated to you, the one is you find that you are bound, the other one is you find that you're not bound, but the situation does not answer the prayer which the applicants have. Their argument simply amounts to the following; you are belonging to the same body, being an extension of the TRC, therefore ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I think the issue is not so much whether we belong to the same, we are part of the same body, the issue what are the powers of this Committee, because I think it is in the, the answer to your application primarily lies in the powers of this Committee. I think that's where the, and that is where the answer ought to be sought. I mean if the Act is clear on what the powers of the Committee are, and notwithstanding that the lay person that you have in mind is still not happy, what I want to find out from you, what is it that this Committee can do to allay the fears of the average lay person that you have in mind?

MR LOWIES: Chairman, what I would suggest is the following; I have said that I think - and I did not make a concession, I have said that I think it is unlikely that scenario two as I've described it, may be a finding by this Committee, ides that you are bound by it, in other words you are a rubber-stamp of that. The Act does not say that you are a rubber-stamp or you are not a rubber-stamp, it is silent on that. One thing that the Act does say is that the TRC cannot review what you are doing when it comes to amnesty. It's got powers of review regarding various other aspects, but regarding the amnesty itself, it's got no power of review, as I see the Act.

CHAIRPERSON: Well you see, it seems to me that for the lay person's viewpoint to prevail, the lay person would have to go further and say; my fears are that notwithstanding the evidence that would be before you, which suggests otherwise, you are going to ignore that evidence and you are going to find against us. If the lay person can't go that far, if he can't suggest we're going to ignore the evidence, then I can't see how the fears come into the picture. Because once it is accepted that we've got to decide the matter based on the evidence before us, I can't see how, what the Commission has found based on the material that was before it, it can come and influence us. Because if we do that, it would seem to me that it would be gross dereliction of duty, because we have to decide the matter based on the evidence before us. So unless your lay person goes further and says; I fear that in light of this report, these findings, this Committee is going to ignore the evidence before it and will find against us on this issue.

MR LOWIES: Chair, I would submit the leap from what they want in prayer number 3 to the fear, is too big in this argument or the proposal that you've put to me. What I would suggest is the following, Mr Chairman; there is not clarity, even where we are sitting today, as to whether or not you find yourself as being bound by that decision ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: It may not be clear in your mind, but I'm sure in the mind of many others it is quite clear what the Act requires of us.

MR LOWIES: Chair, be that as it may, what my opinion specifically is as a lawyer is immaterial at this stage and in any other person's opinion, as to how you may go about. But the fact is there is no law firstly, stating that you are not bound by it. The only law that there is, is a section in the Act which says you cannot be reviewed.

Now with respect, the argument is, those two scenarios which I've postulated in the beginning, they still stand, it's either this way or that way and there is no decision as to it yet. Yes, we may say at a stage, or a lawyer may say; I read the conduct of the Commission as being X or going in favour of this point of view or that point of view, but still Chairman, there is no decision on that. There is no law on that and that is what you are requested to do.

I would submit that the reason why this application is brought, or the motivation for it must be clear, but I don't want to make that quantum leap from the making of that judgment to a bias by this Committee, and therefore I would suggest that there is an intermediate position, and that position is; are you bound or not and then that must be decided by yourself, with respect. There is a possibility that you may find on the probabilities in the one side or the other, but still ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: How do we decide that?

MR LOWIES: Chairman, you interpret the Act and you make a decision as to that, so that's it's binding on the applicants and the families.

CHAIRPERSON: That's what I have been trying to put across to you, that the answer to your submission lies primarily in the scheme of the Act.

MR LOWIES: But it's not clear, with respect Chair, that is the point that I've been driving at, and we want you to make it clear so that the applicants can also see where they're going. There may be a strong feeling that you're going in direction X, but it is not clear.

CHAIRPERSON: If that's their feeling then they must tell us that.

MR LOWIES: Chairman, I cannot take it further than to state that I think that you should make a decision as requested in the Notice of Motion.

CHAIRPERSON: So what prayer are you asking?

MR LOWIES: A declarator which incorporates prayers 3.1 and 3.2 ...(intervention)

INTERPRETER: The current speaker's mike is off.

MR LOWIES: Now 3 ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Sorry, just repeat that for the purposes of the translation.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chairman.

A declarator which incorporates prayers 3.1 and 3.2, both of them.

CHAIRPERSON: What precisely is the order you are asking us to make?

MR LOWIES: Whether the Committee regards itself as being ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: What the Notice of Motion does, it simply says: "Application is hereby made that the Committee issues a ...(indistinct) declaring the status and the nature of the TRC findings." What do want us to make in that regard?

MR LOWIES: Whether it regards itself as bound by the said TRC findings, the ones which I have highlighted in my argument.

CHAIRPERSON: I want you to tell me what order, if we are with you, should we make? That is what I'm asking you.

MR LOWIES: Chairman, the order that you can make is one of two, either you find yourself in agreement with the findings of the TRC, that is the one which you have to decide on, or the alternative is you do not find yourself being bound by that.

CHAIRPERSON: In simple terms, I am asking you to tell me what is the draft order that you are prepared to accept.

MR LOWIES: Oh, I see. Chairman, you must first of all make a decision, but once you've made a decision, I would like an order along the following lines; that the Committee does not regard itself bound by the said TRC findings. - more-or-less as stated in 3.4. Of course you have a choice, to say that you do find yourself, but my ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the order that you want?

MR LOWIES: That's the one that I would prefer, the first one. I just ask the first one.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that all that you're asking for?

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any further submissions to make?

MR LOWIES: I have none.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Yes, Mr Mapoma?

MR MAPOMA IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Chairperson.

Chairperson, to start with, from the submissions made by the applicant it is quite clear that the applicants' representatives acknowledge that the provisions of the Act make the Amnesty Committee a Committee capable of making its independent decisions with regard to the amnesty applications. And it is acknowledged by them as well that the Committee cannot be influenced by the decision of the, the findings of the TRC, because it has got its own powers. Such powers, Chairperson, are derived from Section 4(c) read with Section 5(e), and the provisions of Chapter 4 of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 34 of 1995. In particular, Chairperson, Section 5(e) provides that no decision of the Amnesty Committee may be interfered with by the Commission. Those provisions, Chairperson, depict the independence of the Amnesty Committee. Those provisions were properly interpreted, Chairperson, by the decision in AZANIAN PEOPLE'S ORGANISATION AND OTHERS v THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND OTHERS 1996(4) SA671. In particular Judge Mohamed, on page 685, paragraph E the Judge says - if I can quote, Chairperson:

CHAIRPERSON: No, you don't do that.

MR MAPOMA: Oh, thank you, Chair.

That is intended, Chairperson, to illustrate the independence of the Amnesty Committee. I do not think, Chairperson, I have to belabour the point, especially in the circumstances now that the applicants themselves acknowledge these provisions.

What seems to be the crux of the matter therefore, Chairperson, is the perceived bias from the applicants, and it is my submission, Chairperson, that I agree with my learned friend that the test is the perceived bias. It is my submission, Chair, that perceived bias must be reasonable in the circumstances. And it is my submission that with respect Sir, the bias which is being contended now is not reasonable. I'm saying this, Chairperson, because the Act is ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Well isn't it your submission that having regard to the provisions of the Act, in particular those that you have directed our attention to, if the applicants continue to have this suspicion, it cannot be reasonable?

MR MAPOMA: Precisely, Chairperson, that is my submission. I'm saying this, Chairperson, more so when the applicants are legally represented and the provisions of Section 34 of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act intended that legal representation for the purpose of enabling the applicants to be provided with the proper interpretation of this Act, and that proper interpretation of this Act has been provided to the applicants through their legal representatives. It is on that basis, Chairperson, that I submit that that alleged perception perceived bias cannot be reasonable in the circumstances.

I proceed, Chair, to go further to the powers of this Committee ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: If the applicants persist in entertaining the suspicion which we are told, and I should observe that none of the applicants have said so under oath, but we are told that they have that suspicion, notwithstanding the provisions of the Act, what is it that this Committee or any other Committee of the TRC can do to allay those fears? Is there anything?

MR MAPOMA: Chairperson, there's none that can be made in the circumstances.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes.

MR MAPOMA: I want to go further, Chairperson, to look into the powers of the Amnesty Committee, whether it can issue a declarator on the status of the findings of the Human Rights Violations Committee. I submit Chairperson, that the Amnesty Committee has no power to make such a declarator because, Chair, the provisions once again ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: The Amnesty Committee is a creature of stature, it has no other powers other than those that are set out in the Act.

MR MAPOMA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there anything in the Act which gives this Committee the power to issue a declarator?

MR MAPOMA: There's none, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Yes, what's your next submission?

MR MAPOMA: Chair, I'm not taking the matter any further now, I think I've covered all the aspects.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you, Sir. I pray that the application be dismissed.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Mr Berger?

MR BERGER IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Chairperson.

Chairperson, my learned friend, Mr Lowies ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Just hold on, I'm just making notes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: Thank you, Chairperson.

My learned friend, Mr Lowies, says simply that prayers 1 and 4 fall away, but Chairperson with respect, the papers that were produced last Monday contain the most scandalous allegations against a number of people, including my colleague, Ms Cambanis, her partner Ms Nichols, their firm, Mr Kopedi, Mr Tshongwene, myself, and it's not good enough to simply say that those prayers fall away, without a public withdrawal of the allegations against us.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger, the issue that is before this Committee is the application. We are now told that he is not persisting with the prayers that he's indicated ...(intervention)

MR BERGER: Indeed, indeed.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm not going to call upon him to make any public withdrawal ...(intervention)

MR BERGER: But, Chairperson ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: We're concerned with the application that is before us. If you want to pursue that matter, you can peruse that matter in a different forum, not here. What are we supposed to do? Are you going to ask us to deal with those prayers when they are longer in issue?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, this application is a public document now, the allegations have been made public in this forum, and I submit that it's not good enough simply to withdraw the prayers, the allegations must be withdrawn.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I don't know why the seriousness of the allegations are brushed aside. They have been made public and they stand until they are withdrawn. And if this application had been proceeded with and if this application had been dismissed, that would have been one thing, but the allegations still stand despite the fact that the prayers have been withdrawn. And they are most serious allegations which have been made. I don't suppose it will help if I go through the application to point out which allegations I'm referring to, so I won't.

My learned friend submitted to you that those allegations are simply of academic value now, that's not so, they're not of academic value. They were allegations made on the basis of opinions of a journalist and the applicants called for an investigation, and our submissions would have been that the proper place for that investigation should be here before this Committee, not some other investigation which was being called for by the applicants. In the same way as the circumstances surrounding the making of Mr Nosenga's application, were investigated here in this forum, so the other allegations of fraud and laundering through the TRC, all those allegations must now be investigated here in front of this Committee.

The applicants refer to Section 5(l) and (m) of the TRC Act, which says that this Committee has the same powers as the TRC, and we would have argued that that must be read in the context of amnesty hearings. And yes, it's correct, this Committee has the power to investigate matters, but it must be done within the context of this very hearing, and that's what we would have submitted, and then those allegations against us could have been canvassed and dealt with here. Those allegations are part of, at the moment part of the record of this amnesty hearing. The allegations of laundering, of fraud, of forgery, which have been made against us, are part of the record of this very amnesty hearing, and how are they going to be dealt with if not by an investigation here before this Committee into those allegations? That is why I submit that it's not of academic interest only and it's not - I'll move on.

My learned friend talks about bias and he says that his opinion as a lawyer is immaterial. His opinion as a lawyer, with respect, is most relevant and his duty is to inform his clients what his opinion as a lawyer is. And if he informed his clients that this Committee, as the correct legal position clearly is, is not bound by the findings of the TRC Report, then his clients who have employed him to give his legal opinion would then have their feelings allayed. I agree with completely with the submission made by my learned friend, Mr Mapoma, as to the status of the TRC Report and as to the powers of this Committee, this Committee has no power to issue a declarator.

If the findings of the TRC report were binding on this Committee, then the evidence of, for example, Mr Baloyi, would be irrelevant. The very fact that his evidence is being entertained as being relevant to an issue to be decided by this Committee, should indicate to Mr Lowies, and through him to his clients, that this Committee is not bound and does not consider itself bound by the findings of the TRC Report, because if it were so, then Mr Baloyi's evidence would not be heard. I submit that there is nothing this Committee can do other than what it has been doing all along, to hear the evidence, and that it is for my learned friend to allay the feelings, the fears, if they exist, of his clients. I have no further submissions.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Yes, Ma'am.

MS THOMAS IN ARGUMENT: My learned friend, Lowies, has decided to withdraw what I will call prayers 1 and prayer 4 of his application. Chairperson, a lot of allegations had been made in the affidavit with a view to support those prayers, which really put my client, being the ANC, in a very bad light. My instructions are merely Chairperson, to deny each and every allegation levelled against the ANC, insofar as it seeks to show that the ANC formed part of a scheme that was all out deliberately engineered towards indicating that there was police involvement in the Boipatong massacre, as and when it took place in June 1992.

Chairperson, insofar as the rest of the prayers are concerned, I am in full agreement with what my learned friend, Mr Mapoma has submitted and it is not my intention to delay the proceedings unduly. I can therefore make no further submissions insofar as this application is concerned.

MR MALINDI: Chairperson, Ms Cambanis and myself associate ourselves with the submissions by Mr Berger.

CHAIRPERSON: Two issues. One is the basis of your application is that the applicants have a reasonable suspicion that this Committee might be biased in view of the Commission's finding in regard to the presence of the police and the role played by the police. Mr Mapoma's answer to that is that having regard to the provisions of the Act, if there is such a suspicion, such a suspicion is unreasonable. What do you say to that?

MR LOWIES IN REPLY: Chairman, I would submit that at this stage for the purposes of prayer number 3, it's not strictly relevant. It may be a motivation to bring, and I want to stress this, it may be a motivation to bring the declarator in terms of prayer number 3, but the applicants' point is the following; the law is not clear and if you decided you are bound, a certain aspect will have to be canvassed then, if you decide that you are not, then we proceed as the matter ... That is simply put, the attitude of the applicants. I don't think that it is necessary for you at this stage to make a finding as to whether or not there is bias, and we're not asking for you, for sure we're not asking you. We say it may be a motivation in bringing this application, but it is not an issue that you have to make a decision on.

CHAIRPERSON: The second argument amounts to this; you are asking this Committee to make a declaration, to issue a declaratory order as to first of all, the status of the report, is that right?

MR LOWIES: That is correct, in the main.

CHAIRPERSON: And secondly, and that is to say whether or not it is bound by that Report. That's the essence of the declarator?

MR LOWIES: Correct, Chairman, I couldn't have phrased it better.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. The answer is the following from Mr Mapoma; he says the Amnesty Committee is a creature of statute which has no other powers other than those that are set out in the Act. Nowhere in the Act is this Committee given the power to make the order of the kind you are requesting it to make.

MR LOWIES: I would submit two aspects there, Chairman. The common law is applicable to you inasfar as it is applicable to administrative tribunals, and (b); one must also bear in mind that some aspects may be implicit in your duties and prerogatives that you have. May I give a good example to illustrate this in my submission?

CHAIRPERSON: Would you deal with the common reposition first?

MR LOWIES: The common law position, Chairman I would suggest is the following; a tribunal has the right to regulate its own proceedings and I think the Act goes further here as well and it tells you to regulate the proceeding. For instance, if you are requested to recuse yourself, there's nothing in the Act that says you may or may not recuse yourself, but yes, it is common law and it is accepted practice that an administrative tribunal has that authority. Now all I'm saying is, the very nature - maybe the word "declarator" is not a good word, but the very nature of this application is that you regulate your proceedings and telling the applicant, to put it in other words in other words, telling the applicants in other words; "The procedure that I'm going to follow is, I'm not going to regard myself as being by that." That I would submit is implicit in what you have, although there is no specific provision in the Act.

CHAIRPERSON: Why should we do that, because there is no-one here who has sought to introduce the Report to us and those findings and has called on us to accept those findings. We can only do that if someone comes up and does that.

MR LOWIES: But Chair, for instance, the applicants may want to do that, the applicants may want to. Nobody has done it because of ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: They have not done so.

MR LOWIES: No I agree, with respect, Chairman, but that is the point.

CHAIRPERSON: So why should ...(intervention)

MR LOWIES: The matter is not settled. What if the applicants may want to? For argument's sake, just to take the point, what if the applicants may want to say; "There's a finding by the TRC (where there is) that Mr Peens has killed Victor Kheswa", and from that make certain submissions to yourself. What is the status of that? It's not been done, it's not been argued.

CHAIRPERSON: We will deal with that position as and when it is raised, but we simply cannot issue - that goes to the question of procedure. I agree with you, we can regulate our own procedure. But what you're asking us is to pronounce on the status of the Report, whether, are we bound by that. And that's what Mr Mapoma submits is beyond our powers.

MR LOWIES: My only counter argument is it relates mostly to procedure and therefore it is something which by necessary implication, is within your powers. I can take it no further.

CHAIRPERSON: No, further than what?

MR LOWIES: And of course to interpret the Act, sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: No further than what? You say you can't take the matter any further, I'm asking further than what?

MR LOWIES: No, I don't want make further submissions. That is my argument.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the argument?

MR LOWIES: The argument is, Chairman, that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You are asking us to pronounce on the status of the finding and whether we are as a Committee bound by that. It's not a matter of procedure, is it?

MR LOWIES: I would submit the ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: By no stretch of imagination can it be a matter of procedure, can it?

MR LOWIES: No, the argument goes as follows, Chairman; you have certain implicit powers, inter alia regarding procedure.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now I would say, this is akin to the powers that you have to regulate your procedure. In other words, you can say: "I have the power to state that I am not bound by that decision", and then you must give it, with respect. And this is what you are requested to do. Or you have the power to say: "I have no choice but to accept it and within that framework, this is the way that the procedure is going to be, or the application is going to be entertained." I would submit it's implicit.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: That's my argument, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: So is it your submission in essence, that this is just a matter of procedure, whether in the course of this hearing we will be having regard to the TRC findings?

MR LOWIES: No, the something similar to that. I want to draw the line or I want to draw the ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Just before you draw any line, is it your submission that it is not a procedure, but it is something akin to a procedure?

MR LOWIES: Precisely, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, yes. Do you accept that if it is not a measure of procedure, we would have no power to pronounce, to issue the kind of order that you are requesting?

MR LOWIES: Yes, but I'd like to qualify it, provided that it's not something that one can say is within the common law and principles relating to administrative tribunals ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: What is this common law that you're referring to?

MR LOWIES: This power that you have to make ancillary findings. For instance to regulate procedure; for instance to decide whether or not you should recuse yourself, which is of course not of issue, but never mentioned in the Act, something similar in that vein, in that genus.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MR LOWIES: Sorry, may I add a third point which I have mentioned before, but not in summary now. And of course, Chairman, you have the right to interpret the Act.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I understand that. What you're asking us in essence, is to pronounce on a matter which may or may not come before us.

MR LOWIES: No, not necessarily. I say the following; it may come before you, but my request is not that you pronounce on something which is uncertain. You with respect ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: It is not before us, do you accept that it is not? No-one has sought to introduce the Report, is that right?

MR LOWIES: No, but it is in existence.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh yes, just like a whole host of other evidence that is not before us.

MR LOWIES: Correct, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: So it is not before us and no-one has sought to introduce it here, is that right?

MR LOWIES: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. So what you want us to do is that in the event of someone raising the Report, we must now pronounce on whether or not we are bound by that Report?

MR LOWIES: Yes, but I must qualify, I can't agree unqualifiedly with it. I must qualify that there is a specific nexus between this Committee and the Commission, and the TRC, and that by its very nature makes it relevant.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the new point? What is the new point that you hadn't made?

MR LOWIES: I have raised it just now, the fact that you must also interpret the Act.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct). What about that?

MR LOWIES: Well Chairman, with respect, I indicated to you that there are three aspects which are relevant. The first one is, you can, even if the Act does not tell you specifically that you have a right to issue a declarator, you have certain inherent rights, like for instance I've mentioned the fact of the procedure, I've mentioned the recusal aspect and the other aspect which I think is also relevant is the fact that you must also by necessary implication have the right to interpret the law.

CHAIRPERSON: I cannot - I don't understand this submission. I don't understand the last submission.

MR LOWIES: The submission is simply, Chairman, as a matter of law you must decided whether or not you're bound by a decision or not.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Do you have any further submissions to make?

MR LOWIES: I have no further submissions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma, is there anything that you want to say further?

MR MAPOMA: None, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Mr Malindi, is there anything you want to say further?

MR MALINDI: Nothing, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: Nothing, Chairperson.

MS THOMAS: Nothing further to add.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well, okay.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

CHAIRPERSON: The time now is about ten to one. I will give the decision at ten to two. We'll take the lunch adjournment at this stage.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Tanzer, Nosenga is not part of this application, is he?

MS TANZER: No, as I mentioned earlier.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, okay, very well. I do not propose to give any detailed reasons for the ruling which now follows, suffice to say the following:

R U L I N G

This is an application brought by the applicants, save for Mr Nosenga, for an order inter alia that the circumstances under which Mr Nosenga's application was made be investigated. Secondly, for a declarator as to the status of the findings of the TRC, which are contained in the TRC Report of October last year. Thirdly, requesting the records of the meetings which led to the findings in issue.

The applicants no longer persist in the order that the circumstances relating to Mr Nosenga's application be investigated and also in regard, with the order requesting the records relating to the findings of the TRC, however, they do persist with the declaratory order.

The background to the application is briefly as follows:

The TRC in its Report has made a finding to the effect that the police colluded with the hostel dwellers and took part in the attack on Boipatong. The presence of the police during the attack is a hotly contested issue before us. The applicants, all the applicants I should say, except for Mr Nosenga, have denied that the police were present during the massacre. We were told that because of these findings by the TRC, the applicants entertain a fear that the Committee may well have prejudged the issue, as the Committee is part of the TRC. Unless the Committee indicates whether it is bound or not bound by the TRC findings, we are told the applicants may well entertain a reasonable suspicion that the Committee would be biased against them.

In order to allay their fears, it is therefore necessary that this Committee issue a declaratory order as to the status of the findings of the TRC, in particular whether the findings of the TRC are binding on this Committee.

None of the applicants have deposed to an affidavit setting out what fear they have, or the basis of that fear. None of the applicants have deposed to an affidavit in which they indicate that they fear, or I should say they are likely to entertain a reasonable suspicion that this Committee is biased or would be biased against them unless this Committee issues the order sought by them.

Mr Lowies, who argued the matter on behalf of the applicants, conceded that the issue of the findings is not before us and indeed none of the parties to these proceedings has asked us to have regard to those findings. Nevertheless, Mr Lowies has argued that the matter may or may not be raised.

It seems to me that the threshold question is whether this Committee has the power to make the order sought by the applicants. This Committee is a creature of statute, it has no other powers other than those which are set out in the Act which constitutes this Committee.

Mr Lowies could not point out to any provision of the Act, which either expressly or by necessary implication gives this Committee the power to make the order contended for by the applicants. He made a broad submission, which if I understood it correctly, was to the effect that under the Act this Committee has the power to regulate its procedure. That is the provision which he relied upon for the submission that we have the power to make the order sought by the applicants. However, he conceded that the nature of the order that he is seeking is not a matter of procedure. In a somewhat feint tone he suggested that it is something akin to a procedure. This submission is manifestly devoid of any substance when it only states that proposition in order to dismiss it as devoid of substance.

There is nothing in the Act which manifestly gives this Committee the power to make the order sought by the applicants. For that reason alone, the application ought to be dismissed.

In any event, having regard to the provisions of the Act, it is difficult to fathom how the applicants or any reasonable person for that matter, could entertain a reasonable suspicion that this Committee will act as a rubber-stamp for the findings of the Commission. There is no foundation for the fear that we are told the applicants have.

Again somewhat in a feint tone, Mr Lowies conceded that it is highly unlikely that this Committee can find that it is bound by the findings of the Commission.

I agree with Mr Mapoma when he submits that any such, if the applicants indeed entertain any such suspicion, such a suspicion has no foundation and it is therefore unreasonable. For these reasons the application is DISMISSED.

----------

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thomas, thank you, you may be excused.

MS THOMAS: Thank you, Chairperson.

MR LOWIES: As it pleases you, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, may I remind you that you are still under oath.

MACHIHLILE WILSON BALOYI: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Strydom?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: (Cont)

Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Baloyi, I'm going to ask you about the positions of the various police vehicles you saw. If you listen to the question and answer me directly, we can go quickly through this. After the attack on your house you went outside and at that stage did you see vehicles?

MR BALOYI: The ones that I saw was the Koyoco that had left my place, it was parked under a tree in Amatola Street and then it left to join the other two vehicles near the Metal Box and there were now three of them.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. And at that stage did you already see the other two Koyokos down close to the footbridge?

MR BALOYI: After shooting there was this huge flare that made it possible for us to see the vehicles.

MR STRYDOM: So then you saw two vehicles. So if I say that you saw three vehicles then close to Metal Box and two down at the bridge, so we're talking about five vehicles in total, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Four Koyokos and one small vehicle.

MR STRYDOM: Ja. And all this you could see from your position where you were standing on the road, is that right, close to your house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it was quite conspicuous.

MR STRYDOM: And the vehicle that fired the flare that created the light was in the vicinity of Metal Box?

MR BALOYI: I am saying there were three vehicles. I am saying this for the twelve time now. There were three of these vehicles. They got off this Koyoco and fired in the air and there was this flare in the sky and I saw these two vehicles that were moving in Umzimvubu Street.

MR STRYDOM: So what you're saying is that this flare created light also in the area over the bridge, because you saw the vehicles in the area of the footbridge?

MR BALOYI: It was - there was light all over the place.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Strydom is asking you is whether the shot that was fired into the air, which flared up, is that the shot which provided you with the light to be able to see the two motor vehicles which were travelling along Umzimvubu?

MR BALOYI: Besides that there was light all the time, but the light became even more bright after this thing was fired in the air.

CHAIRPERSON: If it had not been for this light which came from this shot that was fired into the air, would you have been able to see those two motor vehicles which were travelling along Umzimvubu?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Now can you describe the colour of the two vehicles that travelled in Umzimvubu?

MR BALOYI: You see yesterday I said that these Koyokos, the ones that you are talking about, are such that you cannot tell their type. They have different colours very day, depending on what was preferred on that day.

MR STRYDOM: Now you already testified that you saw a group of people in the vicinity of the Koyokos close to, in Umzimvubu Street. Now I want to know, did you see a crowd of people apart from the passengers of those vehicles, in the vicinity of the other three vehicles that were now standing in front of Metal Box?

MR BALOYI: These people were walking on the open space. There were many of them. They were moving in the light that was provided by the Koyokos, so that they could see ditches and they could avoid them as they were moving along.

The vehicles that were parked near Metal Box were just stationary there and after the group had walked past, the first two started moving on and the three followed from behind and they took the direction towards the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: So are you saying there were actually two groups, the one group of people that walked in the vicinity of Metal Box with, in front of those vehicles and the other group that were down in Umzimvubu Street and eventually crossed the footbridge?

MR BALOYI: I said there is no - I am saying only a few people took the direction towards the robots, the majority of the group took the direction towards the footpath.

MR STRYDOM: Let me ask you this way, the group that was walking in front of the vehicles that were stationary at Metal Box and which followed them later on, which why did they follow towards the hostel?

MR BALOYI: It was only a few people who went along that road. They were headed towards the factories and the Koyokos had always been stationary there. After the had all passed, the Koyokos proceeded towards the robots.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, do you know a police motor vehicle which is commonly referred to as a suitcase?

MR BALOYI: Those are ...(indistinct) vehicles.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know them?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I do.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know about the military vehicle, a smallish motor vehicle ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: I cannot specify all types of military vehicles, I'm not a soldier.

MR STRYDOM: That night did you see a vehicle, a small vehicle that's covered in glass so the people sitting inside can look outside? They call the vehicle a microwave.

MR BALOYI: I did not see that vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say they call this car a microwave?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, that's correct, because it gets so hot inside.

Am I right in saying that the majority of the attackers you saw moving out of the township moved towards the footbridge, only a few people or attackers followed the vehicles that were travelling from Metal Box towards the robots?

MR BALOYI: They did not follow them. I said they did not follow them, they preceded the vehicles and the vehicles followed.

MR STRYDOM: But only a few people took that route.

MR BALOYI: Yes, a few. Maybe they had missed their way or something.

CHAIRPERSON: Were these people walking along Umzimvubu Road?

MR BALOYI: They went along Bafokeng Street, most of them, but then they used different streets whilst they were in the township. So it is possible that these were the people who had been lost. We were watching them all the time.

MR STRYDOM: When did you get - or did you in fact get onto the garage of your house to get a better look or view?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: When was that?

MR BALOYI: When the Koyokos had left I went onto the rooftop of the garage to check if there were no other vehicles that had been around.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see any other vehicles?

MR BALOYI: I saw military vehicles travelling along Frikkie Meyer. They were stationary at Frikkie Meyer.

MR STRYDOM: What kind of military vehicles, is that the Hippos or what?

MR BALOYI: You've just spoken about them, suitcases.

MR LAX: Mr Strydom, could I just ask something here, just for a moment if you will?

You said you got onto your garage when the Koyokos had left. Left where, at what stage are you talking about?

MR BALOYI: They were headed towards the hostel.

MR LAX: Yes, but where had they left from at that point? That's what I'm trying to understand.

MR BALOYI: They have been leaving, or they left from Metal Box and the other two had left from Umzimvubu.

MR LAX: You see you've lost me now. You told us that there were two at a tree near Metal Box, one joined them. You then said the two at the footbridge then proceeded towards Metal Box, towards the robots and then there five. Now what I'm trying to understand is, at which stage did you get onto the roof, was it - I'm just not sure and I'm not sure which vehicles left where at what point. Do you understand my problem?

MR BALOYI: I said the two vehicles that had been travelling along Umzimvubu headed towards the robots and then the three that had been at Metal Box also left and then regrouped and proceeded towards the hostel. That is when I went to the rooftop.

MR LAX: Thank you, that's very much clearer for me, thank you.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you say in your evidence-in-chief, and I've got a note here:

"As I was standing on top of the garage, I saw a Koyoco parked under the tree in Amatola Street. It drove off that street and went to the street near Metal Box factory and joined two other parked vehicles."

So what you said in chief is that you got onto the garage at a much earlier stage, when that one vehicle was still there at the tree at Amatola Street.

MR BALOYI: You are just questioning me on one thing, but that is not how it happened. I told you clearly before, from yesterday, you are still questioning me on one issue. It doesn't help that I should repeat ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: And what would also be helpful is for you to answer the question. If the answer is yes, you will say yes, if the answer is no, you say no. It will not help us to get into an argument with counsel. He is doing his job when he asks you the questions.

MR BALOYI: No, I am not trying to get into an argument with him, but I do not know how to respond to his question now. What I am going to say is, the Koyoco that left the streets near my house proceeded to Amatola and thereafter the other two vehicles that were parked at Metal Box. Then were another two vehicles that had been travelling along Umzimvubu. They assembled and proceeded towards the hostel.

Thereafter I came back just to make sure that everything was okay. I then climbed onto the rooftop of the garage. I was on my stomach in fact and I was watching out for what was happening. It was at that point that I saw these two vehicles parked at Frikkie Meyer.

MR STRYDOM: I understand your evidence now, but what I'm saying is that yesterday you testified that at the time the light or the flare was fired into the air, you were on the garage. Now it seems to me that you were not on the garage but standing somewhere in the street when you saw all this.

MR BALOYI: I did not mention the garage yesterday. You did not question me on the garage yesterday.

MR STRYDOM: Sorry, I didn't question you, but sorry in your evidence-in-chief ...(intervention)

MR LAX: I just wanted to confirm for your sake, Mr Baloyi, that this matter was raised in your evidence-in-chief with you, by Mr Berger, and you did in fact say that you were on top of the garage, you saw a Koyoco parked under a tree in Amatola Street, and then you went on to describe how it moved and then the flare and a whole lot of other things, giving the impression that you were on the roof when you saw all these things. So he's not tricking. In fact you did give that testimony yesterday.

MR BALOYI: I cannot comment on it because we discussed many things yesterday.

MR STRYDOM: Apart from that one occasion when you saw this light being created in the air, did you see that again a bit later during the course of that same night?

MR BALOYI: What I also saw were two buses coming from the direction of KwaMadala Hostel and they were travelling along Frikkie Meyer.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Baloyi, I'm not asking about - I just want to know, did you see another flare being fired during the course of that night?

MR BALOYI: No.

MR STRYDOM: Because I want to put to you that evidence was led at the criminal trial that after the attack a flare was fired on the KwaMadala side of Frikkie Meyer, to look for possible people that were hiding in the swamp there. So you cannot give any comment?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not see that.

MR STRYDOM: I want to refer you to Exhibit CC, that's the statement ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Sorry, Mr Strydom, before you do, I'm just trying to assimilate what you've just put to him, but I'm not sure that I understand you correctly, so just for my own benefit. Are you saying that another flare was fired at a different time? In other words that two flares were fired, or are you saying only one flare was fired? I'm not sure what you're putting to him exactly.

MR STRYDOM: Sorry, I shouldn't have used the words "other flare". According to the evidence at the criminal trial, a flare was fired after the attack on the KwaMadala side of Frikkie Meyer Boulevard, close to the swamp.

I want to return to your statement, Exhibit CC, and just to put you into perspective I'm going to read from the fourth last paragraph:

"When they left the house, they left a suitcase in the living-room that did not belong to me, containing glasses and ladies shoes."

Do you agree with that?

CHAIRPERSON: What paragraph is it?

MR STRYDOM: The fourth last paragraph from the bottom.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, okay.

MR STRYDOM: Do you agree with that?

MR BALOYI: Did this happen in my house?

MR STRYDOM: You found a suitcase and there were ladies shoes in that. That is correct, you already testified that. Do you agree with that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is so. The suitcase burst open. That suitcase belonged Mxena, whose wife was killed in the street.

MR STRYDOM: And then you told the person who took the statement:

"I then went outside and climbed onto my roof. I was watching the group of people leaving the location"

- locations. So according to this statement, and that's what I want to put to you, it seems to me that after you left your house you went onto the roof.

MR BALOYI: We did not stand watching for a long time, we just looked and returned back. We did not spend two or three minutes there, we would just watch for a moment and return maybe to the house and look at the other things. There was no time just to stand around.

MR STRYDOM: But then you went along to state:

"I also saw two police vehicles, one Nyala and one casspir, escorting the group of people. The police in the Nyala shot a white flare into the air."

Do you agree with what is stated here or not? - that I just read to you.

MR BALOYI: This refers to what I've just told you about what happened at Metal Box, or is this a different issue altogether?

CHAIRPERSON: I think what he is trying to point out is to reconcile what you have told us and what appears in your statement. In the statement you are recorded as having said the following: - and listen carefully.

"I saw two police vehicles, one Nyala and one Casspir escorting the group of people."

Is that statement correct?

MR BALOYI: No, that is not how I put it, no. Escorting people, I did not know anything about that.

CHAIRPERSON: And then the statement goes on to say:

"The police in the Nyala shot a white flare into the air."

MR BALOYI: That is so. They were not in the Nyala, it was the police who alighted from the Koyoco. There were three vehicles there.

MR STRYDOM: So this statement should have read:

"Three vehicles escorted a group of people"

... not two? Isn't it so? Because you told us there were three vehicles driving behind people, with reference to the group of people that fired the flare. So the reference here to two vehicles cannot be correct, do you agree?

MR BALOYI: It is a mistake. I just mention what I said.

MR STRYDOM: And then the statement goes further, and I'm going to read to you:

"In the open field there were two cream-white trucks that were also leaving the location and were following the group of people to KwaMadala Hostel."

Is that statement a correct statement?

MR BALOYI: Cream? How could I see the paint? Where does it come from that they were cream? I do not know about it. There were Koyokos there but they were not that colour.

MR STRYDOM: You see I want to ask you where it comes from because, do you suggest that the person that took the statement just wrote there: "two cream-white trucks"?

MR BALOYI: White?

MR STRYDOM: Cream-white.

MR BALOYI: No, I do not know where he got that from. Where does that person come from, where did he get that? I was pointing out the people that I was with when they wrote the statement, I pointed out what happened and how it happened. I only mentioned what I knew, what I saw from my house.

CHAIRPERSON: You didn't at any stage tell the person who was taking your statement what the colour of the Koyoco was, did you?

MR BALOYI: No, with regards to white, it's the first time I hear of it.

CHAIRPERSON: Now he's not saying that it's white, he's saying it was cream-white. But you didn't tell the police ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: I never mentioned anything about cream-white, I just mentioned that they were Koyokos. The colour of the paint was of no concern to me.

MR STRYDOM: And you also didn't say "trucks" because what's written down here is trucks, not Koyoco or Casspir or Nyala, as has been previously recorded in your statement.

MR BALOYI: I do not know about that, I hear it for the first time, it's news to me.

MR STRYDOM: You stated that you saw a taxi or some kind of vehicle coming from KwaMadala back towards the robots, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Vehicles?

MR STRYDOM: Buses or - you said buses came from KwaMadala towards ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: Yes, that's what I said.

MR STRYDOM: What kind of buses were these?

MR BALOYI: It was the Vaal bus, Vaal buses.

MR STRYDOM: But at what stage was this? Was that after the police vehicles moved towards KwaMadala, or when was this?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they had left a long while ago. That is when I saw these buses coming from the direction of the hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: Were these buses coming from the hostel?

MR BALOYI: They were coming from the hostel. I am not certain where they'd been parked there, but ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Did you see them coming out of the hostel? That's what I want to find out.

MR BALOYI: Yes, you can see the street clearly.

MR STRYDOM: Were you still standing on your roof?

MR BALOYI: No. I did not spend a long time on the rooftop.

MR STRYDOM: So were you standing close to your house somewhere?

MR BALOYI: I was standing by my lawn. Even if I stand at the back of the house I can still see the road clearly.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but you can never see the entrance to KwaMadala Hostel from your house, isn't it so?

MR BALOYI: I am not talking about the gate. They were coming from the direction of the hostel, they were on the street.

MR STRYDOM: So you can't say that these buses came from KwaMadala, they might as well have come from Iscor, because if you follow that route you get to the main entrance of Iscor.

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is possible, but they were coming from that direction.

MR STRYDOM: But in your statement, maybe in this regard, you said:

"Two white Vaal Triangle taxis were also leaving out of KwaMadala Hostel with people in."

Did you say that to the person who took the statement?

MR BALOYI: That is not my statement, I did not say that, never. That's not what I said.

MR STRYDOM: What's the relevance of these buses, do you try to insinuate that they took people that were part of the attack to some place, why do you mention the buses?

MR BALOYI: I saw these buses. I'm mentioning them because I saw them.

MR STRYDOM: One last aspect. At the criminal trial many people from Boipatong testified, people living in the same street as you testified, also people from Bafokeng Street. Now I want to put to you, they didn't see police or white people participating in the attack and what you are saying you say on your own. Can you give an explanation why the other people didn't see but you saw it?

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry, I must have missed something, saw what?

MR STRYDOM: The other people didn't see police participation.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, I see.

MR STRYDOM: So I want to put it to him that you stand very alone in your testimony, is there anything you want to comment on about that?

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, Mr Strydom, can I get it clear, are you saying that the people said they didn't see or they don't mention police participation?

MR STRYDOM: It's a bit of a difficult statement because so many people testified, some people looked outside and they didn't see, some people never looked outside, they can't say if there was any participation. I don't want to bind myself by individuals because they are literally, I think a hundred of them.

ADV SIGODI: I think in fairness to the witness, I mean it insinuates that what you're saying is that there were no police - the other people are saying that there were no police and I think you should put it clearly that they are saying that some said that they didn't see and some do not mention that there were police.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, thank you.

I want to put to you that the witnesses that testified at the criminal trial, that looked outside and made certain observations, those people didn't see the police or the police vehicles in the township, during the attack. So what I put to you is you stand alone in your testimony.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

MR STRYDOM: ...(indistinct) so far. Well I'm referring to the criminal trial.

CHAIRPERSON: So far, yes.

MR BALOYI: The people who were unwilling to testify to the effect that there were police are just similar to those who don't mention them at all, but the situation then was very bad, people were unwilling to testify because the police will pick you up and take you wherever and assault you. That was the order of the old government. It was only after the new government dispensation that things improved.

MR STRYDOM: Do you say that there are still witnesses that are too scared to come forward to say what they have seen, but they've told you that they've seen police accompanying the attackers?

MR BALOYI: Because they did not make statements even then they are still intimidated to do so, even now.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know who they are scared for, or what they are scared of?

MR BALOYI: The situation remains the same, the police are still in force, they have not been removed. They are still the same police.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you, Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR STRYDOM

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, in your statement, the one that Mr Strydom has been going through with you, which you were supposed to have made to the police, the following is said:

"I saw some of the white people shooting at the houses opposite mine. I can't say that it was policemen."

Do you know anything about this statement?

MR BALOYI: No, I do not remember. I don't recall whether I did mention that.

CHAIRPERSON: You don't remember whether you said this?

MR BALOYI: ...(no English interpretation)

CHAIRPERSON: What is it that you don't remember?

MR BALOYI: What I remembered is that they shot at Singwane's house.

CHAIRPERSON: What is said here is the following:

"I saw some of the white people shooting at the houses opposite mine. I can't say that it was policemen."

Now do you know anything ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: No, I do not recall, I don't recall that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chairman, can I proceed?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, bearing in mind that some of your time has been consumed by the application.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LOWIES: I'll bear that in mind, Chairperson.

Mr Baloyi, I have to put to you that your house was probably attacked, but my instructions are that the manner in which you describe and the people involved in this attack, were not involved and regarding that your evidence is suspect and that my clients do not believe you.

The first aspect that I would like to find out from you is ...(intervention)

MR BERGER: Chairperson, with all due respect, to put that kind of a statement to the witness, how is he supposed to respond to it? There's no indication in what regard he's not being believed.

CHAIRPERSON: He is about to do that. Aren't you?

MR LOWIES: That's correct.

MR BERGER: I beg your pardon.

MR LOWIES: The first aspect is, is it correct that at the time of the attack you were 72 years of age? You're now 79.

MR BALOYI: I am saying the people who were taking this statement wrote as they pleased. I told them that I was born in 1920, on the 7th of February and if they chose to write something else, really that's not my problem.

MR LAX: Mr Baloyi, please, just listen to the question and answer the question. If you were born in 1920, then you would be 79 now and you would have been 72 at the time of the attack. It's plain arithmetic.

MR BALOYI: I don't know, I did not study mathematics.

MR LOWIES: On your own version further there were adults in the house, residing there at the time of the attack, not so?

MR BALOYI: I don't know these people. Maybe they were staying there without me knowing.

MR LOWIES: I don't want to argue with you, Sir, just please listen to the question. Is it not so that there was a chap that was 37 years of age residing with you? Please.

MR BALOYI: I don't know now. I don't know what you are saying now. Are you saying other people, one of them is 37 years? I don't know these people.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, I think what he's referring to, he's referring to members of your family. He says that at the time of the attack there were members of your family who were adults. He says one of your members of your family was approximately 37 years at the time.

MR BALOYI: My children?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: Yes, he should say that. Maybe he's not in the position to say that. Look I cannot just answer when he's talking about people, I have children you know.

CHAIRPERSON: Whereby people ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: Yes, I do have a child of the house.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, by people in your house he's referring to your family, the children.

MR BALOYI: Yes, they are my children.

MR LOWIES: Now who is Mando?

MR BALOYI: Mando. Mando is my daughter.

MR LOWIES: Were there any grown-up men in the house, residing there at the time of the attack?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Who were they?

MR BALOYI: I said Pitso is a police, he is one of the police that are using these Koyokos, another one is Silo. These are males, and his nickname is Dodudu.

CHAIRPERSON: Dodulo?

MR BALOYI: Dodudu.

MR LOWIES: What is the age of Pitso?

MR BALOYI: I would not say, I would have to ask my wife. I cannot state.

CHAIRPERSON: Were these ages not given to us yesterday?

MR LOWIES: I haven't got that age.

CHAIRPERSON: Were we not given those ages?

MR LOWIES: Sorry, Chair, he didn't mention ages as far as my note reads, of these two. He did mention ages of other people.

CHAIRPERSON: Of Howard, Ugabe, Cleopatra and Mando. Yes, very well.

MR BALOYI: Pitso is an adult. He has his own family now. He stays in Zone 10.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, I think he says he's going to ask his wife to get the correct ages.

MR LOWIES: But he was a grown-up person?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR LOWIES: So was Silo. You can't tell us his age can you?

MR BALOYI: Silo is still young and he's a grown-up now.

CHAIRPERSON: Who is older between Silo and Mando?

MR BALOYI: Mando.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright.

MR LAX: Can I just ask this, is Silo older than Howard?

MR BALOYI: Very much so, far much older. Howard is still young, he's about 17.

MR LAX: That's all I was trying to ascertain.

MR LOWIES: Were they there the night of the attack?

MR BALOYI: The one who is a police was at work. Silo was in the house.

MR LOWIES: When you were watching TV, did you do so in the dark or was the light on?

MR BALOYI: Yes, the lights were off.

MR LOWIES: Was everybody watching television or just yourself?

MR BALOYI: Not everyone. People were watching television with me but everyone, each one of us left for our bedrooms as we pleased.

MR LOWIES: To go and sleep?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Who went to sleep, who left for their bedrooms?

MR BALOYI: I would not say. You see my house is big, sometimes they would just stay there in their bedrooms and sometimes they would sleep. I do not follow them around you know.

MR LOWIES: The reason why I'm asking you is because in your evidence-in-chief you said you instructed everybody to stay up because you thought the attack was imminent.

MR BALOYI: I was the one who was watching all the time. I am the man you see, in the family.

MR LOWIES: Now but Sir, you must listen to the question. The question is, on your version now it seems that some of them went to the bedroom to go and sleep, yet in-chief you said the situation was as follows; you expected an attack and you told everybody to stay up. What is the truth?

MR BALOYI: It is true, I had told them so, not to go to sleep. But I would not say whether they were asleep when they went to their bedrooms or not.

CHAIRPERSON: You see I was left with the impression - it may be wrong, but I was left with the impression that what was conveyed to other family members is that you've got to be on the alert because there is an attack which is imminent. And I think as I recall his evidence he was left watching TV with Silo, if I'm not mistaken.

MR LOWIES: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes.

MR LOWIES: Chair, I hear what you say. I also had it that there were actually two incidents, but I'll canvass it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well, but do canvass that.

MR LOWIES: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: If it is relevant.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chair. Now you see, Mr Baloyi, when Father Patrick phoned you he was not sure whether an attack was going to be launched at Boipatong, not so?

MR BALOYI: I am saying that when somebody tells you something I would not say whether ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Just listen to the question, we'll move faster. If you'll just answer the question. What he is saying is that when the Father conveyed the message to you he was not sure whether the attack was going to be on Boipatong.

MR BALOYI: That is correct, because he spoke about two places.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: Did you do anything as a result of this phone call?

MR BALOYI: I then informed my family that we might be attacked and I kept watch over my son and told them that they must lock the doors and keep them locked.

MR LOWIES: Now did you also phone the police?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did and I spoke to one police person at the police station.

MR LOWIES: What did you tell him?

MR BALOYI: I told the police that rumour has it that we are going to be attacked and he said there's nothing he could do, I should phone Sebokeng. I said I cannot waste my money and phone Sebokeng. "If you don't want to phone Sebokeng, that's not my problem".

MR LOWIES: Now which police station did you phone?

MR BALOYI: Vanderbijlpark.

MR LOWIES: Did you also get in contact with the comrades?

MR BALOYI: Very much so. We were working together.

MR LOWIES: That night?

MR BALOYI: I don't roam the streets, not even people like Madala - I mean the older ones. The older ones do not roam the streets.

MR LAX: Sorry, I just can't get this clearly in my headset. I'm not sure what - what exactly is your answer? Maybe you can just repeat it again.

MR BALOYI: I am saying I did not spend my time with them in the streets. They were younger. They are the ones who had the responsibility of guarding the streets and we older ones remained behind at home.

MR LOWIES: But my question is, did you seek protection from them on that night?

MR LAX: Sorry, your question was; did he contact them. That was your question.

MR LOWIES: Thank you. Now did you contact them?

MR BALOYI: We were in constant communication. Each street had this constant communication with them.

MR LOWIES: Did you tell them that night that there's a possibility of an attack, after the phone call by Father Patrick?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I told some of them.

MR LOWIES: And were they around the house after you spoke to them, or not?

MR BALOYI: We were always waiting outside.

MR LOWIES: Did you see them there that night after you spoke to them?

MR BALOYI: They were chased away by the police who were shooting at them and firing teargas canisters at them, and they fled into people's houses. I never saw them again, because we were also afraid of being teargassed.

MR LOWIES: Now on your version the police came there with a tractor to fix the holes in the road on the day of the attack, but it was during the day.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, we've canvassed this and as I understand the ruling, it's not to be canvassed again.

MR LOWIES: I just want to bring him in the picture, Sir, I don't want to question him on things that have already been canvassed, but otherwise I won't be able to put an introductory to him.

CHAIRPERSON: You're laying a foundation? Ja, go ahead.

MR LOWIES: Do you recall?

MR BALOYI: Yesterday I said the tractor was moving in front, closing up the trenches that we had dug up and the Koyoco was following behind, occupied by police.

MR LOWIES: Who did the tractor belong to, was it a police tractor or did it belong the municipality or town council or the township or some other authority?

MR BALOYI: If I knew the police I would ask them to whom this tractor belonged.

MR LOWIES: You don't know?

MR BALOYI: I don't know these police you see.

MR LOWIES: You can't say that it was a police tractor?

MR BALOYI: I think maybe yes, it belonged to the police or soldiers, I don't know.

MR LOWIES: Isn't it possible that the police were just protecting the people on the tractor from an attack?

MR BALOYI: We did not want the police in the township. We did not want them altogether. That is why we dug up these trenches.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what he is putting to you is, is it not possible that the police were protecting the people on the tractor who were either removing the barricades or fixing the holes in the road? Do you know that or don't you know that?

MR BALOYI: Exactly, yes.

MR LOWIES: Yes, what?

MR BALOYI: I am saying they were protecting the people who were closing up the trenches using the tractor.

MR LOWIES: When the people wanting to close the trenches with the tractor, were they attacked or was there a threat that they may be attacked?

MR BALOYI: Very much so. He could not have travelled, moved about freely on his own.

MR LOWIES: Now that day, was there a physical threat that he would be attacked, not a general threat? Did somebody do something to say here's going to be an attack? - that you could see.

MR BALOYI: Would you please repeat? I do not understand.

MR LOWIES: Did you see - that day of the tractor, when it was busy closing the trenches, did you see whether somebody attempted or indeed did attack the tractor or the police with them?

MR BALOYI: No. All white people were scared of going into Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Now what made them fire teargas at the comrades?

MR BALOYI: I cannot say, because they came across the comrades who were sitting around burning tyres and they fired without asking.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know when these trenches were dug up in Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: We dug the trenches. We did not want movements of any police vehicles.

ADV SIGODI: When did you dig them up, had they been there for a long time or were these trenches dug on that day, the 17th, or were they dug before the 17th?

MR BALOYI: We dug up the trenches before the 17th. We did not dig the trenches on the 17th.

ADV SIGODI: Approximately how many days before the attack were they dug?

MR BALOYI: Each and every street has comrades and each and every street made their decisions as what to do because you see the township is big. People dug up holes or trenches in their streets and we did the same in our street.

ADV SIGODI: So these trenches had been there for some time before the attack on the 17th?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: And they were only filled up by the tractor on the 17th?

MR BALOYI: They closed it up on the 17th. It was round about 4 o'clock.

ADV SIGODI: Thanks.

MR LOWIES: Did they ever before that try to close the trenches?

MR BALOYI: I don't know, I did not see them do that.

MR LOWIES: But if there are trenches it would not prevent pedestrians from entering into the township, only vehicles, not so?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Now on the night of the attack you also say that - that's in-chief, you said that as you were watching television, it was approximately twenty past ten, you heard a noise in the street.

MR BALOYI: That is correct, as I stated yesterday.

MR LOWIES: There's some problem with regard to precisely what the noise was. What did you think what was going on outside, what was this noise about?

MR BALOYI: Yesterday I said I thought the noise was coming from the comrades.

MR LOWIES: Now what was the nature of this noise? Because you also said that at a stage you heard that windows were breaking.

MR BALOYI: Yes, they were breaking windows.

MR LOWIES: Now the noise that you heard, the first noise, what was that, what was the nature of that noise?

MR BALOYI: You see I heard this noise, the screaming of people and you had things like the shattering of windows etc.

MR LOWIES: But now why would you think that the comrades would do something like this, why did you think that they would make a noise like that?

MR BALOYI: When I heard the noise I thought maybe the comrades were singing. That is why I had to go outside and look.

MR LOWIES: But I asked you what the nature of the noise was and you said:

"screaming and breaking of items"

Now the question is, if that is the situation - please wait - if that is the situation, why did you think it was the comrades?

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't his evidence that his initial reaction was to think that this noise was coming from the comrades?

MR LOWIES: I heard what you say, Chairman, but with respect, if the nature of the noise is of such a nature, I would submit that it's not true, and that's what I'm trying to explore. I don't think he heard anything, but that's what I'd like to explore.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, this can't possibly be laying a foundation because what this witness heard or didn't hear has been canvassed in detail for the last two days.

CHAIRPERSON: What he is putting to you, Sir, is that you didn't hear any noise. Is that what you're putting to him?

MR BALOYI: I heard noise coming from a further up direction. I didn't know what noise was this. I then went out to investigate.

MR LOWIES: Out where? Out of what? ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You're putting to this witness that he didn't hear the noise. He says he did hear the noise. We dealt with this yesterday.

MR LOWIES: No, he said he went out. I want to know where to.

Where to?

MR BALOYI: I went to the gate and I stood there and looked.

MR LOWIES: Because you never testified yesterday that you went to the gate and looked at the gate at this stage.

MR BALOYI: You see they did not ask me, you are the one who is asking me where I went to.

MR LOWIES: Because we had, Sir, on your own version, that you only went to the window at that stage and now you say you went outside.

MR BALOYI: This noise was coming from afar and it continued and I would look through the window as the noise was continuing. I was not sitting down you see.

MR LOWIES: Now did you or did you not go outside when you heard the noise for the first time? - to the gate.

MR BALOYI: I've just told you now that I went outside, went to the gate and looked around.

MR LOWIES: And when you were at the gate, did you see anything? - at that stage.

MR BALOYI: I did not see anything and I went back into the house.

MR LOWIES: Did you proceed to watch TV or did you now do anything else?

MR BALOYI: The television set was on and I was watching at the same time.

MR LOWIES: Yes? What made you get up again?

MR BALOYI: The noise was approaching, getting closer.

MR LOWIES: And then?

MR BALOYI: And I looked through the window. They had not come within my view at that time.

MR LOWIES: Did you see anything at that stage?

MR BALOYI: I did not see anything at that time, it was just noise.

MR LOWIES: And did you remain standing or did you go back to sit and watch TV again?

MR BALOYI: I am saying, when I heard this noise I thought that this could be the people coming to attack us or the comrades, so I was not sitting down really.

MR LOWIES: That's not the question. We heard that you went to the gate, you went to sit and watch TV, then ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: That was at the beginning. That's what I said.

MR LOWIES: Then you heard a noise and you went to the window again. Now at that stage, did you go back to sit again or did you stand there in front of the window all the time?

MR BALOYI: I am saying to you I never sat down again, I continued watching through the window and watching television at the same time, trying to make out as to what this was.

MR LOWIES: What was the very first thing that you saw to make you realise that now there is trouble? See, that you saw. The operative word is that you saw, not heard at that stage.

MR BALOYI: I had received a message.

MR LOWIES: No but Sir, I specifically said to you "that you saw".

CHAIRPERSON: He'd been warned before that there is going to be an attack, then he hears the noise and then he saw the Koyoco. He warned his family.

MR LOWIES: He didn't say that now, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: But he said that yesterday. That has been said many times.

MR LOWIES: I'll leave it at that.

Now when you saw the Koyoco, what did it do, did it just go there, park there and nothing happened regarding that Koyoco?

MR BALOYI: This Koyoco came to a standstill there and the noise of the engine was running almost quietly and the lights were dim.

MR LOWIES: No, my question is, did anything specifically happen or did it just go there and park there and nothing else happened regarding that Koyoco?

CHAIRPERSON: We were told yesterday it came in there and parked and then moved on. That is what we were told.

MR LOWIES: Chair, I hear that. I just want to clarify because this was never canvassed, whether anything happened regarding that Koyoco, except for the fact that it went there and parked and moved.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR BALOYI: Nothing happened after the Koyoco had arrived, it just came and parked there.

MR LOWIES: Nobody alighted, nobody got into it, nobody loaded anything into that Koyoco?

MR BALOYI: Nobody alighted because had somebody alighted I would have said so.

MR LOWIES: And the Koyoco, whilst it was there, could you see people inside the vehicle?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, with respect, ...

CHAIRPERSON: Inside what?

MR LOWIES: The vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: What vehicle?

MR LOWIES: The Koyoco.

CHAIRPERSON: But he told us yesterday that he could see the people that were, two white people that were in front. He told us that yesterday.

MR LOWIES: I specifically made a note of that. I wasn't sure whether he said in front, inside or standing in front of the vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: Just put that to him.

MR LOWIES: Were the people inside the vehicle or were they in front of the vehicle? - outside.

MR BALOYI: Yesterday I said - I think you were here, but if you were not here yesterday I'm going to tell you now. You did not hear this.

I am saying it came to a standstill, no single white person got out of this Koyoco. The people who were inside this vehicle were visible, but not as clear as one would have expected.

MR LOWIES: Why do you say they were white people?

MR BALOYI: I know a white person, what are you? I can see you are a white person, finished. Look I can see. You mean I don't know a white person now?

MR LOWIES: But it was dark wasn't it?

MR BALOYI: I know a white person, even if it's at night I'll know a white person.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I'm sorry to interrupt, I know that it doesn't help, but I wouldn't be doing my duty to my client if I didn't object at this point. I have advised my client, as has Ms Cambanis and my learned friend, Mr Malindi, that your ruling means that they will not be subjected to cross-examination of this sort. Perhaps we don't understand your ruling but we've always thought that not being able to revisit issues means that these kinds of questions can't be asked.

CHAIRPERSON: I will allow the question. Counsel is free to canvass the issue. If I believe that the question is a repetition I will do so, I will stop him.

MR LOWIES: The question was; it was dark, not so?

MR BALOYI: There was light, a bright light and there was the moon as well.

MR LOWIES: I would like to put the following to you, and that is; it was so dark, Sir, you would not have been able to see inside that Koyoco.

MR BALOYI: You see the Koyoco had no curtains so I could see the people inside. I could see them through the windows and the ones who were in front were even more visible.

MR LOWIES: They did not wear balaclavas, did they?

MR BALOYI: No, they did not have these balaclavas on.

MR LOWIES: Now what provided the illumination at that stage? Where did the light come from? And you must please mention all the light sources.

MR BALOYI: Moonlight, the floodlights.

MR LOWIES: Yes?

MR BALOYI: Nothing else, except for these things.

MR LOWIES: You see I've handed out to everybody a document which is an assessment of certain evidence before the Goldstone Commission of Inquiry into the Boipatong Massacre on 17 June 1992.

I would request that this be admitted as Exhibit EE, Chairman.

Now in this document, Sir, an independent firm, Inloptro(?) described the elimination conditions, and I want to put it to you that it was not brightly lit outside, the illumination was actually very bad. This is the crux of their finding.

MR BALOYI: The person who is saying that is saying what he knows and I am saying what I know. It was very bright that evening.

MR LOWIES: Because I'd like to just mention the following to you - Chair, for the assistance of everybody - at page 6 thereof if I'm not mistaken, paragraph 4.1, you'll find the following description:

"At the time of the incident, at about 22H00 on 17 June 1992, ..."

CHAIRPERSON: Where is this?

MR LOWIES: Chair, two document were handed to you, the one on top is document I think: "Recollection and Impressions of Inspection at Boipatong". Now I think four or five pages further there's a report which is titled: "An Assessment on Certain Evidence Given". Then on top of this document it says page 6 of 10.

MR LAX: Mr Lowies, the page numbers of this document are at the bottom right-hand corner.

MR LOWIES: That's 17, thank you, Mr Lax. I would submit that that is the correct page.

MR LAX: Sorry, we don't have the fax thing on the top on our copy, unfortunately.

MR LOWIES: Page 17 is actually a much better reference.

Now it is stated there, Sir, that at the time of the incident on that day:

"It was two days after full moon and the moon was approximately 30 degrees above the horizon. The illumination at the time ..."

...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, he has told us that there was moonlight on the day in question. Now reading to him what the report says - and he insists that there was moonlight, can you really take the matter any further?

MR LOWIES: I would like to suggest the following to you, Sir - I hear what you say, Chair - on page 18, under paragraph 4.1.2 he comes to the conclusion, the compiler of this report:

"That the moon therefore did not contribute very significantly to the overall illumination within the township."

This is the gist of what he says in a lot of pages. So I want to put it to you that the impression that you want to create that the moon supplied a lot of illumination is not correct, it could be negated for the purposes of identification.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, that's not what the report says, it says:

"The moon did not contribute very significantly. There were Apollo lights ..."

And on top of it, if one looks at the report very briefly, it seems that there was random sampling done.

CHAIRPERSON: Well if I understand what's being put to him only with regard to the moon, it doesn't deal with the Apollo light because this witness, as I recall his evidence, he relied on the moonlight and the Apollo lights. There's nothing the witness can say ...(indistinct) concerning the contents of this document.

MR BERGER: Unless there was a specific test done in front of his house, perhaps that might help.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, continue, Mr Lowies.

MR LOWIES: Do you still say that the moon provided sufficient illumination ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: He has said yes, he did.

MR LOWIES: I want to put to you, Sir, that you are not telling the truth, as a matter of fact it was quite dark there and you are creating the impression that you were able to see things which you could not.

MR BALOYI: That is not true, the people who wrote here wrote as they thought appropriate because they don't want a black person and that's it.

MR LOWIES: You can't say that. I want to put to you the following as well. The light of the Apollo light is quite far away from you, isn't it so? And as you were standing - sorry, you want to answer?

MR BALOYI: I am saying I can bet today I can take you in the evening, take you to my home, nobody will kill you, you will see the lights.

MR LOWIES: Yes, it's not disputed that there's an Apollo light, but listen to the question. Is it not correct that ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: I am saying the light goes through my window.

MR LOWIES: Is it not correct that as you're standing in your house, the Apollo lights are approximately to your left? As a matter of fact you indicated to us the angle yesterday - just listen please, you indicated the angle more-or-less the same as you are sitting to Mr Strydom, in another regard where Mtwana Zulu was, not so?

MR BALOYI: I said that yesterday. The light flashes through towards this direction. It is very bright, very bright and at round about 10, when there is no coal smog or smoke, it's very bright.

MR LOWIES: We'll get to that, let's just get to the angle. Do you agree that as you are standing it's approximately to your left, as you were standing there at the door, the same angle as you are sitting towards Mr Strydom, which is about 30 degrees?

MR BALOYI: You see it's very, very tall, it comes from Botswana and flashes through towards this direction.

MR LOWIES: Would you agree it's approximately to your left-hand side, 30 degrees as you were standing at the window yes, or no? The 30 degrees is the angle that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, these degrees are not going to take us anywhere. If you want to put it to this witness that on the day in question there was insufficient light to enable him to identify or see anything, just put that to the witness. This witness knows nothing about the degrees, how many degrees the Apollo light was.

MR LOWIES: I hear what you say, Chairman, however I must state that it is quite important to know at what angle he was looking because of various factors.

So can I just ask you this; as you were standing you were actually looking more-or-less in the direction of the light?

MR BALOYI: As I am looking at you now.

MR LOWIES: Right. Now Sir, if that is the situation, you were actually looking into the light of the Apollo.

MR BALOYI: The light comes from that direction but the light is cast all over.

MR LOWIES: And you know that if you are looking into the light you have a problem with specifying things in front of the light, like for instance the Koyoco, not so?

MR BALOYI: You cannot stare at the pole directly, that is impossible.

MR LOWIES: And the Koyoco was higher than the level at which you were standing, correct? What do you say?

MR BALOYI: Please repeat.

CHAIRPERSON: It was higher than the level at which he was.

MR LOWIES: The people inside the Koyoco, not so?

MR BALOYI: The Koyoco has windows on the sides.

MR LOWIES: And you had to look up towards those windows from where you were standing, not so?

MR BALOYI: It is not very high, no. I did not check just how tall it was, I do not know.

MR LOWIES: I put it to you that you had to look up and as a result you would have been blinded by the light from the Apollo, making it impossible for you to see people inside so that you can identify them as being black or white.

MR BALOYI: I know white people. I saw them.

MR LOWIES: Did you only see their faces to make sure that they're white or could you see anything else from there?

MR BALOYI: Just as I see your face.

MR LOWIES: Only the faces?

MR BALOYI: I did not see the body, I just saw the faces.

MR LOWIES: Could you make out whether they had beards or moustaches, or were they clean-shaven? Could you make out?

MR BALOYI: I had no time to check whether they were clean-shaven or they had beards, I just saw a white face.

MR LOWIES: Could you see whether they had long hair or short hair?

CHAIRPERSON: He didn't have time to look whether they were clean-shaven or whether they had beards, all he saw were the white faces. I mean, can you take the matter further than that?

MR LOWIES: Chair, I heard what you say. I have a bit of a problem in that unfortunately it's my instructions to test his powers of observation and that would be relevant.

CHAIRPERSON: But if he was not able to tell us whether he was clean-shaven or whether they had beards, do you expect him to tell us?

MR LOWIES: I get the point, I'll withdraw the question.

Now Sir, when you looked at Mr Zulu, my client, who you say was there and which is denied, is it not so that he was actually standing in front of the Apollo light, far away but between you and the Apollo light?

MR BALOYI: I will repeat what I said yesterday. When they left Buwa's house he stood on the lawn and called out to Dodudu Morena and Lucky.

MR LOWIES: It doesn't answer the question. Was he between you and the Apollo light? - in the same line.

MR BALOYI: That Apollo light cast a light all over the area because it is high up.

MR LAX: Mr Baloyi, please just listen to the question. Was he - this is Mtwana, was he between where you were and where the Apollo light is? Just a simple yes or no is all we need. We're not testing the light, we just want to know where he was positioned. That's all you're being asked.

MR BALOYI: The Apollo light is a distance away. What I'm saying is that there was sufficient light on our street, Bafokeng Street and he was standing about there.

MR LOWIES: ...(indistinct)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

MR LOWIES: Sorry. Is it not so that the light was actually shining from the top, behind him towards you, as I have demonstrated to you?

CHAIRPERSON: On the evidence of this witness or on your instructions?

MR LOWIES: On his evidence.

MR BALOYI: This puzzles me. What I am saying is, just as those lights above there are not shining directly on you, they are just casting light. All I'm saying is that there was light and that is where I saw him.

CHAIRPERSON: Assuming that pole next to this camera is the Apollo light, do you understand that? Let's assume that this is the Apollo light, do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Where would Mtwana have been standing in regard to the light? We know that it may have been a distance from your house, and where were you standing?

MR BALOYI: ...(no English translation)

CHAIRPERSON: Well he would have been between the pole and yourself, is that what you're saying?

MR BALOYI: The pole light is as far off as Botswana, it was the light that was cast in our direction.

MR LOWIES: What made you sure that it was Zulu and nobody else? What were the distinguishing features that you saw? Because you are making a mistake on his version and I'd like you to tell us what those features were.

MR BALOYI: I will put it this way. What I said yesterday - I'm not sure whether you're going to understand it or not, but I said yesterday when he emerged from there he called out to my son, he called out: "Morena" and he called out "Lucky".

What I know very well is that I am not seeing him for the first time today, nor did I first meet him two days ago. I knew him from a long while ago, he was a resident at Serela and he used to perform with our children. Maybe you understand that.

MR LOWIES: I understand that. The question is; what distinguishing features made you so sure that you saw him on the day and not somebody else?

CHAIRPERSON: You see I'm not too sure what it is that you are, or whether you want him to tell us what features he has, because what he is saying is that he knows him very well, he's seen him on a number of occasions.

MR LOWIES: I get the point, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: He comes to visit his in-laws, which I gather from him is about four houses from where - is that right, is it four houses down the road, the in-laws?

MR BALOYI: ...(no English interpretation)

MR BALOYI: My house is opposite Buwa's.

CHAIRPERSON: The in-laws which Mr Zulu used to visit, are they four houses from your house?

MR BALOYI: It is the fourth house from mine.

CHAIRPERSON: His son, Mr Baloyi's son, took part in a traditional dancing club. That's what he's saying, so that's why he says he knows him very well.

MR LOWIES: I would like to ask you this, did you see whether he had a beard or not on that day?

MR BALOYI: Please repeat.

MR LOWIES: Did he have a beard that day when you identified him there outside? As he denies that he was not there, he challenges you. - that he was there, sorry. He denies that he was there.

MR BALOYI: He is the one who is denying that. If he denies it, what am I supposed to say. If he denies that he was present he must explain where he was, he is the one who must do the explaining.

MR LOWIES: He can explain, he says he was in KwaZulu Natal and he visited a doctor that day, or over that period. But the point is, Sir, you must - no listen please, the point is ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: I maintain that I saw him. That is what I say.

MR LOWIES: You must please just tell us ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, I don't have to repeat this, Mr Lowies represents amongst others, Mr Zulu, according to his instructions Mr Zulu was not there, do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I do.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, so these questions that are being put to you are intended to test whether indeed the person that you claim to have seen and heard was Mr Zulu. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: ...(no English interpretation)

CHAIRPERSON: Don't answer first. Do you understand what I'm saying? Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: ...(no English interpretation)

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand what I've just explained to you?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, I will explain it to you again. Mr Lowies is representing amongst other, Mr Zulu, Mr Zulu says he was not there, so what Mr Lowies is doing is to test whether the person that you say in your evidence you heard and saw was indeed Mr Zulu, do you understand that? Do you understand what I've just explained to you?

MR BALOYI: I maintain what I said, it was him.

CHAIRPERSON: So at this stage it is not for Mr Zulu to come and explain. If necessary and if he's advised to do so he will come and tell us his own version, but for the time being you are there to answer the questions, do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that's alright. I saw him calling out "Dodudu, Morena" and "Lucky". If it wasn't him then I don't know who it was. Nobody else would have called out to them on that night. He is the one who used to perform with them.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, could I ask for an indulgence, Mr Baloyi looks very tired. Could we take the adjournment at this stage? It's 4 o'clock.

CHAIRPERSON: We don't have time. At the pace at which we are going we are not going to finish. If we still have to listen to 24 witnesses, we're not going to finish.

MR BERGER: It's not going to be 24.

CHAIRPERSON: We can take a short adjournment and come back, but we'll have to continue with this cross-examination.

MR BERGER: He is exhausted, can we take a short adjournment?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, can you still give evidence or are you tired?

MR BALOYI: I can continue, but I don't know how many questions still remain.

CHAIRPERSON: I think we want to have an indication as to how long you are going to continue.

MR LOWIES: I think half an hour, it could be less.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR LOWIES: Half an hour, or it could be less.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, who is going to be the next person?

MS PRETORIUS: I will be the next person, but I won't canvass this again. There is only one ...

MR BOTHA: I think I should be about half an hour.

CHAIRPERSON: Right.

MR LOWIES: I don't believe that I will be more than half an hour, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS TANZER: I should be about 10 minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Mr Baloyi, if you are no longer in a position to continue giving evidence, let me know because what they are telling me is that they are still going to be here with, they still have to ask you questions for some time. So if you are tired at this stage we will adjourn and you will come back tomorrow morning and we will continue.

MR BALOYI: That is alright, we can continue even tomorrow.

CHAIRPERSON: Now when you say ...(indistinct), what do you mean? Do you mean you can continue now until half past four or do you want to take the adjournment now?

MR BALOYI: Yes, we can continue until half past four.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chairman.

Now please, Sir, just to make sure I want to know, could you see whether he had a beard or not?

MR BALOYI: I am maintaining what I said, he called out to my son. I was watching.

MR LOWIES: Must I then take it you can't say whether he had a beard that night or not?

MR BALOYI: I cannot comment. If you know a person well you would not concentrate on whether they have a beard or not that day.

MR LOWIES: Is it correct you can't even recall what clothes he had on, whether it was dark or light, not even that?

MR BALOYI: No, I do not recall his clothing.

MR LOWIES: Was there ever trouble between you and him in the past?

MR BALOYI: We were on very good terms. We had participated in the burial of two persons from his in-laws. I contributed R4 400. Those people, I contributed to their burials. I did not hate them. Those in-laws still reside there on my same street. I do not hate anyone.

MR LOWIES: But don't you dislike him because he is a member of the IFP, according to you? - of Inkatha.

MR BALOYI: I would not hate a person on those ground, I do not care about all that, I just like people who are honest.

MR LOWIES: Are you saying that he is dishonest?

ADV SIGODI: I don't think that was interpreted correctly. He said ...(no English interpretation).

MR BALOYI: Yes, that's what I said, people who live well.

ADV SIGODI: Human beings maybe more appropriate.

MR LOWIES: I'll retract the question, I understand there was a problem.

Now Sir, is it not so that Dodudu was doing these dances with lots of other people, who could have called his name, not just Mtwana?

MR BALOYI: It is true, but Mtwana was their teacher. He is the one person who gave them instructions and everything that pertains to that dancing.

MR LOWIES: How far was he approximately away from you when you saw him? I think it was the distance pointed out yesterday, Chair. - 15 metres, okay.

After he called out the names of Dodudu and Morena, what happened to him, what did he do?

MR BALOYI: These people were on their way to the hostel and when they broke my gate they said: "Kill the dogs".

MR LOWIES: No, I'm talking about Mtwana, only him.

MR BALOYI: He did not come to my house, he did not enter my premises and I did not see him attacking.

MR LOWIES: Now just describe the scene. I mean at one moment he is calling these names, what happened to him, did he just vanish or didn't you look further or what was the situation? Did he get into a Casspir? That is what I want to know.

MR BALOYI: There was no Casspir, they were walking on foot.

MR LOWIES: Okay, what happened to him, or didn't you notice anymore, did you go somewhere else? That's what I want to know.

MR BALOYI: I am not the only person who heard these names being called.

CHAIRPERSON: What he is asking you is, after he had called the names Morena and Dodudu, what did he do, could you see what he did thereafter or didn't you notice?

MR BALOYI: After that they were on their way to the hostel and as they broke my gate, it was at that time that they shouted: "Kill the dogs" and then the people entered my premises, broke my door and did whatever they had to do. They didn't much time in my house.

CHAIRPERSON: And did Mr Zulu walk away?

MR BALOYI: I do not know.

MR LOWIES: Now how long did you look at him, was it just briefly or did you stand there and stare at him for a while?

MR BALOYI: There was no time really, it was fighting.

MR LOWIES: Now inside the house, the door where you were, that you used to push the person who assaulted you, how does it open, does it open from the bedroom to the lounge or does it open from the lounge to the bedroom, as I have indicated to you?

MR BALOYI: Which door, my door?

MR LOWIES: The door that you, on your version, used to push the attacker away who was trying to hack you how does it open?

MR BALOYI: It opens into the bedroom.

MR LOWIES: So do I understand correctly, the attacker was standing there in the doorway and you pushed him with the door that was opening, that was actually closing from the bedroom towards the lounge, the sitting-room?

MR BALOYI: Yesterday I said I had held the door with my right hand and when I closed it from inside I pushed it this way and opened it this way. I knocked him down with the door and he fell onto the sofa.

MR LOWIES: How could you knock him down if he didn't go actually into the room, because the door does not open the other way?

MR BALOYI: I would like us to go to my home now.

CHAIRPERSON: But doesn't the witness say that the door was half open? It was not closed, it was half open. He was behind the door which opens inside to the bedroom, so when this man tried to enter the bedroom he closed the door pushing him outside.

MR LOWIES: I hear what you say, Chairman. May I just ask a question regarding that?

But did he actually enter into the bedroom or was he just standing here right by the door, which is how I understood your evidence.

MR BALOYI: He was trying to get into the bedroom because he wanted to hack me you see. He had this axe and he wanted to axe me, to hack me with the axe and on a third attempt he knocked or hacked the door. I can take you to my home now so that you can see the door.

MR LOWIES: Now how did it happen that the suitcase actually flew open?

MR BALOYI: You see he fell onto the suitcase.

MR LOWIES: But the suitcase was on top of the table.

MR BALOYI: The suitcase was on the floor and when he fell you see, he fell onto the sofa during which time the suitcase flicked open and glasses got broken and the items that had come from Victor were there, Shoes belonging to Victor's, or Mxena's wife were there as well.

MR LOWIES: But I understood your evidence to be that he left the suitcase on the table.

MR BALOYI: On the table? No, there is nothing as such. He put it on the floor and it was open.

MR LOWIES: And what made him just go away after that? I mean he tried to open the door and then he just left without trying to open the door further - sorry, he hacked at the door and then he just left without trying to open the door further, is that your evidence?

MR BALOYI: He left, because you see I said he attempted three times and on the third occasion he hacked the door and somebody was calling out outside to say time has run out. He took the clothing items belonging to the children. Items which were lying on the sofa he took along.

MR LOWIES: And the other attackers didn't assist him at all, the other two chaps that came into the house with him?

MR BALOYI: They took things and they left, they did not help him. He too wanted to take whatever he thought appropriate and he failed, because he even left the ones that he had brought along.

MR LOWIES: I want to put to you, Sir, that this scenario whereby he was trying into the room and you knocking him over with the door, is not true, it did not happen.

MR BALOYI: I am saying if you have the truth or if you want the truth I can take you to the place so that you can witness this for yourself.

MR LOWIES: And you did not see as much as you are pretending to have seen, you are trying to put a greater role onto yourself than that you played on the specific day of the incident.

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Lowies, I'm a bit puzzled. He is not attributing any role to himself, he's talking about what he observed. There's a very big difference between the two.

MR LOWIES: I put it to you that this did not happen and therefore you are attributing more to yourself than what happened.

MR BALOYI: You are the one asking me. If you ask me, do you want me to keep quiet? Because I have to tell you about the things I saw happening and tell you about what I did.

MR LOWIES: But why did you get on to - how did you get onto the roof of the garage?

MR BALOYI: Are you through with this one now?

CHAIRPERSON: The witness has told us that he got onto the roof, and I think somewhere along the line he mentioned a ...(indistinct). Now do you want to suggest to this witness that he didn't go on top of the garage?

MR LOWIES: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Well because these issues have been canvassed, why don't you just put to him what your instructions are?

MR LOWIES: ...(indistinct) got instruction, I have to test him on the probabilities, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Whilst you have all the right to test him, but you cannot do that by means of efficient expedition.

MR LOWIES: I hear what you say, I'll rephrase the question.

CHAIRPERSON: There's got to be limits on some cross-examination.

MR LOWIES: I will rephrase it. I want to put it to you that it was not possible for you to get onto the roof of the garage, how did you manage to do so?

MR BALOYI: The place where my house stands belongs to me, I know the place. I often times get on top of the roof. It's a flat roof you see.

MR LOWIES: I was there, that's why I'm asking you. ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: You were there, but you did not see the area where I managed to get onto the roof through ...(intervention)

MR LOWIES: How did you get on top of the ...(intervention)

INTERPRETER: Chairperson, may the answer please be repeated?

MR BALOYI: I am saying at the place where I have built my second kitchen, not the garage in front, that is a new garage, I just built it recently. The first garage had a chicken pen and I climbed onto the roof through the chicken pen behind, or at the back.

MR LOWIES: But as I understand you, you were responsible for the first-aid in the street, why didn't you rather apply first-aid to the people who were injured?

MR BALOYI: I am the one who assisted people with first-aid at Afrox as well as Iscor. I was assisting people with first-aid. I don't know what you want me to say now.

MR LOWIES: I want to put it to you that as a result of the fact that you were in charge of first-aid, your first priority would rather have been to assist people attacked, than getting onto the roof, which you didn't do.

MR BALOYI: You see you are saying that if you get injured now, be it in a car accident, black or white, I will help you now. I help all people, even whites.

CHAIRPERSON: But surely Mr Lowies, I would have thought that as a matter of ...(indistinct) - I see you're putting what you believe ought to be logic, but I would have thought that he would first have to satisfy himself that it was safe to go out first.

MR LOWIES: But at that stage according to him, it was so, the people had already left, he saw it.

CHAIRPERSON: But anyway he has answered your question. Anyway go ahead.

MR LOWIES: Now did you at any stage apply first-aid to anybody, render first-aid to anybody?

MR BALOYI: I started with my child who was cut by glass. I did not want to take the child to hospital. I did not want to take the child to hospital, and thereafter I went to help the Buwa's and I had run out of bandages or bondages at the time, but they did try to stop the flow of blood and we tried to look for an ambulance but we could not.

They wanted me to transport the child to hospital in my kombi and my wife said: "You cannot go under these conditions". As were there outside an ambulance came. That is when we loaded them into the ambulance, but then came the Koyoco that fetched the corpses from the ...(indistinct), a black person as well as a white person.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: Why did you get onto the roof of the garage?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, where are you going to take this, what's the relevance of that question?

MR LOWIES: Chair, it's disputed that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You've just been asking him whether he rendered any first-aid, he answered that question, do you're wanting to know now why he got into the roof. Do you have any further questions to ask? If you don't have further questions, say so. What's the relevance of asking him whether he got onto the roof?

MR LOWIES: Chair, I have to explore this because I want to put to the witness that he did not get onto the roof and he did so because of a specific reason.

What is the reason, why did you get onto the roof?

MR BALOYI: I was trying to look for the police that you are talking about and trying to look where these people who were killing us have gone to.

MR LOWIES: But you could see that from the street, not so? You could see that from outside your house, or not?

MR BALOYI: I am the one who was doing all that, me. I was not supposed to be told by whoever, where to stand or to stand in the street.

MR LOWIES: Sir, that is the point. There was no reason for you to get onto the roof, you could see, on your version that you gave to my colleague, Mr Strydom, perfectly from where you were standing. Is that true or not?

MR BALOYI: I was able to see yes, but I decided to get on top of the roof to see. I made that decision, not somebody else made that decision for me.

MR LOWIES: But that is exactly the point. If you could see from the streets, why go through all the trouble to go onto the roof?

CHAIRPERSON: He has answered you. He decided on his own that he must go on top of the roof.

MR LOWIES: I have no further questions, Chair, I can't take it further.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LOWIES

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, in view of the lateness of the hour, you will have to come back tomorrow morning so that you may be cross-examined further. Do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I understand. Are they not through with questions?

CHAIRPERSON: There are still a number of people who have to ask you questions.

MR BALOYI: It's okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you please made sure that you are here by 9 o'clock?

MR BALOYI: That's okay.

CHAIRPERSON: We will rise until tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

13-05-1999: Day 9

Matter: Boipatong Massacre

ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: It has been brought to our attention that there is intimidation that is going on. Some of the applicants have complained of being abused, some of the victims have been complaining of having been threatened. I want to make it clear that none of this will be tolerated.

Whilst we do understand the background to this hearing in particular, that people lost their lives, their property, but let us not give anyone the right to intimidate anyone or to hurl any abuse at anyone. We have requested the police to take up positions within the hall where they will be able to identify those people who are interrupting the proceedings and those who are intimidating or abusing others.

If any person - and let me make it clear, regardless of who that person is, is found abusing anyone within this hall or intimidating anyone, that person will be removed from the hall immediately and everyone of those persons will be removed from the hall, and apart from being removed from the hall, the necessary steps will be taken against that person. I therefore urge everyone of you to co-operate.

The proceedings have been jogging for a long time and therefore I urge each one of you to please co-operate so that we can proceed with these hearings to finality. I also hope that your respective legal representatives have conveyed to you what I am now repeating to you. Thank you.

Mr Baloyi, may I remind you that you are still under oath.

MACHIHLILE WILSON BALOYI: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Pretorius.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PRETORIUS: Mr Baloyi, you've been living in Boipatong for forty five years. From your testimony it sounds as if you are one of the community leaders, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MS PRETORIUS: And you're also a leader in your church.

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MS PRETORIUS: To which political party do you belong, Mr Baloyi, if any? I'll repeat the question. To which political party do you belong, if any?

MR BALOYI: I was a leader of Shangaans in the Vaal area at the time when the Gazankulu homelands was in existence, from this area, including Sebokeng.

MS PRETORIUS: What I'm referring to is say from 1990.

MR BALOYI: I was not politically affiliated to any political organisation.

MS PRETORIUS: Are you aware of it that the IFP was chased out of Boipatong? People belonging to the IFP or who were supporters of the IFP had trouble living in Boipatong.

MR BALOYI: It did appear as if there was conflict, but I cannot speak on their behalf.

MS PRETORIUS: But as a community leader at least you knew what was going on in Boipatong, is that true?

MR BALOYI: It was clear that there were conflicts. There was conflict between the ANC and the IFP.

MS PRETORIUS: And this conflict resulted that the IFP members and supporters could not live safely in Boipatong, is that true?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I think so, but it did not start there. That was did not start there.

MS PRETORIUS: What do you mean by that?

MR BALOYI: I mean that there was this conflict because they felt that the ANC should not be dominant in the area, they wanted to be the dominant party.

MS PRETORIUS: But the question is, that as a result of this conflict the IFP members and supporters could not live safely in Boipatong, is that so? It's easy, you must just tell us yes or no.

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MS PRETORIUS: From 1990 until the night of the attack, were any of the IFP members that you are aware of, necklaced in Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not hear of anybody being necklaced. The only person that I know of was one who was burnt ...(intervention)

MS PRETORIUS: That's what I mean, I'm sorry. You did hear of a person being burnt?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did hear of that.

MS PRETORIUS: And that person was an IFP member or a supporter.

MR BALOYI: I am not certain whether he was a member or supporter, but yes, he was in the IFP fold.

MS PRETORIUS: Do you know of any houses that were burnt down in Boipatong, that belonged to IFP members or IFP supporters?

MR BALOYI: The one that I'm well aware of is the one belonging to Mtwana Zulu, but there were other houses that were burnt, the house belonging to people who were just supporters of the IFP, but not full members.

MS PRETORIUS: So their houses were burnt. Do you know how many?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not keep count, unless if I were to check from the book.

MS PRETORIUS: So it was quite a lot?

MR BALOYI: Quite a few but not too many.

MS PRETORIUS: The trenches that were dug in the street, which you helped to dig, was that then - the barricades that were erected, was that also to keep out IFP members from Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: Chairperson, I'm not sure if the evidence was that Mr Baloyi actually dug trenches.

CHAIRPERSON: I thought the question was the trenches that were dug.

MS PRETORIUS: I did say which he helped to dig. I thought he said so yesterday. I'll retract it and I'll rephrase.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, you did testify that, as far as I recall, yes.

MS PRETORIUS: Yes, he did. These trenches were also dug to keep out not only the police, but also the IFP members, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: IFP people did not use Koyocos, they walked on foot. Those trenches were dug to prevent police vehicles from moving about in the area.

MS PRETORIUS: And the comrades, were they appointed to keep out IFP members from the area?

MR BALOYI: No, they were not instructed to do so. Even now they are able to walk there freely, nothing happens to them.

MS PRETORIUS: I know now they are able to walk there freely, I know because we've been there, I've seen IFP members in Boipatong, but I'm speaking about the year or the two years prior to that attack. Because there has been evidence to this Committee by the attackers, that it was not safe to go to Boipatong for them at all. They could not go and buy food there, their children couldn't go to school there. Would you agree or what would you say about that?

MR BALOYI: The children were able to go to school. It was them who were fighting the people of Boipatong, and that is why they were afraid of entering the township.

MS PRETORIUS: So the comrades saw to it that the IFP members did not come into the township, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: We used to live amongst them, I mean IFP members in the township.

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Baloyi, I don't think you're answering the question, the question is, that after 1990, 1991 up to 1992 until the attack when the houses were burnt and people were, the one person that you know of was burnt, it was not safe for IFP members to come to Boipatong and the comrades were there to keep them out. Do you agree or disagree with that statement?

MR BALOYI: I do not agree with that.

MS PRETORIUS: So they could come freely to Boipatong, IFP members and supporters?

MR BALOYI: Those people who were afraid of coming to the township were those who were involved in the fighting with the residents of Boipatong. Nobody prevented or stopped them from coming into the township.

MS PRETORIUS: Why was Mtwana Zulu's house burnt?

MR BALOYI: He had a fight with somebody else. Nobody would have just gone out to burn his house for nothing. Mtwana was a respectable person, he did not trouble anyone.

MS PRETORIUS: But he was a leader of the IFP.

MR BALOYI: Yes, he was, but he did not trouble anyone.

MS PRETORIUS: And that could be the reason for burning his house?

MR BALOYI: He is the one who can explain that. Maybe he had a fight with someone on Majola Street.

MS PRETORIUS: Are you aware of it that from 1990 until 1992, that the South African Police went to Kwamadala Hostel several times to search Kwamadala Hostel?

MR BALOYI: Which hostel?

MS PRETORIUS: Kwamadala Hostel.

MR BALOYI: I do not reside at Kwamadala, I cannot know about what happens there.

MS PRETORIUS: Well I'm putting it to you that that is what happened. Apart from you, you said yesterday you don't hate anybody, but was there a feeling of hatred between the ANC members and the IFP members in Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: The ANC is a big organisation, it is not a two people affair. So they hated the organisation as such.

MS PRETORIUS: Who hated the organisation?

MR BALOYI: I am just saying that the ANC is a big organisation. If two or three people within the organisation hates some other persons, you cannot claim that the entire organisation hates the IFP. There was no trouble between us.

MS PRETORIUS: In 1992, before the attack?

MR BALOYI: The problem was they tried to kill some people in the township, those people that they'd been involved in some conflict with.

MS PRETORIUS: So there was trouble in 1992 between the ANC and the IFP in the township, you would agree to that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, we were attacked and killed as ANC members.

MS PRETORIUS: That is before the attack I'm talking of, Mr Baloyi. There was trouble in the township between IFP and ANC members.

MR BALOYI: There may have been problems that they may have to negotiate and solve. I cannot comment on that.

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Baloyi, the people from Kwamadala Hostel, were they mostly IFP members, do you know?

MR BALOYI: You would not be in a position to know about people who stayed in the hostel because it was not near the township. The people who resided at Kwamadala were mixed, some were ANC, some were IFP because they were all employees of Iscor.

MS PRETORIUS: When Father Patrick phoned you that night, that afternoon, why did he phone you, what did he tell you? He said there's an imminent attack, but what did he want you to do, why did he phone you specifically?

MR BALOYI: He should have called me, he liked me. He a priest, he was involved in God's work and he was interested in the safety of all people. He called me so that I could also try and take safety precautions.

MS PRETORIUS: What did he tell you to do?

MR BALOYI: He said I should be on the alert because there was an attack that was to be launched, nothing else.

MS PRETORIUS: He did not tell you to warn the other people in your street or other members of your church?

MR BALOYI: Because he called in the afternoon I only informed my family, I did not go out.

MS PRETORIUS: Why not, Mr Baloyi? It sounds so improbable that if you get a warning that you're going to be attacked, that you'll keep it to yourself, only warn your family to be on the alert and leave all your neighbours.

MR BALOYI: I may have told a few people, but if I told five people, it doesn't account for the rest of the neighbourhood. Yes, there were a few people that I told.

MS PRETORIUS: Who did you tell, Mr Baloyi?

MR BALOYI: Do you want their names?

MS PRETORIUS: Yes, please.

MR BALOYI: I told about five people.

MS PRETORIUS: But I would like the five people's names.

MR BALOYI: I cannot give you their names, because I did not enquire from them when I told them this information, they are just members of the congregation. Maybe if Father Patrick testifies you can pose questions to him.

MS PRETORIUS: But how did you tell these five people, did you go and see them, did you call them, what did you do? How did you tell them?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did call them on the phone, but I was not specifically telling them about the attack, I just warned them about the possibility.

MS PRETORIUS: But if you phoned them, surely you can remember at least one name.

MR BALOYI: I have children. Do you want my children's names?

MS PRETORIUS: I want to know the people, the other people that were not of your family, the members of the congregation you've just told this Committee that you phoned, I would like one of their names. Preferably all of them, but apparently you can't remember them. Can you give us just one name?

MR BALOYI: It was not just one person that I called, I called Shirley, Lizzie and Elizabeth, Betty. I don't know why you want this information. I just called those people. These people are not the attackers.

MS PRETORIUS: Can you give me their surnames, Mr Baloyi?

CHAIRPERSON: Would you please give me the names again, you said it's Shirley ...?

MR BALOYI: I called Shirley, Lizzie Tsotetsi, Gertrude Mbele, Joseph Mbele.

MS PRETORIUS: What is Shirley's surname, Mr Baloyi?

MR BALOYI: Tsotetsi.

MS PRETORIUS: And Betty and Lizzie, are they also Tsotetsi?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MS PRETORIUS: Do the Tsotetsis all live in the same house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they did.

MS PRETORIUS: And Gertrude and Joseph Mbele as well, they live in another house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they lived in one house.

MS PRETORIUS: Why did you tell me a minute ago you can't remember their names, because now you remember their names and their surnames, Mr Baloyi.

MR BALOYI: It was not important, it is not important because if you telephone a person you do not really concentrate on their name.

I am here to testify about what I witnessed, not anything else. I thought you're going to question me on what I witnessed, not about the telephone calls that I made, no.

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Baloyi, just answer the questions. I'm sure your lawyer and advocate and the Chairperson will stop me if they feel I'm asking you questions that I should not ask you. So just answer the questions.

Was this the first time you had been warned about an imminent attack?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

MS PRETORIUS: Do you have a motorcar?

MR BALOYI: I do have motor vehicles, not just one.

MS PRETORIUS: Why didn't you leave Boipatong that night if you ...

MR BALOYI: I do as I please, I cannot be forced to do something.

MS PRETORIUS: Is it not so that you did not regard this warning as serious? And that is the reason why you did not warn your neighbours and other people of the congregation and why you did not send your family away.

MR BALOYI: Do you want me to respond?

MS PRETORIUS: Yes, please.

MR BALOYI: I do not know where I would take my children because I did not know exactly where the attackers were going to launch the attack. If I had taken them somewhere it could have been that that is where they are going to be attacked. Even if I was to inform other people from the streets, it would also have been, it would not have worked because I was not sure where these attackers would come from.

MS PRETORIUS: Is that the reason you did not warn the people in your street?

MR BALOYI: I did inform some people, that was enough. They were also going to inform others.

MS PRETORIUS: The question is, is that the reason that you did not think it was going to be in Boipatong, that you did not warn the people in your street?

MR BERGER: But he did inform some people and warn some people in his street. He said that twice.

MR BALOYI: He did not say it was in his street, Mr Chairperson. I'm sorry if I'm wrong.

Is that the reason you did not warn the people in your street, Mr Baloyi? - because you did not take it seriously.

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MS PRETORIUS: Is it correct that in Boipatong it was winter on the 17th of June 1992?

MR BALOYI: I don't know. Everybody knows that it is winter around that time.

MS PRETORIUS: Was it cold that night?

MR BALOYI: It was a little cold, but I did not feel it. I was on duty, I was keeping watch, on the alert.

MS PRETORIUS: There were lots of fires burning in Boipatong that night.

MR BALOYI: I did not go around checking fires at Boipatong. I would just concentrate on the fire that was lit in my street only.

MS PRETORIUS: No, Mr Baloyi, I think you don't understand. I'm not trying to catch you out, I'm just asking, I would just like some facts. Normally in winter time there are lots of fires in Boipatong - don't talk about that night specifically, normally in winter time.

MR BALOYI: Do you mean inside or out in the streets?

MS PRETORIUS: What I want to get at, there is a lot of smoke in winter over Boipatong, like Vanderbijlpark likewise.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what the witness wants you to do is to clarify the question for him, whether the fires that you're talking about, were they fires in the streets or inside the house.

MS PRETORIUS: I mean generally. The fires inside and outside cause a lot of smoke in Boipatong on a winter evening.

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MS PRETORIUS: And that affects the sight of people in Boipatong, that you don't see as far and as well as you would on a clear summer night when there is no smoke.

MR BALOYI: Yes, it does happen from around 7/8, but around 9/10 that smoke will be clear. there will be no smoke.

MS PRETORIUS: Because Mr Buwa testified ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: He is here, he's listening to you as you speak. I cannot comment on Mr Buwa's statements, no.

MS PRETORIUS: Okay, I'll retract that question. What I want to know from you, did all your neighbours know Mtwana Zulu?

MR BALOYI: There's not a single person who does not know Mtwana. He was a good person and he used to perform with the children.

MS PRETORIUS: Did Mr Buwa know him, do you know?

MR BALOYI: Yes, he knew him very well, he was our neighbour.

MS PRETORIUS: Your other neighbour by the name of Victor, did he know Mtwana Zulu?

MR BALOYI: What I'm saying is, Bafokeng Street, the people of Bafokeng Street, even the people of Boipatong in general know Mtwana.

MS PRETORIUS: So if they had seen him there they would have said so?

MR BALOYI: I would not know about that, I can only comment on what I saw.

MS PRETORIUS: Did you hear any shots being fired at the Buwa household?

MR BALOYI: There was the breaking of windows in Buwa's home. I was watching, I did not hear any gunshots. I only heard gunshots at Nxwane's home.

MS PRETORIUS: Can you give a reason if there had been shots at Buwa's house, why you wouldn't hear it? You were watching his house, what is the reason why you would not hear gunshots if it was shot at his house?

CHAIRPERSON: But his evidence is that he was watching Buwa's house and all there was was just the sound of breaking windows. He didn't hear any gunshots sounds.

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Chairperson, I would just like then to put the following statement to him.

Mr Buwa says that he did, there were shots fired at his house, have you any comment on that?

MR BALOYI: That is his testimony. What I'm saying is that I did not hear any gunshots.

MS PRETORIUS: The people that were walking along Bafokeng Street, were they all carrying loot, goods that they had taken from the houses of the people of Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: There was a large crowd of people. I cannot comment whether each and every one of them carried something, but there were many TVs that I saw. Many of them were carrying items. I cannot really say if all of them did carry something.

MS PRETORIUS: You also saw them carrying it after they had left Bafokeng Street, going over the veld, were they still carrying these goods?

MR BALOYI: They would not have dumped these items in the township, they did carry them towards the veld.

MS PRETORIUS: And you did see that?

MR BALOYI: If somebody goes past you and you have their back towards you, how would you know what happens?

MS PRETORIUS: After they had left were there any TVs standing in the veld there?

MR BALOYI: I did not go to that veld, I was busy with other issues. The situation was very bad that day, you would not have been able to just go out. Even policemen were afraid to walk around.

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Baloyi, the first time you realised that the people in the black clothes walking along the street with the balaclavas, the first time you thought they were white people was when the white man in the Casspir loaded the body into the Casspir, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I said so. That is what I said yesterday.

MS PRETORIUS: So up to that moment you did not think there were white people taking part in the attack?

MR BALOYI: I did see the people in the Koyoco and I realised that they were white.

MS PRETORIUS: No, I mean the people walking in the street with the black clothes, that you said had balaclavas on. The people in the Koyoco I'm not talking about, I'm talking about the people on foot. The first time you thought they might have been white was when the white man wearing the balaclava came to load the body in the Casspir, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: That is what I said. Even yesterday I still said the same thing.

MS PRETORIUS: So the person saying: "maak gou" didn't really make you think that they were white, you thought it may be a black man that was saying this. Because it's an expression used by English people, Afrikaans people, Zulu-speaking people, isn't that so?

MR BALOYI: No, I don't think so. If an Afrikaner person says: "maak gou", you can understand or you can hear that this is an Afrikaner speaking.

MS PRETORIUS: But you just told us that you made the deduction that there were white people involved in the attack when you saw the policeman wearing the balaclava, after the attack.

MR BALOYI: I said when I heard that voice I recognised that it must have been an Afrikaner and when I saw the person later on who was dressed the same way as those people who had been walking alongside the street, it certainly confirmed that indeed those persons who had been walking along the street on the sidelines were white.

MS PRETORIUS: That was not your evidence now, but I'll leave it at that. Do you speak Afrikaans?

MR BALOYI: No, I do not know Afrikaans. I can understand when you talk but I cannot claim that I know Afrikaans.

MS PRETORIUS: Do you speak English?

MR BALOYI: I am not English but I can understand.

MS PRETORIUS: Do you have any description of the man that attacked you in your house? The lights were switched on, you were trying to keep him out of the room, can you give the Committee any description of that man?

MR BALOYI: I'm not in a position to describe who they were or what they looked like. They were in their private clothing.

MS PRETORIUS: What kind of clothes did they wear?

MR BALOYI: I do not know.

MS PRETORIUS: Do you normally wear glasses?

MR BALOYI: No, I do wear glasses sometimes, if maybe I'm reading something, but I don't normally wear them.

MS PRETORIUS: Because it's still strange to me that you cannot - can you tell us what clothing this person who attacked you with the axe had on, is it possible for you to tell us that?

MR BALOYI: What I'm saying is, if you are involved, if you are being attacked you have no time to check what your attacker is wearing. During fighting you cannot concentrate on a person's clothing.

MS PRETORIUS: Do you still maintain that you don't know the colour of the Koyoco that was parked in front of your house?

MR BALOYI: I do not want to commit to that. As I said yesterday, Afrikaners are very clever, they respray these vehicles every day. They would respray them every two days.

MS PRETORIUS: But that is not the question, the question is Mr Baloyi, what the colour was when you saw it, not what it was two days later or three days, that night when you saw it what was the colour of the Koyoco?

MR BALOYI: I cannot comment on it. I do not want to commit myself, I just know that it was a Koyoco.

MS PRETORIUS: Why did you not go and hide when the attack took place?

MR BALOYI: Hide myself, what for?

MS PRETORIUS: From the attackers, Mr Baloyi.

MR BALOYI: They had attacked me. I would say I could not have hid myself before the attack because they had not yet come to attack me. I would have expected to hide myself at the time of the attack itself.

MS PRETORIUS: Well that's what I also would like to know, why did you not hide yourself because you hid your family, why did you yourself not hide? You saw them at two of your neighbours and you did not hide, why not?

MR BALOYI: I am the man of the household, I am the one who was supposed to take care of everything that would be a threat to the safety of my family because I had to protect my family.

MS PRETORIUS: Is it not true that you did go and hide?

MR BALOYI: I did not.

MS PRETORIUS: Because I want to put it to you that my instructions are there were no police taking part in that attack on that night and that your deduction after the attack is wrong.

MR BALOYI: That's what you are saying.

MS PRETORIUS: My instructions are also that Mtwana Zulu was definitely not part of the attack and that you made a mistake when you thought it was him calling the names, because there were many people in that street that knew the children's names.

MR BALOYI: You are saying that.

MS PRETORIUS: I have no further questions, thank you, Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PRETORIUS

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Yes, Mr da Silva?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, I want to ask you a number of questions to clarify certain aspects. During the attack or when you saw these vehicles, I understand your evidence to be that you saw five vehicles in the immediate vicinity of your home, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: No, he didn't say that in the immediate vicinity. I think there was one police vehicle in front of his house. Two went down Umzimvubu and then all the way towards the robots and joined the other two which were at Metal Box.

MR DA SILVA: I accept that, Mr Chairman, I put the question incorrectly.

Let me ask you this, the vehicle that you saw in front of your house, I understand your evidence to be that it was a police vehicle, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: It was not an ordinary police vehicle, it was a Koyoco, the one that is used by the police.

MR DA SILVA: Would you agree that your evidence is, and that's how I understand your evidence, that is was a police Koyoco?

MR BALOYI: Yes, a police Koyoco.

MR DA SILVA: Then you saw - did you see a police Koyoco and did you see a police Nyala approaching this police Koyoco in Amatola Street?

MR BALOYI: No, it went towards Metal Box. That is what I said.

CHAIRPERSON: Which one, you mean the ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: And the other left Amatola and joined the others so that they became three. They got off the vehicle and they fired in the air.

MR DA SILVA: Yes. Just concentrate on the question I'm asking you, Mr Baloyi.

CHAIRPERSON: What was your question?

MR DA SILVA: My question was; the vehicles that he saw in Amatola Street, was that a police Koyoco and was it joined by a police Nyala? You've corrected me, Mr Baloyi, the vehicles that you saw near Metal Box, was that a police Koyoco and was that a police Nyala?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that is correct.

MR DA SILVA: Then you saw two further vehicles travelling along Umzimvubu Street, which followed the crowd to the footbridge, were those two police Koyocos, is that what you saw?

MR BALOYI: Yes, two Koyocos.

MR DA SILVA: Right. Now apart from the vehicles that you saw in Frikkie Meyer Boulevard, I'm not talking about those vehicles, you only saw police vehicles and you saw no military vehicles in Boipatong township, in the township itself. Is that your evidence?

MR BALOYI: No, the military vehicles were parked far away, there were only two of them. They were near the gate. I did not see them inside Boipatong.

MR DA SILVA: I understood your evidence yesterday to be that you saw these military vehicles in Frikkie Meyer Boulevard. You're talking about a gate now, what do you mean by the "gate"?

MR BALOYI: I don't understand now.

MR DA SILVA: Let me try and simplify the question. I understood your evidence to be that the vehicles that you saw in Boipatong were police vehicles, they were not military vehicles, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR DA SILVA: Because my instructions are that there were no military vehicles during the attack in Boipatong, so you must agree with that?

MR BALOYI: Inside the township really I cannot say, I only know about my position in Bafokeng Street.

MR DA SILVA: Yes. I'm talking about what you saw. You saw no military vehicles at any stage during the attack, in Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not.

MR DA SILVA: Did you come with the other witnesses this morning in a bus? I understand - or let me put it more correctly, did you come this morning to this hearing with other people in a bus to this hall, did you travel in a bus?

MR BALOYI: Yes, we came by bus.

MR DA SILVA: And I presume you got out of the bus and walked down the path and walked through this door into the hall, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR DA SILVA: Right. Standing outside in the street were two police vehicles, did you see them?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I saw them.

MR DA SILVA: What type of vehicles are those?

MR BALOYI: That is an Nyala.

MR DA SILVA: So that's a police Nyala?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that's what I hear them say. I don't know.

MR DA SILVA: Yes. Now you've testified for two days. When you went home in the evening, on Tuesday evening and Wednesday evening, did you tell your son, the policeman, either Silo or Pitso, did you tell him: "These people are asking me a lot of questions about the vehicles, please explain to me how these vehicles, what these vehicles are"? Did you have a conversation along those lines with either of your sons?

MR BALOYI: I did not. I just know that these are police vehicles. I did not ask them the difference between these vehicles because they do not concern me, they are police vehicles. I just know it is a Koyoco and this is Nyala. I would have no reason to ask to what model or make or type this is.

MR DA SILVA: Very well. You explained to the Committee that a Koyoco is bigger than a Casspir, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: A Casspir is a Koyoco. The one that is outside here is the smaller one. I said Koyocos are big and the smallest is Nyala.

MR DA SILVA: Your evidence-in-chief was that:

"A Casspir is smaller than a Koyoco"

Are you changing your evidence now?

MR BALOYI: Look I don't know the names. They call them Casspirs, they call them Nyala. I did say that. The people who know these things are the police. I suggested to you that you should go and ask my son, he is a police person, a policeman.

MS BERGER: Chairperson, with respect, I must object to this cross-examination. My learned friend has cross-examined this witness to the point where his client is not implicated at all. There's no point in this further cross-examination I would submit.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, the version put by my client differs substantially from the version given by this witness. I'm entitled to cross-examine him, with respect.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's hear your version.

MR DA SILVA: I will put my version at the appropriate stage, Mr Chairman. I submit with respect that I am entitled to test this witness. The implication of his evidence, Mr Chairman, is that travelling down Nobel Boulevard were three police vehicles, and I've already, or my instructions are that the soldiers never saw these vehicles. So I'm entitled to test him to see exactly what he saw, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And in doing so, please do not cover the ground that we've covered. He's told us repeatedly what the Nyala is and what he understood the Koyoco to be.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, I'll ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: And he has repeatedly said he can't distinguish it, all he knows is that one is smaller and the other one is bigger.

MR DA SILVA: I undertake to be as short as possible. I know time is of the essence, Mr Chairman.

Are you saying now, Mr Baloyi, that a Koyoco and a Casspir are one and the same vehicle?

MR BALOYI: I said to you the police and the soldiers, other ones will know of these names. What I know is a Koyoco. It is big and it has a roof door.

MR DA SILVA: But Mr Baloyi, I just want to get clarity. When you started testifying in your evidence-in-chief, you distinguished between a Koyoco and a Casspir and then you distinguished between a Casspir and an Nyala and I want to know if you know what the difference is between these vehicles.

MR BALOYI: The one that is parked outside is small and a Koyoco is bigger.

MR DA SILVA: Yes, but do you accept if I tell you that a Casspir and a Koyoco, as known in the township, is one and the same type of vehicle?

MR BALOYI: I don't know, I saw two Koyocos. I only saw Nyala when it came to the Metal Box under that tree. That is where they got off and fired shots in the air. I did not see it inside the township, I only saw it there.

MR DA SILVA: The question is, you differentiated between a Koyoco and a Casspir at a stage. Your evidence at a stage was that when you looked at Metal Box, you saw two Koyocos and a Casspir joined the two Koyocos. You changed your evidence under cross-examination. And what I want to establish is, do you accept that a Koyoco and a Casspir is the same type of vehicle?

MR BALOYI: I am very sorry, you see I don't know this word or name "Casspir" because that's where you will trap me, you will me on the name "Casspir". I just know a Koyoco, a big one and a small one similar to the one that's parked outside.

MR DA SILVA: So can I ask you this, do you know what a Hippo is? Mr Baloyi, do you know what a Hippo is?

MR BALOYI: I don't want to tell a lie. I only know a Koyoco, I call it a Koyoco.

MR DA SILVA: Do you always talk about a Koyoco, don't you use the term Hippo?

MR BALOYI: We call it Koyoco, even a small child.

MR DA SILVA: The question is, do you not use the term Hippo?

MR BALOYI: Yes, there are those who use the name Hippo, they know it. I just hear them talking about Hippo. I don't know what kind of a vehicle a Hippo is.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, do I understand your evidence to be then that when you refer to a large police vehicle, you would use the term Koyoco and you would not use the term Hippo?

MR BALOYI: I am saying you are the one that is talking about a Hippo, I am talking about a Koyoco. So you should know the Hippo better, I don't know it. I only know a Koyoco.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, I want to establish what is going on in your mind, I want to establish how you use your terminology and the question is very ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr da Silva, the witness has repeatedly told you that he knows this by the name of Koyoco and that is enough.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, with respect, may I address you, Mr Chairman please?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR DA SILVA: The terminology of Hippo is going to become very relevant in my further cross-examination, and it is important for me to establish whether this witness uses the term Hippo or not.

CHAIRPERSON: He has told you that he uses the name Koyoco.

MR DA SILVA: Very well.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's move onto the next question.

MR DA SILVA: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Do you know a suitcase, a vehicle known as a suitcase?

MR BALOYI: I did say that I saw two of them in Frikkie Meyer Boulevard, not in the township. They were just parked there.

MR DA SILVA: How do you differentiate between a suitcase and a Koyoco?

MR BALOYI: They are different, military vehicles are different. They are vans and they are covered on the side, but you can actually see the heads of the people who are inside, through the roof. Those are the ones that are called suitcases. I don't know what you call them.

MR DA SILVA: So you say the one difference is that a suitcase doesn't have a roof and that you can see the soldiers' heads sticking out of the top of the vehicle, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes, yes, that is correct.

MR DA SILVA: Can you explain to the Committee whether there are any other differences that you know of between a suitcase and a Koyoco, apart from the fact ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: Look, I've never been to the army, I've never been to an army camp so I cannot talk about army vehicles.

MR DA SILVA: So you say that when you were standing at your house - you must correct me if I'm wrong, you're standing on your lawn or in front of your house and you're looking across the veld towards Frikkie Meyer Boulevard and you saw two suitcases. Is that your evidence?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that's what I said.

MR DA SILVA: You say that at a distance of 350 metres, whilst standing in front of your house, you could distinguish two military vehicles in Frikkie Meyer Boulevard?

MR BALOYI: They were not moving, they were stationary. I said so. I don't know what they were doing there. They were just stationary, they did not move. The only ones that were moving were the Koyocos, the ones that were running or moving through Umzimvubu Street.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, a report was handed in yesterday, it's marked Exhibit EE, and it deals with the visibility of certain people at certain different places in Boipatong, in similar situations as when the attack took place. Now I want to ask you, when you were watching the Koyocos moving from the township towards the footbridge, is it your evidence that they were in your sight the whole time, that they were in your sight for the full distance of 350 metres?

MR BALOYI: These vehicles were visible. Look you cannot know now, there's a difference because some structures have been put up in that area, but if you could stand there you could see everything. I will take you to the front of the house, to the back of the house, you could actually see everything. That is how I saw these vehicles at the time.

MR DA SILVA: So is your evidence that after these two vehicles left Umzimvubu Street, you could actually see them and you had them in your sight the whole distance from when they left the township till when they got near the footbridge, is that your evidence?

MR BALOYI: You see that was our responsibility because we had been beaten up and we were loading people who had been injured, so we were watching. We did not go to sleep that evening.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, I'll repeat the question, perhaps you don't understand the question. Was your evidence - let me ask you this, when you first saw these vehicles, can you give an estimate of how far you were from these vehicles?

MR BALOYI: I am not in the position to say. I would request you to accompany me to the place so that you can see the distance. All I know is that I saw these vehicles. I cannot tell a lie about a distance. It is a place that is within view.

MR DA SILVA: I've paced the hall yesterday, from the front here to the back of the hall, it's 25 paces, can you give an indication, was it the length of the hall, two halls, a soccer field?

MR BALOYI: Look I don't even want to estimate, I don't want to commit myself. That would be telling a lie.

MR DA SILVA: You explained to Mrs Pretorius that you sometimes use glasses to read, when were these glasses or spectacles prescribed?

MR BALOYI: I don't use them except occasionally.

MR DA SILVA: Did you go and see an optometrist to obtain these spectacles or how did you obtain the spectacles?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I went to the doctor, but then thereafter I did not have a problem with my eyes.

MR DA SILVA: When did you go to the doctor?

MR BALOYI: I cannot recall. I was still working at the time.

MR DA SILVA: When was this, when did you stop working?

MR BALOYI: It has been five years since.

MR DA SILVA: So at the time of the attack you were still working, Mr Baloyi?

MR BALOYI: No, I don't think so. I would have to have a look. I don't want to tell a lie, but I think I was not working.

MR DA SILVA: Where would you have to have a look to establish when you stopped working?

MR BALOYI: I'm going to look at the date on which I left for pension. I want to talk about something that I am sure of.

MR DA SILVA: You say you were working when you obtained the spectacles, can you give an estimate of how long ago you obtained these spectacles? Was it 10 years ago, 15 years ago?

MR BALOYI: Maybe six years I can say so.

MR DA SILVA: Look the attack took place seven years ago, and I get the impression from your evidence that at the time of the attack you were not working.

MR BALOYI: Yes, I was not working. That's what I am saying. I don't want to commit myself to these dates. I just want you to ask you know, the questions that are important because the other ones are not important.

MR DA SILVA: The Chairman of the Committee will decided which questions are important, Mr Baloyi, but in any event, what is your standard of education?

MR BALOYI: Standard five.

MR DA SILVA: So you can read and write, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: I can write.

MR DA SILVA: And what work did you do?

MR BALOYI: I'm not working anymore.

MR DA SILVA: The question is, what work did you do when you worked?

MR BALOYI: I was a driver and doing first-aid and I was a mechanic at Afrox.

MR DA SILVA: You were a driver. Why did you obtain spectacles, why did you go to the doctor to obtain spectacles?

MR BALOYI: I did not require them for driving. You see there are these machines that have sparkles of lights and sometimes they can affect your eyes so that you cannot see, you can have a problem in seeing, like welding for example.

MR DA SILVA: So are you saying that while you were working at Afrox, the welding machines affected your eyes and that you had to obtain spectacles, is that your evidence?

MR BALOYI: I was not doing welding there. Welding affects you even if you walk past you know. The mere look at the sparkles affects your eyes and you end up having watery eyes, so that you have that problem.

MR DA SILVA: Since the accident - let me put it to you this way, since the attack in 1992 until now, you haven't had an accident which has affected your eyesight, or you haven't had an operation to your eyes, have you?

MR BALOYI: I only went to hospital once since I was born.

MR DA SILVA: Now will you please look at Exhibit M2. Do you have Exhibit M2 in front of you?

MR LAX: Someone better pass him a copy as they had to do last time.

MR BALOYI: I don't want this. Is it a map of the township? I have my own map.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, just listen to me carefully ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: Look, I am not going to look at this thing, I'm not going to look at this. I can see it, but it's not important. Look, I cannot make out what's happening here, but this one that belongs to me is important.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: I can see. You see there's nothing that I cannot see here, but I don't want to look at this. You will end up saying my eyes cannot see. Look, this is not important, I'm talking about important things here.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, just listen to my question please, Mr Baloyi. Is it not so that you don't want to look at that document because you can't read it, because your eyesight is not good enough to read it, isn't that so?

MR BALOYI: No, that is not true. Tell me what you want.

MR DA SILVA: Then why don't you want to look at that document?

MR BALOYI: Look, these things have not been done the correct way, the appropriate way. The whole plan of the township is here, this is the one that I have.

MR DA SILVA: Look at the back of the hall, look at the back of the hall please and you'll look at some gentlemen that are standing next to a table, what do you see on that table?

MR BALOYI: There's this plastic container and glasses.

MR DA SILVA: Yes, is there something written on that plastic container?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I can see three 3's, but then I cannot see on the other side.

MR DA SILVA: Is it written in - what colour is that written?

MR BALOYI: Red.

MR DA SILVA: And can't you see - if you can see the three 3's, the plastic container turns in your direction, you should be able to see the rest of the number. Can you see the rest of the number?

MR BALOYI: Look, I would have to go there and have a look because I cannot see the numbers clearly, they are on the side. I don't want to tell a lie.

MR DA SILVA: Are you saying that from where you're sitting, that from where you're sitting, you cannot see all six figures, is that your evidence?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr da Silva, for the record, it is quite that the witness can see what's on the table and also what's written on that plastic container on top of the table, so far as those numbers happen to be visible to him.

MR DA SILVA: But, Mr Chairman, ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: And I don't think we can take this matter any further. This is not the time to do eye testing here.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, there's one aspect that is important, with respect. The figure on the container consists of six figures, he's identified two and the eye, his visibility is very, very important and his credibility is also very important because his evidence is that from he's sitting he can't see all six figures because the container is round. I don't think he's correct, and I'll submit with respect, I'm entitled to test him in that regard.

CHAIRPERSON: Well if he is not correct you will tell us what is correct.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, I submit to you that from where you are sitting, that all six figures are in fact visible from where you're sitting.

MR BALOYI: I can see them.

MR DA SILVA: And what are they?

MR BALOYI: 3 and 9.

MR DA SILVA: There are six figures, what are the six figures, Mr Baloyi?

MR BALOYI: And 7. I cannot see the other one quite well because it is on the side. I don't want to take the chance.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, I have two short aspects. I note it's five past eleven, I don't know if you wish to take the adjournment now.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) of those aspects.

MR DA SILVA: They should take approximately 10 minutes, at the outset.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Well if you want to continue and finish you can do so.

MR DA SILVA: I'm going to go over to a new aspect, Mr Chairman, so if you find it appropriate to take the adjournment now we can take it now.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Well I suppose you know, we have the interpreters who might want to take a break and the witness too.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, let me remind you, hopefully for the last time, that you are still under oath.

MACHIHLILE WILSON BALOYI: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr da Silva.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DA SILVA: (Cont)

Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Just before you go on, there are a number of documents which are being given to us from time to time during the course of the proceedings and one doesn't know what one does with these documents and where they come from and for what they are intended. I think perhaps as a matter of procedure, if there is a document that is intended to be added in, could we be notified so that we know that there is a document and then it can be marked appropriately, because otherwise it will just get lost in this mass of documentation that we have.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, if I could explain. You will know that I was asking for a long time for a copy of the interview that was referred to in Mr Malan's affidavit ...

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, yes, yes, indeed.

MR BERGER: ... and I asked Mr Mapoma to make copies of that for me. I was going to hand it in and have it made an exhibit number and then unbeknown to me it was handed out before I could do that. So I apologise for that.

CHAIRPERSON: No, it's okay, it's okay, it's been done before.

MR BERGER: But perhaps it should be marked Exhibit FF.

CHAIRPERSON: FF, alright. And then it goes up to 10, 10 pages.

MR BERGER: It's a 10 page document, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright. Let me just make a record here. Very well, the interview by Riaan Malan with Pedro Peens will then be marked Exhibit FF. At this stage there's no mention as to what is the status of this document suffice it to say that it purports to be what it is.

MR BERGER: It's the interview which is referred to by Mr Malan himself in his affidavit. He says that a transcript of the interview was given to the TRC, or to the Amnesty Committee. This is that interview.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, okay. Well perhaps I should make a note of that.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, it is referred to at page 9, paragraph 22.

CHAIRPERSON: Paragraph 22, page ...

MR BERGER: Of Malan's affidavit.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Do you accept that, Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: I do, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, alright.

MR BERGER: The other point is that Mr Baloyi has a concern which he wanted to raise with you, Chairperson. He was trying to do that now.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Baloyi?

MR BALOYI: I am saying that here, as we are sitting here it happened that on Tuesday two people went to my house whilst I was still here. They went to measure, to take measurements. I would like to ask as to whether that is legally permissable, to leave the owner of the house behind and go into his house. If that indeed happened, I would like for these people to come forward and apologise.

CHAIRPERSON: Would counsel investigate these allegations made by Mr Baloyi and then report back to me just before lunch or perhaps at the end of the day today.

MR LOWIES: I can assist you in that regard, Chair, at this moment already if you would like me to. Mr Strydom, myself, Ms Pretorius went out to the place, we stook outside in the road to see what we could observe. End of story, nothing else.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Well as I understand the allegation, it is that you went inside the premises.

MR LOWIES: No, that is denied.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, very well.

MR LOWIES: Sorry, we were five, but the three of us here, my attorney and Mr Tshabangu, Nana.

CHAIRPERSON: You did not enter the premises?

MR BALOYI: I know that people did enter the premises. Excuse me, I have neighbours so that when you went there they were watching.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, what you're telling me is what was reported to you, is that right, you were not there?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I have asked your counsel to investigate that matter and then to report to us probably either the end of, well perhaps tomorrow morning before we start, how is that? I think that will give them enough time.

MR BALOYI: I thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, but I am told now that Adv Lowies, Pretorius and Strydom, together with their instructing attorney and Tshabangu, one of the applicants, went to Boipatong and they did not enter your house, the premises of your house, okay? Very well. Mr da Silva?

MR DA SILVA: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Before I proceed with questioning Mr Baloyi, may I place the following facts in regard to the canister which is at the end of the hall, on record, Mr Chairman.

I stood where Mr Baloyi is seated and I measured the distance from where he is seated till where the canister is, and that is 26 paces. From where Mr Baloyi is seated I could observe the full number which is in the canister. It is a white canister, the number is written in red letters. It could possibly be interpreted as a telephone number and the number is 33-4771, 33-4771. In fairness to the witness, the first downstroke of the 4 is indistinct. I measured the length of the figures, they are six centimetres long. I've also measured several motor vehicles parked in the vehicle park outside and the normal registration number of a motor vehicle is seven centimetres long.

CHAIRPERSON: That's very helpful because I can't see those figures myself.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairperson, I can ...(intervention)

MR BERGER: Just for completeness, there also small glasses on that table next to the white canister, which Mr Baloyi picked out.

MR DA SILVA: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Baloyi, I don't have many more questions for you, so if you'd just be patient, there are a few aspects I want to clarify with you.

CHAIRPERSON: And no-one has measured the size of those glasses. Can you see them from where you are, Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: I can see them, but I'm wearing my glasses.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, very well.

MR BERGER: They look approximately 10cm high.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairperson, if they're the same glasses as in front of me, these ones are 13cm.

CHAIRPERSON: Well you have a better eyesight, Mr da Silva. You're the one who has a better eyesight than probably most of us. Anyway - yes, thank you, Mr da Silva, we've noted that.

MR DA SILVA: You will recall that you explained yesterday in your testimony that you were standing outside your house when you were looking at these people going in the direction of the footbridge and you referred to what was a forest and they you explained that it was called a forest because the grass was so high and then you indicated fairly high grass. Could you explain how high this grass is? If a person had to walk in the grass, do you disappear or is there any portion of a person that sticks out when you walk in the grass?

MR BALOYI: No, I cannot really explain that because at the moment there is no longer any grass there.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr da Silva wants to find out from you is, are you able to give us at least an indication of how tall that grass was?

MR DA SILVA: That is correct, Mr Chairman.

MR BALOYI: From Bafokeng Street towards that open space you could clearly see vehicles at Frikkie Meyer, but the grass was about that high.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Could you just place your hands again, where you say the grass would be.

MR BALOYI: That high. You can see their heads.

CHAIRPERSON: You indicate with your two fingers across your chest, that that is how tall the grass is. Could you stand up? Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: I would need Mr da Silva's ruler, it's perhaps a metre, I don't know.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, I'd estimate about four feet, in old language, 1.2 metres(?)

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, who can translate that into metres?

MR DA SILVA: 1.2 metres approximately, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Well Mr Berger is not far off the ...(indistinct) then.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, I understood your evidence then that while you were still standing in front of your house, you turned and you could see Metal Box, is that your evidence?

MR BALOYI: Yes, up to this day I can still see Metal Box from my house. I could see all the way to the robots. I even saw it this morning.

MR DA SILVA: Yes. Now while you were standing there, that is when you observed one Koyoco parked underneath a tree?

MR BALOYI: I did not just stand in one position. There was fighting going on, you would observe it momentarily and then move to another spot, but there was a Koyoco in front of that gate at Metal Box. A smaller vehicle then later approached and then one from Amatola moved towards that spot and then a flare was fired and we could all see this.

MR DA SILVA: What I'm trying to establish, Mr Baloyi, is approximately where you were standing when you saw this vehicle, were you in the vicinity of your house or did you move away from your house to observe this vehicle?

MR BALOYI: I was standing inside my premises, on the yard. Even if I'm standing at the front of the house, I can see.

MR DA SILVA: Right. Then you saw this Koyoco. Can you explain, if you can remember, was this Koyoco more-or-less in the middle of Metal Box, while you're looking towards Metal Box, or was it to the right of Metal Box or was it to the left of Metal Box? Can you explain?

MR BALOYI: I will put it to you straight. Metal Box is on the other side of the street and that open space where the vehicles were parked was just an open space with no grass, there was just a tree. There were two Koyocos and one Nyala parked there. The white people alighted from the vehicles and they shot a flare into the air.

MR DA SILVA: Now when you're saying "on the other side of the street", you're talking of the other side of Nobel Boulevard, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that's the street, you know it. That's also where you travelled.

MR DA SILVA: Now where this vehicle was standing underneath the tree, can you indicate whether it was more-or-less in the middle, to the left or to the right of Metal Box, or can't you say?

MR BALOYI: The Metal Box gate will be on the left and the open space on the right and then the vehicle was parked near that open space. And on your way to Metal Box, you would travel along Nobel Boulevard, and these vehicles were parked just alongside there on an open space.

MR DA SILVA: You then said a white man got out of the Koyoco and shot a flare, could you see what he did to shoot the flare?

MR BALOYI: I would like you to listen to me very carefully, I do not want to repeat one thing over and over again. We still have many issued to discuss here. They alighted from the Koyocos, stood on the ground, took a gun and shot in the air. There was a light. I do not know what that light was. You may be in a better position to explain what it was. I just saw something that lit up the air.

MR DA SILVA: So I understand your evidence to be that you actually saw this person take a gun and point a gun in the air, which caused this light.

MR BALOYI: He had the gun which was slung over his shoulder and he pointed it upwards and fired.

MR DA SILVA: Now can I ask you this, your house I understand from my colleagues who visited the house, and the garage is one building, is that correct? It's not a garage separate from the main building.

MR BALOYI: Just hold on.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: Just wait. I have the plan right here. I have recently rebuilt my house. I'm not talking about hearsay here, I'm just saying, telling you what I know.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, now Mr Baloyi, your house as it stands now and that plan, does that indicate your house as it is now or as it was then?

MR BALOYI: At that time.

MR DA SILVA: I see from this plan that if one looks straight at the house, that the house and the garage is one building, that they're actually connected, would you agree with that? They've got a common wall ...(indistinct) stage.

MR BALOYI: It is connected, but the garage is at the back.

MR DA SILVA: When you say you got onto the roof of the garage, were you ever on the roof of the house when the, immediately after the attack or during the attack? The question is; you say you got onto the roof of your garage, were you ever on the roof of the house?

MR BALOYI: No, I would have not have gotten on the roof of the house, I was on the garage rooftop and I was on my stomach watching over, but I did not spend a long time there, then I got off the roof.

MR DA SILVA: But I understand you to say you were never on the house, only on the garage, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR DA SILVA: When did you first consult with Ms Cambanis or Mr Berger or Mr Malindi, in this matter? Did you consult last year at a stage?

MR BALOYI: I cannot recall.

MR DA SILVA: You must have seen them before these hearings started, did you see them before the hearings started?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, we all know that the day these hearings started, we had to adjourn so that we could meet our clients.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry, I'm just looking at the map. What is the issue?

MR DA SILVA: I've asked the witness if he can indicate when was the first time he consulted with my legal friends, the legal team on the other side, my learned friends.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, and Mr Berger you were saying?

MR BERGER: And Mr da Silva said:

"You must have consulted with Adv Berger and Ms Cambanis before these hearings started",

... and my learned friend was here and he would know that we had to take an adjournment so that we could meet our clients for the first time. And Adv Malindi wasn't here even at that stage.

MR DA SILVA: Perhaps I can rephrase the question.

Did you consult with any of my learned friends before August 1998?

MR BALOYI: Yes, we did consult them, I think it was last year, although I cannot remember the date.

MR DA SILVA: Alright. And you told them your version of the story? You told them the version of what happened, you told them the version that you've told this Committee over the past three days, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: They did not consult with just myself, they consulted with the other people. I was not then able to tell the whole story.

MR DA SILVA: You see, Mr Baloyi, why I'm asking you these questions is that my learned friends filed a memorandum setting out what their case is. They did so on the 8th of August 1998. It's been handed in as Exhibit O, and in paragraph 9.8 they set out your version of what occurred.

CHAIRPERSON: Could you direct ...(indistinct) what paragraph? - 9 ...

MR DA SILVA: 9.8 at page 17, Exhibit O.

I'm going to read to you what they say in that paragraph. They start off by saying:

"Standing ..."

...(intervention)

MR BERGER: If I can just ... Chairperson, 9.8 doesn't purport to be Mr Baloyi's version, it's an instance of what Mr Baloyi would say, but it's definitely not his whole version.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I think his attention at the moment, as I understand it, is merely directed at paragraph 9.8, where a statement is made about him and which indicates, which would suggest what he must have said. Do you understand?

MR BERGER: Yes. I have no problem with that, it's just my learned said:

"... where your version is set out"

... and it's definitely not his whole version.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I think he may have, ...(indistinct) part of the version I think ...(intervention)

MR DA SILVA: I accept that it's a very concise summary of a version, and I accept for the purposes of these proceedings it's not a full version.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed, yes.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, in that paragraph the following is stated, and I'll read it to you and you can make whatever comment you like. The following is said:

"Standing of the roof (I would accept it's on the roof) of his house, Mr Baloyi saw two armoured police vehicles parked in the veld just west of Thembu Street."

And the point I'm trying to make is that you say you were standing on the roof of your house, your evidence now is that you're standing on the roof of your garage, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: I was on my stomach. I would have not just stood upright because they could have spotted me. And if you get on the roof you would have to walk first before you lie on your stomach.

MR DA SILVA: Alright. Then the following is said:

"The attackers passed by these vehicles on their way back to Kwamadala."

And then the following is said:

"Shortly thereafter, the two Hippos ..."

The words: "Hippos" are used, did you mention the word "Hippo" to your representatives?

MR BALOYI: There is just one Hippo that returned to Bafokeng Street. At that time we were loading persons from the Buwa family onto the ambulance. Those are - that is the Hippo that returned to collect the body. There were two persons in that Hippo, a white police officer and a black officer.

MR DA SILVA: But I'm trying ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr da Silva is asking you is, did you say "Hippo", did you use the word "Hippo" when you made the statement to your attorneys.

MR BALOYI: As I said before - I beg your pardon with regards to that, I cannot say whether I mentioned it or not, but the word that I know well is "Koyoco".

MR DA SILVA: And then you say the following:

"And another two Hippos from within the township followed the attackers back to Kwamadala."

As I interpret this paragraph is that there were four Hippos moving away together.

MR BALOYI: No, that is not what I said. I have testified from Tuesday ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, you're not being asked at the moment about your evidence before us, do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What you're being asked about is a statement contained in a memorandum which refers to you and mentions two Hippos and another two Hippos. Do you understand that? This memorandum was submitted by the attorneys who are acting for the victims, including yourself I believe. You're not being asked about what you have told us. What Mr da Silva wants to find out is whether what is contained here is what you said to your attorneys, do you understand that?

MR BALOYI: Yes, but the one vehicle that remained was the smaller vehicle, the smaller police vehicle. So there were four bigger vehicles.

MR DA SILVA: As it pleases. Mr Baloyi, on reading this document and this paragraph, submitted by your legal representatives, it appears that you said to them that there were four Hippos moving together with the attackers. Did you at any stage say this to them?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I think I may have, I admit.

MR DA SILVA: So you explained to them that your recollection of the incident that you observed was that while these attackers were moving towards the footbridge, there were four Hippos accompanying them?

MR BALOYI: The Hippos followed them. And the Hippos that had been travelling along Umzimvubu reached the robots first and then the ones that had been parked at the gates, the Metal Box gates, joined them and they all proceeded.

CHAIRPERSON: What he wants to find out is, did you tell your legal representative that as the attackers were proceeding towards the footbridge, were they being accompanied by four Hippos?

MR BALOYI: Is that the question?

MR DA SILVA: That is correct.

MR BALOYI: I don't know, I may have told them.

MR DA SILVA: I must put it stronger than that, Mr Baloyi, you must have told them because they wouldn't have got this version from anybody else other than you.

MR BERGER: But the version in paragraph 9.8 doesn't talk about people being followed to the footbridge, it talks about four Hippos following the attackers back to Kwamadala. And Mr Baloyi has repeated again that the two vehicles moved up towards Umzimvubu towards the robots and the other vehicles moved to join them. That's all that is recorded here.

CHAIRPERSON: The statement is clear, I don't think there can be any debate about what it says. The witness has answered the question.

MR DA SILVA: As it pleases you, Mr Chairman. I'll leave it at that, Mr Chairman, it's a matter or argument.

I'm almost finished, Mr Baloyi. Yesterday when, or during your cross-examination you made reference to the different colours of the different vehicles that you'd observed in the township, and I just want to read you the notes and what I want to - I want to read you my notes and what I want to get from you is your reference to Vaal Commando. I've got the following notes:

"The Casspirs are yellow and the pick-up vans are yellow"

I got the impression you were talking about police vehicles. Then you said:

"The Casspirs have a blue stripe with a blue light"

Then you said the following:

"The Koyoco has a back door"

And then you said:

"Some Koyocos colours is grey and other police Koyocos have a camouflage colour"

Then you said the following:

"The Vaal Commando have a yellow colour"

Now what I want to know firstly, when you were referring to the Vaal Commando, precisely to which vehicles were you referring to?

MR BALOYI: I usually see Vaal Commando vehicles and I spotted that they were yellow, but as I mentioned yesterday, I do not want to commit myself to the colours because the vehicles are resprayed now and then. I really mentioned it yesterday.

CHAIRPERSON: But you've just told us that it was yellow, didn't you?

MR BALOYI: No, sometimes they are white, sometimes they are another colour. They are sprayed differently each time.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, you said that sometimes they're other colours, what other colours? You've mentioned white, you've mentioned yellow, what other colour?

MR BALOYI: I don't even want to go into that, I don't want to go into the colours.

CHAIRPERSON: As I understand what he's conveying is that he doesn't want to commit himself to any particular colour of these motor vehicles because as he says, the colours are changed from time to time. So he doesn't want to say the motor vehicle was yellow, only to find that the following day it's sprayed white.

MR DA SILVA: Very well, Mr Chairman, I'll leave it then.

Mr Baloyi, I just want to clarify this aspect, is it your evidence that you saw Vaal Commando vehicles, which are Casspirs and which are yellow? That's what I want to know from you.

MR BALOYI: I did not see them in the township. If you refer to yellow vehicles, I did not see them in the township.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what Mr da Silva wants to find out - and if you know you will tell us and if you don't, say so, you talked about the Vaal Commando motor vehicles. Now what he wants to find out is, the Vaal Commando motor vehicles that you saw, what colours did they have, did they have one colour or did they have many colours, can you remember?

MR BALOYI: I do not recall very well, but after the attack I saw those vehicles and they were yellow in colour.

CHAIRPERSON: And before the attack?

MR BALOYI: I did not see them before the attack.

MR DA SILVA: During the attack or immediately after the attack, did you ever see Vaal Commando vehicles which are yellow?

MR BALOYI: No, I did not.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, I put it to you that you're mistaken, the Vaal Commando has never used Casspirs. Can you make any comment in that regard?

MR BALOYI: I do not want to commit myself with regards to the colour.

MR DA SILVA: Now I'm ...(indistinct) the make of the vehicles, I'm putting it to you that they have never used a Casspir.

MR LAX: Mr da Silva, when did he say Vaal Commando used Casspirs? If you can refer me to that bit in his evidence I'd be grateful, because I've read my notes of his previous evidence, the piece you've been referring him to, there's no mention there that he ever said Vaal Commando used Casspirs.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman through you, Mr Lax I want to clarify this aspect, because he was speaking about Casspirs and in the next breath he spoke about:

" Vaal Commando have a yellow colour"

So I just want to clarify and put it to the witness that there's no misinterpretation in this regard, that the Vaal Commando never used Casspirs. And if the witness can't help us in that regard, then I accept that, Mr Lax.

MR LAX: Ja, there's just a difference between putting to him that he said it and clarify whether that is in fact what he means.

MR DA SILVA: As it pleases you, Mr Chairman.

Can you dispute, Mr Baloyi, or can I ask you this; have you ever seen the Vaal Commando using Casspirs?

MR BALOYI: I do not know about that, whether they use Casspirs or not. I don not know.

MR DA SILVA: Okay and then I want to put it to you, Mr Baloyi, that the Vaal Commando used their armoured vehicles. There's a vehicle called the "Buffel" and it's brown in colour. Can you give any comment in that regard?

MR BALOYI: I am grateful for that information, but it is something that I would not keep on my mind.

MR DA SILVA: Mr Baloyi, when you looked at Frikkie Meyer ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Just for the record, I have a note here which says:

"Vaal Commando was yellow"

MR DA SILVA: I beg your pardon?

CHAIRPERSON: No, I was just drawing to your attention that I do have a note which says:

"Vaal Commando was yellow"

... the motor vehicles. He did say that.

MR DA SILVA: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Baloyi, you testified that you saw two military vehicles on Frikkie Meyer Boulevard. I want to put it to you that you are mistaken, that at different stages there was only one vehicle there, there were never two vehicles together.

MR BALOYI: Yes, I know that is what you're going to say, but I saw two vehicles parked there. I have already told you that there were two vehicles. I think I've told you three times already.

MR DA SILVA: Okay. Then the last question that I want to put to you, Mr Baloyi, you indicated that while the attackers were leaving the township, that you saw the two Koyocos and an Nyala in Nobel Boulevard. I want to put it to you that a military vehicle moved down Nobel Boulevard and they never saw police vehicles. Have you got any comment in that regard? - at the stage when the attackers were leaving the township.

MR BALOYI: I do not know about that. I saw the vehicles that I've just mentioned. I don't know where they headed or what was happening, but I saw them parked there.

MR DA SILVA: I have no further questions, Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DA SILVA

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr da Silva. Yes, Mr Botha?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BOTHA: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Baloyi, only three aspects that I want to take up with you and I'm going to be very brief. I'm not clear on the Koyoco that you saw in front of your house on this particular night, especially on the colour. Did you see what the colour was or didn't you see what the colour was? Did you see and you don't want to tell us? Did you see or didn't you?

MR BALOYI: I don't want to commit myself to colours. I really don't want to commit myself to colours.

MR BOTHA: Sir, all that I'm asking you is, did you see what the colour was or didn't you?

MR BALOYI: I did not see it, only the shape and that it is a Koyoco.

MR BOTHA: Sir, how did you see what the colour of the people were that were inside of it?

MR BALOYI: There was a movement of people inside. I could see the movement of the people inside, but I could not make out as to whether they were white or black police.

MR BALOYI: So you can't say that the people inside the Casspir were indeed white people?

MR BALOYI: No. The ones that I saw were the ones who were sitting in front, those were whites.

MR BOTHA: Sir, but if you could see their colour, definitely you would have seen the colour of the Koyoco as well.

CHAIRPERSON: But Mr Botha, we've gone through this I don't know how many times. His evidence is there. I don't think the matter can be taken any further. He could see people moving inside the Koyoco, but what he is certain about is that the people who were in front were white, he noticed them. He didn't see what the colour was. We know from his evidence that at a later stage a Koyoco came back to the township, it had a white and a black, that we know.

MR BOTHA: As you please, Mr Chairman, I'll leave it then for argument.

You say that people fired teargas at some of the victims, is that correct?

MR LAX: ...(indistinct) incident earlier in the day, when the police apparently came into the township and chased the comrades away. He put that at round about 4 to 6 o'clock, somewhere round about there.

MR BOTHA: Indeed, Sir.

MR LAX: Okay.

MR BOTHA: At that stage you say the police fired teargas at the people?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR BOTHA: How did they fire it? What was the procedure, was it canisters they used or did they fire it with the rifles?

CHAIRPERSON: Just before he answers the question, may I remind you, Mr Botha, that you represent Mr Peens, is that right?

MR BOTHA: Indeed Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. And Mr Peens only, is it?

MR BOTHA: Yes, only Mr Peens, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And Mr Mey represents Tshaka and Greef. Alright. This witness has not said anything about Mr Peens.

MR BOTHA: Indeed Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Unless you want to do as Mr da Silva has done, lay a foundation in order to put your version or dispute some of what he has said, based on the instructions that you have from Mr Peens.

MR BOTHA: Mr Chairman, this aspect of the teargas was a second aspect of my cross-examination. It's not that relevant, except that regarding his credibility. The last is identity on Peens, Greef and Tshaka and I'll move onto that point.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but if - you are here primarily because your client has been implicated, in particular by Mr Nosenga. That is why you are here. So if a witness does not implicate you, that does not give you the licence to cross-examine any witness unless you have a version that you want to put to the witness, which is inconsistent with what the witness has said. His credibility has nothing to do with Mr Peens. Whether we believe this witness or don't believe this witness, has nothing to do with Mr Peens.

MR BOTHA: Mr Chairman, if that's the Commission's view of it, that Peens is not implicated, I wasn't sure about that and that's why ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: My notes may not be accurate, but I do not recall this witness mentioning the name of Peens.

MR BOTHA: No, not at all, Mr Chairman, the fact is that Nosenga mentioned Peens as one of the people inside the Casspir. And as this witness is not able to exclude the possibility, I thought it best ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: To do what?

MR BOTHA: I thought it best to cross-examine him on that. But if it's ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Unless the suggestion is that the people who were at the back of the truck, I mean of the Koyoco that he saw, amongst others was Mr Peens.

MR BOTHA: No, that's not the version that he gave and that's neither the version of Mr Peens.

CHAIRPERSON: Then what's the point?

MR BOTHA: That will be all then, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BOTHA

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS TANZER: ... father Patrick phone you?

MR BALOYI: I was not looking at the time, it could have been around 6 in the early evening, 7 or 8, I'm not quite sure, I cannot remember. It was in the evening.

MS TANZER: Did he tell you how he knew of the imminent attack, from where his sources came?

MR BALOYI: Father knows many people. He is known by many people who are able to tell him if there is something, to warn him, not that he would have to do anything and then he phoned to inform me about that, so that I too could pass the information on and that I could protect my children.

MS TANZER: So did he hear of the attack only on that date, or had he heard of it earlier? Had he heard of an imminent attack taking place, earlier than the 17th? Let me rephrase that. Rumours of an attack taken place or being spread, earlier than the 17th.

MR BALOYI: No, we had not heard anything before that.

MS TANZER: Now besides Father Patrick, were there any other rumours regarding an imminent attack on Boipatong? Was there any other talk of an attack?

MR BALOYI: We were always on the lookout.

MS TANZER: ... Kwamadala Hostel dwellers and the members of the South African Police Force, during the 1991/1992 period?

MR BALOYI: I don't know anything about that.

MS TANZER: So you were not aware of any kind of collusion between Inkatha members and the police?

MR BALOYI: No, I don't know whether there was this collusion.

MS TANZER: Did you suspect that there was some kind of collusion, was there like a suspicion amongst the Boipatong residents that the IFP and the police had some kind of relationship?

MR BALOYI: They may have thought so, but I for one, concluded or should I say came to realise that there was this collusion between the two on the day of the attack.

MS TANZER: Did policemen frequent the Boipatong location during the early '90's, 1991/'92 period? Did they used to come often into the location or did they keep away?

MR BALOYI: They used to come. They used to come, they were not barred, but they were not in good books of the people of the township.

MS TANZER: Were any policemen known to you?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you mean apart from his son?

MS TANZER: Apart from his son, obviously. Were any policemen, during 1992 or in the 1991 period, known to you, as the Chair said, apart from your son or family relatives?

MR BALOYI: I know them, I used to see them, but I had no association with them.

MS TANZER: Did you ever hear of a policeman named Peens or called by the name Peens?

MR BALOYI: No.

MS TANZER: Did you ever hear of a policeman named Tshaka, called Tshaka?

MR BALOYI: I was hearing that for the first time here at the Commission.

MS TANZER: ...(no audible question)

MR BALOYI: That as well.

MS TANZER: On the night of the attack, did you notice the attackers putting the stolen loot into the police vehicles that you described?

MR BALOYI: They were carrying these things. I did not see them load these, the loot in into the police vehicles.

MS TANZER: What was the relationship like between Dodudu and Mtwana Zulu in 1992, at the time of the attack?

CHAIRPERSON: Apart from the fact that Dodudu was part of a traditional dance club?

MS TANZER: Yes. It was a good relationship?

MR BALOYI: Very much so.

MS TANZER: And what was the relationship between yourself and Mtwana Zulu like, during the 1992 period? -in fact about June 1992.

MR BALOYI: We were not seeing eye-to-eye anymore because things had turned difficult.

ADV SIGODI: No, I don't think the way I understand it, it's a correct interpretation. The witness said ...(Sotho), not to say that they didn't see eye-to-eye. ...(no further audible statement) ... put that again.

INTERPRETER: Thank you, Chairperson.

MR BALOYI: I am saying during that very same year the contact between the two of us had since broken.

MS TANZER: Had Mtwana Zulu been in your house before?

MR BALOYI: Before? What do you mean?

MS TANZER: Well had he been in your house, in your home, in your living-room, as a guest?

MR BALOYI: No, not in the dining-room. I am saying we are in good terms and his children usually come to my place.

MS TANZER: Did you not take Father Patrick's warning seriously because of the relationship between Mtwana Zulu and yourselves having family in Boipatong?

CHAIRPERSON: Just repeat the question please.

MS TANZER: Well, ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: I saw it as important. I took it seriously, but there was nothing I could do because we had not yet been attacked.

CHAIRPERSON: Was part of this crowd that you had seen earlier on, still going past your house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they were still passing by.

THERE SEEMS TO BE A PROBLEM WITH THE MECHANICAL RECORDING - EVIDENCE IS REPEATED BUT QUESTIONS DO NOT FOLLOW IN SEQUENCE ON ENGLISH ONLY AND ENGLISH AND FLOOR TAPES

MS TANZER: The people who came to fetch the corpse, you said in a Koyoco, were they dressed in black tracksuits?

MR BALOYI: Not corpses, a corpse, one.

MS TANZER: Was that cop(sic) dressed in a black tracksuit? (English only tape - inaudible on English/Floor tape)

MR BALOYI: ...(no English interpretation).

MS TANZER: And that is the same ...(intervention)

INTERPRETER: Yes.

MS TANZER: Sorry?

CHAIRPERSON: You're talking about a corpse being dressed in black.

MS TANZER: ...(indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: No, but that's what you put to him.

MS TANZER: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS TANZER: I put to him that the policeman in the Koyoco, when they came to fetch the ....(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, no.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, Ms Tanzer said "cop", not corpse, but perhaps it got lost in the ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes.

MS TANZER: I'll rephrase the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, perhaps let's just stick to the word "police officer".

MS TANZER: Yes. Did the police officer or officers who came to fetch the corpse, in the Koyoco after the attack, were they wearing black tracksuits?

MR BALOYI: No, only the white police officer was wearing a black tracksuit, but the black officer was wearing a police uniform. And they had come to fetch only one corpse.

MS TANZER: Now you put the two together when you mentioned in your evidence that you also noticed the police office, or white men on the street, running on the side in black tracksuits. Was that your evidence?

MR BALOYI: Yes, I said I associated them with this one who was wearing a black tracksuit and I noticed that the other ones were white as well.

MS TANZER: Did you notice police vehicles driving slowly through the Boipatong location, moving alongside the attackers?

MR BALOYI: In the township?

MS TANZER: In the location, yes.

MR BALOYI: I saw the one that came to park in front of my vehicle, not in the township. Look, my house is at the end of the township, so I could not have seen the vehicles in the township.

MS TANZER: Do you know of a structure in Boipatong that was used as a mixed hostel?

MR BALOYI: I am the one who constructed it.

MS TANZER: Is that structure near your home?

MR BALOYI: It is far away, it is actually nearer to Slovo Park.

MS TANZER: Would you say that the attackers followed a certain route on that night of the 17th of June, or were they randomly attacking different streets in Boipatong?

MR BALOYI: Look, I don't know about the different routes, I am at the beginning of the township. I only saw them on their way out.

CHAIRPERSON: ... the mixed hostel that you referred to, did it have a name?

MR BALOYI: It was just called Boipatong Hostel.

MS TANZER: And my last question is, the attackers that took the route, as you gave evidence, via the robot, not past the nursery but via the robot, back to the hostel, the Kwamadala Hostel that is, were they being accompanied by the police vehicles or were they behind the police vehicles?

MR BALOYI: Yesterday I said the vehicles were stationary and these people were moving. They were not accompanied by the police, the police vehicle only followed from behind.

MS TANZER: The police vehicles that made their way from Umzimvubu Street up towards the garage, those are the vehicles I'm talking about, were they ahead of the attackers that took that route or were they accompanying the attackers on the route?

MR BALOYI: No, these people had already walked past that spot and the other ones had taken the footpath direction.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that when you saw the motor vehicles, the police motor vehicles in Umzimvubu Road, the attackers had gone past?

MR BALOYI: Yes. See, these vehicles were moving slowly and the people were walking past the vehicles as they were moving slowly.

MS TANZER: So the attackers were ahead of the vehicles, not behing the vehicles?

MR BALOYI: I am saying, as these people were moving past these vehicles, the vehicles were also moving, but slowly. They were in a hurry.

MS TANZER: Alright. I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS TANZER

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MEY: ... that Rooikop, alias - that Greef, alias Rooikop and Mr Tshaka were not involved in the Boipatong massacre.

MR MEY: I don't know the people you are talking about.

MR MEY: ...(inaudible) Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed, yes. Mr Mapoma?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MAPOMA: Thank you, Sir.

Do you know the name of the deceased person whose corpse was being picked up by the two policemen you have referred to in your evidence?

MR BALOYI: It's a little girl. I don't want to make a mistake pertaining to the name. I know the name, I have just forgotten it. It was a girl of about 12/13 years. I know her very well, she was a child belonging to my neighbour.

MR MAPOMA: Do you know the parents of the child perhaps?

MR BALOYI: Very much so, they are neighbours.

MR MAPOMA: Who are they?

MR BALOYI: Hlube is the surname.

MR MAPOMA: Do they stay in the same street as yours? Do they stay in the same street ...(intervention)

MR BALOYI: Yes, it's the sixth house from my house.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MAPOMA

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malindi?

MR MALINDI: No questions, Chairperson.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR MALINDI

MS PRETORIUS: No questions.

NO QUESTIONS BY MS PRETORIUS

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR BERGER: Thank you, Chairperson, two questions.

Mr Baloyi, were you ever asked by anybody to testify during the criminal trial?

MR BALOYI: No, I don't remember.

MR BERGER: And the second question, what was your position in the church in 1992, June?

MR BALOYI: We have no positions in that church, the Roman Catholic Church. It is only the Priest who delegates what people should do.

MR BERGER: Why was it that you were delegated to perform certain tasks in the absence of Father Patrick?

MR BALOYI: I don't know, God must have planned so, that I be chosed, I don't know.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what Mr Berger wants to find out is that there must many people who belong to the Roman Catholic Church in Boipatong, now what he wants to find out is why did Father Patrick single you out.

MR BALOYI: I am going to answer you as follows; it is my faith.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)

MR BERGER: Oh.

MR BALOYI: Maybe it is because of my faith.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) than the other members of the Roman Catholic Church?

MR BALOYI: I had committed myself many years ago.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: Thank you, Mr Baloyi, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BERGER

CHAIRPERSON: It's approximately five to one, we will take the lunch adjournment now and when we come back my colleagues will put one or two questions to you, just to clarify certain matters and thereafter you will be free to return to your seat, okay?

MR BALOYI: Thank you.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Baloyi, I sincerely hope that I am now reminding you for the last time that you are still under oath.

MACHIHLILE WILSON BALOYI: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Sibanyoni?

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I've got no questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Advocate Sigodi?

ADV SIGODI: There's just one aspect. Do you know how many people were killed in your street?

MR BALOYI: Four people.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know them?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: Can you tell us who they were?

MR BALOYI: At Mxena's house, as well as Hlube's, as well as Manyeka, two houses.

ADV SIGODI: Did you render any assistance to those people who were who had died, besides Hlube's house?

MR BALOYI: ...(no English interpretation)

ADV SIGODI: By way of giving first-aid.

MR BALOYI: No, I did not render first-aid.

ADV SIGODI: Thank you, Chairperson.

MR BERGER: I'm sorry, Chairperson. Just for the record, Mr Baloyi said that Manyeka there were two and it was interpreted as "two houses", and I think his evidence was "two people".

CHAIRPERSON: Shall I record that? This is where, at Manyeka? Manyeka, right. Thank you, Mr Berger. Yes, Mr Lax?

MR LAX: Thank you, Chairperson, just one small aspect.

Mr Baloyi, you told us that you were not politically affiliated.

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

MR LAX: And you also said at one point there was no trouble between you in the township. That's how you put it. You said:

"no trouble between us"

Did I understand you correctly?

MR BALOYI: I don't know what trouble you are referring to.

MR LAX: Well you were being questioned about conflict in the township.

MR BALOYI: I said there may have been problems amongst the youth, but it did not affect the entire township.

MR LAX: And then you were asked about why the IFP people had left the township, or were afraid to come into the township and you said:

"They were afraid to come in because they had tried to kill people."

MR BALOYI: Yes, I did say so, but the problems or rather the conflict was between certain individuals, not the entire township.

MR LAX: You were then asked to explain that and your answer was:

"Yes, we were attacked and killed as ANC members"

Those were the words that were translated and that you used.

MR BALOYI: Yes. As we were attacked by these people they would kill that, the residents are Boipatong are all ANC people, but that was not the actual reflection of the situation.

MR LAX: Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: When you were cross-examined, I think it was by Mr Lowies, you indicated that at some stage - this is the stage I would like you to clarify for me, when you heard the noise you went to the gate and then you saw nothing and you returned to your house and continued watching television. Do you remember that?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now when you went to the gate, was the Koyoco, or had the Koyoco that you saw already arrived or was it before?

MR BALOYI: No, it was before it arrived.

CHAIRPERSON: It hadn't?

MR BALOYI: It had not arrived.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And then you said that after the Koyoco had left - I'm now talking about the Koyoco that you saw on your garden, are you with me?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You said after that Koyoco had left you then saw a crowd, a group of people, is that right?

MR BALOYI: That is right.

CHAIRPERSON: And I think you estimated them at about 400.

MR BALOYI: It must have been over 500.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Were these people passing next to your house, on the street next to your house?

MR BALOYI: There were some walking in the middle of the street and some were walking along the sides.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. And it was part of this crowd that went to Mr Buwa's house and the other one went to Mr ...(indistinct) house.

MR BALOYI: The people who were walking along the sides were the ones who went into the Buwa and ...(indistinct) households.

CHAIRPERSON: This is what I want to find out. When you saw Mr Zulu, had this group of people gone past your house?

MR BALOYI: They were just walking along because they were a throng of people, some carrying goods. The people had already gone into Buwa's house and it was at that time that I saw him.

CHAIRPERSON: Whilst there were people at Buwa's place, was part of the crowd or the group of people that you had seen still going past your house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, there were many of them, they were still passing. These other people just went into these houses and did what they wanted to do.

CHAIRPERSON: And then you mentioned, I think you said about three people came to your house, amongst the three there was a person who had an axe.

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now as these people were coming onto your house, was part of this crowd that you had seen earlier on still going past your house?

MR BALOYI: Yes, they were still passing by.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

CHAIRPERSON: Now in regard to the items that were either stolen or damaged at your house, you mentioned that - was the gate to your house damaged?

MR BALOYI: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And the front door was also damaged, was it?

MR BALOYI: Yes, that's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And then the hi-fi set was also damaged, was it?

MR BALOYI: Yes, it was damaged outside the house.

CHAIRPERSON: And then the television set was stolen?

MR BALOYI: It fell on the ground. Yes, it was damaged.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. And the bedroom door, the door to your bedroom was also damaged?

MR BALOYI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Apart from these items, were there any other items that were damaged or stolen?

MR BALOYI: There were items of clothing that were stolen. It belonged to a small child.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there anything else?

MR BALOYI: And the windows, four windows.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BALOYI: ...(no English interpretation)

CHAIRPERSON: Would that be for what, for the dressing table?

MR BALOYI: As a window was thrown into - as a stone was thrown into the window a dressing table window was shattered.

MR LAX: Just repeat that please, I didn't catch it all.

INTERPRETER: He said a stone was thrown through the window, a dressing table glass was shattered.

MR LAX: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you at any stage make a statement to the TRC, setting out the damage to your house, things that were stolen?

MR BALOYI: Yes, there were some statements, but I don't think I ...(intervention)

MR BERGER: Chairperson, we have submitted forms on behalf of all of the victims. We've lodged them with the TRC.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, okay.

MR BERGER: It was done last year already.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes. Is there a cut-off date in regard to this?

MR BERGER: I don't know.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, okay.

MR SIBANYONI: Mr Baloyi, I was looking at the map here of the footbridge, the pedestrian bridge, what goes underneath the bridge? Initially I thought maybe it's a bridge over Frikkie Meyer, but when you look at the map it's just between Frikkie Meyers and the township. What goes underneath the bridge?

MR BALOYI: ...(no English interpretation)

MR SIBANYONI: The footbridge.

MR BALOYI: Footbridge?

MR SIBANYONI: Yes.

MR BALOYI: It is just water, water from the factories as well as drain water.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I also want to seek your indulgence, I've also got one question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: Actually one statement and one question.

Mr Baloyi, you did not testify at the Goldstone Commission, is that correct?

MR BALOYI: I never went to court, they refused me entry. I was supposed to be the first person, but I was refused entry.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, the question I want to ask you is; did you give your version of what happened to the ANC or their legal representatives at the time that the Goldstone Commission was in progress, or just before that?

MR BALOYI: There have been many statements that have been taken from me. I did give information to the Goldstone Commission as well as in Delmas. I have given statements there.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know the - have you ever heard of the Goldstone Commission?

MR BALOYI: There was talk about it, but I cannot say who it was.

CHAIRPERSON: But as far as you can recall you have never testified before a judge or an inquiry such as this one, do you know?

MR BALOYI: No. We were taken there many times but never had the opportunity to speak.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: That's all thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR STRYDOM

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Thank you, Mr Baloyi, you may stand down.

MR BALOYI: I thank the Committee.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: At least I kept my promise.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, my learned friend, Mr Malindi will lead the next witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MR MALINDI: Thank you, Chairperson. Chairperson, the next witness will be Thabo Johannes Rahantlhane: R-A-H-A-N-T-L-H ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Will you just come again.

MR MALINDI: R-A-H-A-N-T-L-H-A-N-E.

CHAIRPERSON: And the other names are?

MR MALINDI: Thabo Johannes.

CHAIRPERSON: And how do you pronounce the surname?

MR MALINDI: Rahantlhane.

CHAIRPERSON: Rahantlhane.

MR MALINDI: Yes, Chairperson. The witness will testify in Sesotho, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MR MALINDI: May I proceed?

CHAIRPERSON: Is there an indication that he has objections to taking the oath? We're not going to read anything into that refusal, unless you are deliberately ...

MR SIBANYONI: Mr Rahantlhane, would you rise. Do you have any objection to taking the oath?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No.

MR SIBANYONI: Would you state your full names.

THABO JOHANNES RAHANTLHANE: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Just before you go on. There is yet another document here which would appear to be a statement by Mr Buwa, is this statement intended to be handed in?

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I don't know who handed out this statement, but we were told that this will be one of the next witnesses and we prepared a statement so long, to be handed in during his cross-examination and in the meantime it's been handed out. I don't know who did that, but it is a, we were told that you will be one of the witnesses later on.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR BERGER: We never said that he would be the witness, we said Mrs Buwa would be one of the witnesses.

MR STRYDOM: Then I misunderstood, but that is the statement of a person we thought is going to be a witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Ja, it hasn't got any status at this stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Shall I return this?

MR STRYDOM: Well do whatever - handed them out, but we'll accept that.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I assume you are the source.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Malindi?

EXAMINATION BY MR MALINDI: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Rahantlhane, in June of 1992, where did you reside?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I resided at 684 Mosheshwe Street.

MR MALINDI: Do you remember the day of 17 June 1992?

MR RAHANTLHANE: ...(no English interpretation)

MR MALINDI: Is there anything of significance that happened on this particular day?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, I can.

MR MALINDI: What do you remember that happened on 17 June 1992?

CHAIRPERSON: Just before he answer that, Mr Malindi, may I just interrupt for a moment? Mr Rahantlhane, what is your standard of education?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Standard 10.

CHAIRPERSON: How old are you?

MR RAHANTLHANE: 36 years old.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, you understand English, do you?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Malindi?

MR MALINDI: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Rahantlhane, although you have a standard 10 education, you prefer to give your evidence in Sesotho.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, in Sesotho.

MR MALINDI: My last question was whether you remember what happened on 17 June 1992.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I remember very clear.

MR MALINDI: What happened?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We were on patrol in Baralong Street, at the corner of Thaba Baseu. At about five to ten a Hippo arrived. The police officers in the Hippo told us to go and sleep.

MR MALINDI: And when the police in the Hippo told you to go to sleep, do you remember any particular words being used?

MR RAHANTLHANE: They spoke in Afrikaans and in Zulu and said: "Hamba lala".

MR MALINDI: You say you were patrolling near the corner of Baralong and Thaba Baseu.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, Baralong and Thaba Baseu, at the corner of Baralong and Thaba Baseu.

MR MALINDI: How many were you on this patrol?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We were about 10 or 15. There were many of us.

MR MALINDI: And why were you conducting this patrol?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We were on the alert to avoid the Inkatha attack.

MR MALINDI: The group which included yourself, in what capacity were you conducting this patrol?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We were patrolling barehanded.

MR MALINDI: As this group that was patrolling, did you represent any structure in Boipatong?

MR RAHANTLHANE: There was no structure in Boipatong that I represented, except the Sporting Coats.

MR MALINDI: After you were told to disperse by the police who were on this vehicle, what did you do?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I decided to go and sleep because I had a feeling that we would be safe as the police informed us to go and sleep.

MR MALINDI: Did the police do anything else besides telling you to disperse?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, they dispersed us through teargas.

MR MALINDI: Did you go to sleep after you took that decision?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, I did.

MR MALINDI: Did you sleep in this address that you have given to the Committee, 684 Mosheshwe Street, in that particular house?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Definitely.

MR MALINDI: Is there anything else that happened during the time you were in the house?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, I think it was at about five to ten, I got into bed. I was with my girlfriend who was already asleep by then. I always leave my radio switched on the whole night. At about 10 - we had the news on Sesotho Stereo, at about ten past ten or twenty past ten I heard a sound of gunshots and sound made by windows.

MR MALINDI: What kind of sound was made by windows?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Breaking windows, that was the sound made by breaking windows hit by stones.

MR MALINDI: After you heard gunshot sounds and the breaking of windows, what happened?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I asked myself two questions.

MR MALINDI: What were they?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I asked myself, whereas we were told to go and sleep, was it members of our team who are breaking windows?

MR MALINDI: And was your, the question to yourself answered in due course?

MR RAHANTLHANE: The question did receive a response, because I found out that these were not people of our group, they were a group of Zulus who came in swearing.

MR MALINDI: When you say "they came in swearing", what do you mean?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I heard them say: "Get out dogs of Mandela". In Zulu that would be ...(Zulu).

MR MALINDI: And when you heard those words you were still in your room?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, that's correct.

MR MALINDI: Could you tell where these people who were uttering these words were in relation to your room?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I think they were at the second house from where I stay.

MR MALINDI: After you heard these words, - before I proceed, you said earlier that you asked yourself two questions, what was the second question?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I asked myself whether these were members of our group or was this an Inkatha group that has started to attack.

CHAIRPERSON: Was then the second question whether this was an Inkatha attack?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, that was my second question.

MR MALINDI: And you have said that you got the answer to your questions. What happened after you heard these words being uttered: "Get out dogs of Mandela", or words to that effect?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I woke up dressed in my trousers not a T-shirt. It was fortunate that they did not enter the house neighbouring mine otherwise I would have left for the streets. They got into 684, the yard where I stayed. They broke windows, windows to the whole house, by then I stayed in a shack.

MR MALINDI: Was it a shack at the back of house 684?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is correct.

MR MALINDI: Proceed.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Whilst they were breaking windows, I told myself that they have not yet arrived at the shack. They broke the kitchen window and then kicked the shack door. God does work in miraculous ways. After they had kicked the shack door - I heard an iron behind the shack door, I was leaning against a cabinet and the door was not kicked open that much, only slightly opened. It was dark inside the shack. I could see people outside because there was moonlight.

Three men arrived at the door after the door was opened. One of them said: "They are asleep". I was not asleep by then. They used a sharp object to stab my girlfriend, called Nxula. The eighth time when he tried to stab her, I took or grabbed this sharpened instrument from his hand, so much that I tried to stab him with this instrument for him to feel how it was. They ran away. As they did so one of them tripped and fell at the house door.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you just slow down a bit? You grabbed this instrument.

MR RAHANTLHANE: The first one that stabbed my girlfriend, as I pulled it from his had I could not stab him, he ran away. As they did so ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR RAHANTLHANE: As they ran away one of them tripped and fell down and the left the second sharpened object. There was one that was left on the ground which they used to break windows. Meaning I had two of these sharpened objects and the one that they used to break the windows with.

MR MALINDI: Okay. After you picked up these sharpened instruments, what did you do?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Goldstone requested the exhibits or evidence to that effect, when we went to Pretoria.

MR MALINDI: And what did you do about this request?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I took them to the courts of law as they were requested.

MR MALINDI: Mr Rahantlhane, just one aspect I want to clarify. You were testifying about something that prevented the door to your shack from opening fully, what caused it not to open fully?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I had an iron behind the door. When they kicked the door - as I said, God works in miraculous ways, the ironing board prevented the door to open fully. My bed is just next to the door.

MR MALINDI: When this man was stabbing your girlfriend with this ...(Sotho) or sharpened instrument, was he inside the shack or was he outside?

MR RAHANTLHANE: They were standing outside.

MR MALINDI: And how seriously injured was your girlfriend?

MR RAHANTLHANE: She was seriously injured. She spent about the whole year, her wounds bleeding.

MR MALINDI: In conclusion, Mr Rahantlhane, now you've picked up the sharpened instruments, did you do anything to assess the injuries that may have been sustained by people, or damage to the property?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malindi, are you referring to the main house or the shack?

MR MALINDI: To both their shack and the main house.

CHAIRPERSON: And the main house, yes.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I would start first with the house. They broke all the windows to the house, broke the door. Although it didn't open, they did break the door.

MR MALINDI: And did you do anything about your injured girlfriend that same night?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I knocked at the main house. Although they were scared I knocked at the window and I took her into the main house through the window. At about 11 o'clock when everything was quiet outside, I went to the shack and got my first-aid kit and tried to stop the bleeding until the ambulance arrived.

MR MALINDI: And was she - what happened after the ambulances arrived?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I went along with her to the hospital.

MR MALINDI: After your girlfriend was stabbed did you remain with her or did you do anything else?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I still stay with her at the moment.

MR MALINDI: I mean on the same night, immediately after she was stabbed.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I didn't go anywhere else, I took her to the house and waited for the ambulance. As it arrived we went along to the hospital.

MR MALINDI: Mr Rahantlhane, on Mosheshwe Street, what is the nearest corner to 684 Mosheshwe Street?

MR RAHANTLHANE: It is Thaba Baseu.

MR MALINDI: So in other words, house 684 Mosheshwe Street is on the south of Boipatong?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is correct.

MR MALINDI: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MALINDI

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, what is your girlfriend's name?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Christina Matlhodi Moremi.

ADV SIGODI: Christina?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: Can you spell that for me?

MR RAHANTLHANE: M-A-T-L-H-O-D-I, Matlhodi. Moremi:

M-O-R-E-M-I.

ADV SIGODI: Thanks.

CHAIRPERSON: In terms of Section 20.2 of the Act, this Committee, regardless or whether or not it grants amnesty, it is obliged to refer a person who in its opinion is a victim of a gross violation of human rights. That is the position regardless of whether you grant or refuse amnesty.

Is there a schedule that has been prepared, which indicates in somewhat detail what each of the victims, in particular those who will testify, sustained both in terms of the injury or the damage? Is there such a document? - so that we don't have to go through ... I've seen it in the memo.

MS BERGER: Chairperson, there's a proforma form which we handed out some time last years for all the victims to fill out, which sets our those particulars, which we then forwarded to the Committee on Reparations. What we will do is, if we furnish you with copies of those proforma forms, then all the details will be there. We can do it that way.

CHAIRPERSON: Will be there. Okay, very well. Yes, very well.

You've concluded your examination-in-chief?

MR MALINDI: I have concluded my examination-in-chief, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Any cross-examination, Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: None, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon, points to clarify.

MS CAMBANIS: Nothing, thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Mr Strydom starts, and if there's anything left we may call Mr Lowies and the remaining ones.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: Thank you, Chairperson.

Do you know if your girlfriend, Ms Moremi, laid a charge after the incident?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I do not know if she did lay a charge. I do not know.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know if she testified at any other, or at any forum at any stage in connection with this case?

MR RAHANTLHANE: It may happen. Maybe it is concerning her injuries, but as to what happened, I am the one who knows that.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know if she did testify concerning her injuries?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I cannot say I know the evidence she gave. You will find she does not attend a lot of meetings. After the 17th we left for Sebokeng for about a week or two.

ADV SIGODI: No, but the question is, do you know if she gave any evidence, whether in a court of law or in a Commission, did she give any evidence, do you know?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That may be the case, that she got injured in the attack.

MR SIBANYONI: Mr Rahantlhane, the question is, do you know if she did give evidence?

MR RAHANTLHANE: She was present at the Johannesburg City Hall's TRC hearings.

MR SIBANYONI: The other one?

MR RAHANTLHANE: It was in Pretoria, where I accompanied her.

MR SIBANYONI: What happened in Pretoria?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We took this sharpened instruments to hand them in as evidence at the Goldstone Commission.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom, do you have any further questions?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, Chairperson.

Apart from the occasion that you went to Pretoria to the Goldstone Commission, did you ever go to Pretoria, to the court in Pretoria?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I have never been there.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know if your girlfriend went to Delmas at any stage to give evidence?

MR RAHANTLHANE: She has not been to Delmas.

MR STRYDOM: You testified that your girlfriend was injured and then she spent approximately a year in hospital, is that correct?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Please understand me. She was injured so much that her wounds were still bleeding although she was discharged from the hospital.

MR STRYDOM: You see I want to put to you that it seems to me, if I look at my records, that she was not a complainant at the criminal, when the criminal case was heard. So what I'm putting to you is that she never laid a charge, can you comment on that?

MR RAHANTLHANE: She did lay a charge. I was present when she testified at the Truth Commission's hearing at the City Hall and she did say, she was asked what she would say if the Truth Commission asked her what must be done for her as a compensation.

MR STRYDOM: But what I'm putting to you is, she never laid a criminal charge against the people that attacked her. Can you give us any information or not?

MR LAX: Mr Strydom, perhaps you should explain what you mean by "criminal charge".

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I will do so.

MR LAX: It's clear this person is not that clear on the issue.

MR STRYDOM: What I want to put to you is that she didn't got to the police to complain about the fact that she was attacked and seriously injured and her case was not put against the people that were charged subsequently in the Supreme Court of South Africa.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Mr Strydom, if the police were effective during those days we would not have been attacked and now I wonder to whom would we report the attack.

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't this a matter that can be objectively ascertained by having a look at the indictment? Does anyone have a copy of the indictment?

MR STRYDOM: I've got a copy. I've checked, there's no such a charge. All I want to know is if she gave evidence at any of these criminal hearings.

CHAIRPERSON: Well from the look of things she didn't. Let's move onto another question.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. When did you tell your legal representatives that are representing you at this stage, that she was injured?

MR RAHANTLHANE: ...(no English interpretation)

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, we have not heard the interpretation of the witness' answer.

INTERPRETER: The witness did not understand the question quite well in Sotho when I put it to him, so I was just repeating the question to him.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I think long ago last year when we met with them, and other meetings where I met with them, even here at Iscor.

MR STRYDOM: Because I want to put to you that your legal representatives gave us a memo, a memorandum setting out what happened at the various houses in Boipatong on that specific night of the 17th of June 1992, and according to the document that was given to us, with reference to a 684 Mosheshwe Street, it's only stated:

"smashed windows'

... nothing is said about the injury to your girlfriend. Can you give any comment?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I said I have full evidence, even the blankets with the holes in them. I said there were three blankets with holes and three sharpened instruments, so-called ...(Sotho).

MR STRYDOM: Did you give a written statement to the people there at the Goldstone Commission? Apart from handing in the weapon, did you give a statement?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: And in that statement did you mention that you were part of a group of people that patrolled the township that day?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom, so as to know where we're going, I understand that you may be laying a foundation, is it going to be the applicants' case, at least those that you represent, that the girlfriend to Mr Rahantlhane was not stabbed as he has testified?

MR STRYDOM: No, Chairperson, that's not the case, what I'm trying to establish is if she made statements, so that we can get hold of them. If she was stabbed one expects that she made statements and we want to find out where those statements are.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed I understand all the inquiry, but what's the purpose of that inquiry? I mean, is it going to be the case that the events that he is testifying to did not happen?

MR STRYDOM: No, that's not the case. What I'm trying to establish is if she laid charges and if she made statements, so that we trace those documents.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I understand it. Because if it is not the applicants' case that she was not injured, that the events that he has described did not occur, then where are we going? Let me see whether I can assist you.

Mr Rahantlhane, we understand from your evidence that you took the two sharpened instruments to Pretoria, I think you said.

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is correct, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Now do you know, or did you hear of the Goldstone Commission?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I know of it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Do you know whether your girlfriend gave evidence before that Commission?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I know of the one in Johannesburg where I accompanied her.

CHAIRPERSON: Would that be the TRC hearings?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Now do you know whether your girlfriend made any statement, either to the Goldstone Commission or the police?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I only know about the Goldstone Commission.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. What about the police, do you know whether she made any statement to the police?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I do not think so.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes. Does that make you happy, Mr Strydom?

MR STRYDOM: I'll take it from there.

You say that you were patrolling the street, why did you patrol the street, against what?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We have already heard through the grapevine that Boipatong might be attacked.

MR STRYDOM: But wasn't it a normal situation during that period to patrol the streets on a daily basis?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No-one would go on patrol without nothing happening.

MR STRYDOM: Isn't it so that during that period a group known as the Self Defence Units were patrolling the streets?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I was on the patrol, but I was not part of the unit, only as a resident in the area.

MR STRYDOM: So do you say that such a unit existed, but you were not part of that?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I told you that I do not know of such, I was involved in sporting structures.

MR STRYDOM: So don't you know - have you ever heard of the Self Defence Units or not?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No.

MR STRYDOM: Did you build barricades in the streets and dig holes into the roads?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: What was the purpose of that?

MR RAHANTLHANE: As Mr Nosenga stated that they used to shoot people, driving by and shooting people and we realised that it will be difficult for them to do so if we dig holes and barricade the streets.

MR STRYDOM: Was that to prevent the police from coming into the township, or other attackers, or other people?

MR RAHANTLHANE: It was to prevent the attackers, not the police.

MR STRYDOM: What time did you start your guard?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Late in the afternoon at sunset.

MR STRYDOM: You mentioned earlier that you already, that you heard through the grapevine that the township would be attacked, who told you what?

MR RAHANTLHANE: When I say "through the grapevine", the source is unknown.

MR STRYDOM: But you must have heard it somewhere.

CHAIRPERSON: His source is the grapevine.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: As I understand it a grapevine is an undisclosed source, or it's a rumour that you pick up somehow.

MR STRYDOM: I'll ask the question the following way ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Unless of course grapevine in these hearings has a particular meaning that I'm not aware of. I know that there's been talk of a microwave and the green beans ...(indistinct)

MR STRYDOM: Why did you get the feeling that Boipatong would be attacked that night, or didn't you?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I am still asking myself the same question.

MR STRYDOM: Now you started the patrol at sunset, how long thereafter did people arrive there who said, I think you said: "Hamba lala"?

MR RAHANTLHANE: It was at about a quarter to ten or ten to ten because at five to ten I was already in the house.

MR STRYDOM: What I want to know is, how can you estimate the time with such precision?

MR RAHANTLHANE: What do you mean?

MR STRYDOM: Why do you say it was that time, on what basis?

MR RAHANTLHANE: You requested me to estimate the time, according to me it was something to ten because at 10 o'clock I heard the news on the radio.

MR STRYDOM: So at that stage you did not - when the warning was given you did not look on your watch or anything of the kind, you just worked it back because you heard the news at 10 o'clock, is that what you're saying?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is what I say.

MR STRYDOM: Was this a common thing, that police vehicles will drive around and if they find these people on guard, that they will tell them to go to bed and stop the guard?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That night when we were on patrol that is when I heard of that.

MR STRYDOM: What kind of vehicle ...(intervention)

MR RAHANTLHANE: Koyoco.

MR STRYDOM: Now you already said:"Koyoco".

MR RAHANTLHANE: It was a Koyoco.

MR STRYDOM: What was the colour of the Koyoco?

MR RAHANTLHANE: It was night time, I did not recognise the colour.

MR STRYDOM: How many occupants did this vehicle have, do you know?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I did not see them.

MR STRYDOM: What did you see about this Koyoco, did it come to a standstill, did people get out, what did you see?

MR RAHANTLHANE: They did not alight out of the vehicle, they shot the teargas.

MR STRYDOM: What was your position at the time that you saw the Koyoco?

CHAIRPERSON: You mean position in what, in society?

MR STRYDOM: No, in the township, his location, where was he standing or sitting.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Please explain status in society or you mean position in society or where was I standing. Please explain very clearly for me.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. Where were you in Boipatong when you saw the Koyoco?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We were in Baralong Street.

MR STRYDOM: Were you close to any intersection or close to any house you can mention a number? I just want to get the position.

MR RAHANTLHANE: At Thaba Baseu and Baralong intersection it was the second house which I entered in.

MR STRYDOM: That's now the position where you were, what was the position of the Koyoco when those words were said from the Koyoco?

MR RAHANTLHANE: It was in Majola Street moving along Majola Street and coming into Thaba Baseu Street.

MR STRYDOM: You say that the vehicle turned into Thaba Baseu and started driving in the direction of Baralong?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We were running away. As it came we ran away and hid ourselves in the yards nearby, but it entered into Baralong Street.

MR STRYDOM: What I'm asking you is, did the vehicle turn into Thaba Baseu from Majola Street?

MR RAHANTLHANE: It was not from Majola. You said how far was it.

MR STRYDOM: No, all I want to know is in which street was this vehicle when those people shouted: "Hamba lala"?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I said in Majola Street. We were in Baralong.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. So the houses were inbetween yourselves and this vehicle, because you're in one block down, one block further away towards the southern direction, is that correct?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Will you please explain, I do not understand the question.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. You said the vehicle was in Majola Street, you were in Baralong Street, so you were one street block down or towards the south from this vehicle, isn't it so?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom, the applicant's may have a case different from the impression I'm getting from the evidence. As I understand the evidence and the background to this attack, and this is what was put, which was the evidence of Mr Baloyi; from time to time the police patrolled Boipatong, and this is what the residents apparently did not like and which is why they erected the barricades in and around the township. Is that common cause or is that an issue?

MR STRYDOM: I would say that's common cause.

CHAIRPERSON: It is common cause, yes indeed. Now is it an issue that on the day of the attack those patrols continued?

MR STRYDOM: The applicants can't really comment on that because they were not there.

CHAIRPERSON: I understand that.

MR STRYDOM: The police will be able to say that. But I will accept that patrols continued during, if it was a normal patrol it probably carried on during that day.

CHAIRPERSON: Well it was a normal - well if the patrol was there the previous day, unless there was no reason to patrol on the - so you're saying it is common cause that the police would patrol the township, that's not an issue?

MR STRYDOM: That's not an issue.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Right now ...(intervention)

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, but as I see it, the reason why this witness is called is to make, to say that very shortly after these people were chased away, the attack started. So the reason why this witness obviously was called is to make that nexus and that's the basis why I want to track this witness on, specifically time, as to establish when in relation to the attack, this incident took place. And I would submit that is relevant.

CHAIRPERSON: No-one is suggesting it isn't. I just wanted to make sure that I understand what the issues are. I understand that you ...

MR STRYDOM: Thank you, Chairperson.

Let's just take it from where I stopped. The police - let me just establish that, you referred to a Hippo, is that correct?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Koyoco.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I will leave that to my learned friend. When the people from the Koyoco shouted: "Hamba lala" you were a block away from the, is that correct, a street block?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I want to explain to Strydom that this car was driving along Majola, it came along Thaba Baseu from Bapedi Street. You have a street that goes down Thaba Baseu, it joins Bapedi and Thaba Baseu.

MR STRYDOM: And when you saw this vehicle you started running away, is that correct?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Those were our lives.

MR STRYDOM: But why did you run away?

MR RAHANTLHANE: They would shoot at us with teargas if they would find us in the streets. We were running away for our lives.

MR STRYDOM: How did you know that they would shoot teargas, did they normally do that, that's the question.

MR RAHANTLHANE: They did shoot at us with teargas.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, on that occasion you say they fired teargas, but had they done that before?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I'm referring to incidents of the 17th day of June 1992.

MR STRYDOM: That's exactly the question, Sir. How did you know that they will fire teargas, why did you start running away?

MR RAHANTLHANE: They sprayed teargas.

MR STRYDOM: Wasn't this just a normal police patrol of the kind that's been happening for a long time in Boipatong at that stage?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Do you mean teargas, spraying or shooting of teargas?

MR STRYDOM: Yes.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I do not know on that score.

MR STRYDOM: Did you run away from police vehicles before, whilst patrolling?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I never ran away from a police car before I started patrolling.

MR STRYDOM: You said that the people in your group didn't have any weapons, is that so?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Did you always patrol without weapons?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is so, and I would ask myself what would we do if attackers would come and us having no weapons.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you bother to patrol if you were unarmed? What can you do if you're not armed?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I did not know that the attackers would come armed.

CHAIRPERSON: You're telling us that you always ask your question, I mean what would we do if we are attacked because we are not armed? Is that the question you ask yourself?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What did you find?

MR RAHANTLHANE: It was a question that remained like that. Knowing that as a resident I would have to go out and patrol like other men.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you ever raise this, did you ever ask this question from your fellow patrollers, as to: "Hey, what if we are attacked here?"

MR RAHANTLHANE: We used to ask ourselves this question, but we didn't know that the attack would be scaled in the manner it did.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Because the applicants said, when they entered Boipatong on that specific night they came up Lekwa Street, or when they got close to the intersection of Mosheshwe and Lekwa Street, the comrades as they describe them, fired shots to them. Do you know anything about that?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Mr Strydom, would you repeat the question?

MR STRYDOM: The applicants have already testified and they said that when they got to the corner of Lekwa and Mosheshwe Streets, shots were fired towards them from the direction of the shops down Lekwa Street. Do you have any knowledge of that? Did you hear shots or something like that?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I did hear shots even if they were shot by people from outside, but I heard the gunshots from Lekwa Street, when they came along Mosheshwe. I was inside the house by then.

MR STRYDOM: So do you maintain that no-one of the guards who used to guard Boipatong had weapons with them, is that what you're saying or not? - or only you didn't have weapons.

MR RAHANTLHANE: In my group no-on had a weapon.

MR STRYDOM: When the police told you to disperse, why didn't you regroup, why did you just go to bed?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I said, when they said we should go and sleep I went to my place to sleep.

MR STRYDOM: I've got no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR STRYDOM

CHAIRPERSON: You don't have a mike do you? Do you need a mike?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LOWIES: Unfortunately I do.

Mr Rahantlhane, I want to put certain aspects which are actually common knowledge to you and I would like your comments on that. I want to put it to you first, which may not be common knowledge, that I sometimes listen to the Sotho radio and the first thing that I'd like to put to you is, is it not so that before the news starts there are six beeps, toot, toot, toot, before it starts?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Do you mean the sound you have just made?

MR LOWIES: No, there's a beep.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Even if you can listen to Sesotho Stereo there is no sound like that.

MR LOWIES: The reason why I'm putting this to you is, in 1992 the radio station, Sesotho Stereo did not exist. There was a Sotho radio but it was not Sesotho Stereo, not so?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That's correct.

MR LOWIES: And at that stage it was not an independent station like it is now, it was run by the SABC, not so?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I don't want to talk about Lesotho Stereo, I just listen to the news.

MR LOWIES: And I want to put it to you further that at 10 o'clock at night there was no Sotho news on the Sotho radio in 1992.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Well I don't know, I hear that for the first time from you.

MR LOWIES: Now but you're the one who told us that there was news on that day, and I say I dispute it, not in 1992, the news was at 8 o'clock.

MR RAHANTLHANE: There was news at 10 o'clock.

MR LOWIES: And I want to suggest the following to you; if it is true that you heard the news on that night, it must have been the 8 o'clock news.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I insist that I listened to 10 o'clock news, not 8 o'clock news.

MR LOWIES: How did you know that it was the 10 o'clock news?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Before the news broadcast they mention the time.

MR LOWIES: And is that the reason why you say it was 10 o'clock?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, I think that's the reason.

MR LOWIES: How do you know that on that day they mentioned the time, was it because they always do it or because you can specifically remember that specific day?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Every time before the news broadcast they state the time. If it is 6 o'clock news they will state that and they will also state who is going to read the news.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what Mr Lowies is asking you is, that is now on the 17th, did you actually hear the news-reader saying what the time was or are you just assuming that each time the news is read they will start by indicating what the time was? Did you understand the question?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, I do understand. I have already explained that when I arrived at home it was around a quarter to, or ten to ten and at five to ten I was already in my house.

MR LOWIES: But Sir, do I understand you correctly, the reason why you're so sure about the time is because you listened to the radio, is that your version?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) you say you arrived at home approximately a quarter to nine in the evening? I beg your pardon, a quarter to ten. This is after you had been told by the police to go and sleep?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Yes, thank you, Mr Lowies.

MR LOWIES: Thank you. Mr Rahantlhane, did you look at your watch or are you relying on the radio, in order to make sure what the time was when you, the time that you are talking about in your evidence here?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I want to tell you this, if I knew what is going to happen that day I would have gone out.

MR LOWIES: No, but my question is not that. My question is, do you relate the time to the radio or did you have a watch with you?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I heard the time from the radio.

MR LOWIES: You did not have a watch?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No, I did not.

MR LOWIES: But when you arrived at five to ten there was no announcement as to what the time was, correct?

MR RAHANTLHANE: When I arrived at home it was around a quarter to ten to ten to ten.

MR LOWIES: And that is an estimate, not something that you heard on the radio? Let's just get this clear.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, I did not hear that from the radio, just an estimation.

MR LOWIES: Did you actually fall asleep?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I went to bed.

MR LOWIES: Did you fall asleep?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No, I did not.

MR LOWIES: Was your girlfriend already asleep?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now Sir, were you a member of the comrades?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I think anybody can be a comrade, you can also be a comrade.

MR LOWIES: Were you in 1992 a comrade?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I don't understand you, can you please explain what you are saying.

MR LOWIES: Do you know what a comrade is?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Well I don't know, that is why I'm asking you to explain to me what is a comrade.

MR LOWIES: So if you don't know, then can we take it that in '92 you were not a comrade?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I was just a sports person.

MR LOWIES: Do you want to tell us that where you're sitting here today, you do not know what the comrades were, who they were, what they did?

MR RAHANTLHANE: 3 o'clock till 6 o'clock I'm at the sports ground for practice.

MR LOWIES: Did you follow my question? Do you, here today, not know what a comrade is? Did you understand the question?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I was never involved in politics and that is different from what I was involved in, that is sports.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Lowies is asking you is, as you are sitting there now, do you know what a comrade is?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I don't.

MR LOWIES: Have you ever heard of the word: "comrades"?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, I did, normally we call each other comrades, in the township.

MR LOWIES: Now when you were doing patrols, would the people refer to you as the comrades?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, we used that name to call each other.

MR LOWIES: And did the people also refer to you, other people, as the comrades when you were doing your patrol?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I can also call you comrade.

MR LOWIES: You can, but that's not the question. The question is, did the people refer to you then as comrades?

MR RAHANTLHANE: They called me Johannes.

MR LOWIES: And the group of people doing the patrols, were they referred to as the comrades? Do you want to answer this question?

MR RAHANTLHANE: They called me Johannes.

MR LOWIES: Ntati, the question is, were you referred to as the comrades? - and the you I'm referring to are the people who used to do the patrols, yes or no?

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer?

MR RAHANTLHANE: The people who were patrolling with me called Johannes. This name comrade is a name that we use everywhere, even in Parliament they use that name comrade.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, I heard you say Ntati, please feel free to cross-examine the witness in Sotho ...(indistinct).

MR LOWIES: Chair, ...(Sesotho) Yes, I can speak Sesotho, but I prefer my language and this is a manner of addressing a person of whose language you can speak, Mr Sibanyoni will know it's either Rah(?) or Ntati, which is a sign of respect.

MR SIBANYONI: Can I just ask a question. Apart from calling you Johannes, did the people who were patrolling with you also call you comrade?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No.

MR LOWIES: Sorry, I did not get the answer because my headset wasn't on. May it be repeated?

INTERPRETER: He said "no".

MR LOWIES: The answer was "yes"?

CHAIRPERSON: The answer was "no".

MR LOWIES: Sorry, Chairman, I apologise.

I want to put it to you that you are trying to hide something, Sir. You well knew what the comrades were in 1992, everybody knew and you were actually a member of the comrades.

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is what you are saying. Because in 1992, I was a leader in my netball team, I was also the Deputy-Chairman of the Boipatong Football Association. I was also involved in the PTSA in our local school. I was a Deputy-Secretary of Boipatong Resident's Association. I was involved in Boipatong Football Association as a President. I was also the owner of the team known as Arizona in Boipatong. I didn't have time for other meetings, political meetings.

MR LOWIES: Is that your answer?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, that's my answer.

MR LOWIES: I also listened to your evidence in Sesotho and initially when you gave evidence you didn't use the word "Koyoco", you used the word "Hippo", not so? - in-chief.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I started mentioning Koyoco.

MR LOWIES: Do you know the difference between a Koyoco and the Hippo, or is it one and the same thing?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I don't know the difference, I only know Koyoco. I don't know whether they are the same thing. The only thing that I know is a Koyoco.

MR LOWIES: Do you understand Afrikaans?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, I do.

MR LOWIES: Now what was the attitude of the people patrolling the township with you at that stage in 1992, did they trust the police?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We trusted the police because when they said to us we should go and sleep, we went away and we went to sleep.

MR LOWIES: So you're saying that because they said so, you thought that it was now safe to go and sleep? Is that what you're trying to convey?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That's correct.

MR LOWIES: Now why did you then run away from the police?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I did not run. From the first house at the corner there is a passage there, I went through that passage, I was near that passage.

MR LOWIES: So you did not run away?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I did not run.

MR LOWIES: You did not go and hide yourself either?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We only went to hide ourselves when the Hippo came, but that night I did not go and hide, I just went to my place to sleep.

MR SIBANYONI: Just a correction, he said when the police came, he didn't use the word "Hippo", Mr Interpreter.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I said Koyoco.

MR LOWIES: Now Sir, the point is this, that night when the police came, did you go and hide yourself?

MR RAHANTLHANE: They came to us once, they did not come for the second time on that night of the 17th.

MR RAHANTLHANE: The question is, when you saw the police, did you hide yourself?

MR RAHANTLHANE: They were screaming from Thaba Baseu, then I went through the passage.

MR LOWIES: Do you understand the question?

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

MR LOWIES: Thank you. I still haven't got an answer. Did you go and hide yourself? - when you saw the police on the night of the 17th.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I said that night of the 17th, the police only came once. When they told us to go and sleep we went away to go and sleep, there is no-one who went to hide anywhere.

MR LOWIES: Did you run away that night of the 17th when you saw the police? - run away.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I did not run away, I was just walking.

MR LOWIES: Did any of your colleagues run away? When I say colleagues I mean the people patrolling with you.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Well we do not stay at the same place, maybe they tried to hide or to run away, I don't know.

MR LOWIES: The reason why I'm asking is, in your evidence-in-chief you told us that you did two things, you ran away and you also hid yourself on the night of the 17th, now you deny it.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I said we were running away and hiding ourselves when we saw a Hippo. That was our life. I was not specifically mentioning on that night.

MR LOWIES: My attention is drawn to the fact, I didn't listen myself, that you referred to the word "Hippo". You made use of the word "Hippo", is it true?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I talked about a Koyoco, you started mentioning a Hippo.

MR LOWIES: You used the word now, Sir, you out of your own mouth.

MR RAHANTLHANE: You started mentioning a Hippo. When I started talking here I talked about a Koyoco. I don't know a Hippo, I only know a Koyoco.

MR LOWIES: So why do you use the word "Hippo", you out of your own mouth, without reference to Hippo in cross-examination at that stage?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I don't remember saying a Hippo, I said a Koyoco.

MR SIBANYONI: Excuse me, Mr Lowies.

Do you often use Koyoco and Hippo interchangeably, in other words, do you make any difference between a Hippo and a Koyoco?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is why I didn't want to mention a Hippo and a Koyoco. I only know a Koyoco because I don't know the difference between the two. The only thing that I know it a Koyoco.

MR SIBANYONI: But do you also know that there is a vehicle called a Hippo?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, I do.

MR SIBANYONI: And you know it differs from a Koyoco?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Well I don't know.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Lowies.

MR LOWIES: Sorry, is it your evidence that you think that a Hippo and a Koyoco is the same or not, in your mind?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I am talking about a Koyoco, not a Hippo. I don't know a Hippo, I only know a Koyoco. If you say to me they are one and the same thing, then I'll accept that.

MR LOWIES: Now Sir, I want to suggest the following to you; your version that you were accosted by police, that you bumped into the police on the night of the incident is not correct.

MR RAHANTLHANE: If you say so maybe you were present, I don't know.

MR LOWIES: No, I'm putting it to you that when you say that, you're telling a lie here with a purpose.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I cannot comment apart from what I've already said.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words, do you still stand by what you have said?

MR RAHANTLHANE: ...(no English interpretation)

MR LOWIES: Can you remember what clothes you wore that night?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I don't remember.

MR LOWIES: How can you remember the time that was announced on the radio before you went to sleep, is there a specific reason why you can remember that time, that on your version was announced before you went to sleep?

MR LAX: Sorry, Mr Lowies, he didn't say he went to sleep.

MR LOWIES: Went to bed. I'd like to rephrase. When you went to bed.

MR RAHANTLHANE: You mean when I went to bed?

MR LOWIES: Is there a specific reason why you can recall the time that was, on your version, announced on the radio? Why would you remember the time?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I remember because immediately after the news from the radio the attack took place, that is how I remember the time.

CHAIRPERSON: No, you see what Mr Lowies wants to find out is the following; you've told us that you specifically remember that the news-reader announced the time as being 10 o'clock, is that right?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Lowies wants to find out is why do you specifically remember, not that the time was 10 o'clock, but that the news-reader announced the time and said it was 10 o'clock.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Chairperson, everything that took place in Boipatong will be difficult to forget it if it happened to you, but you can only forget it if it happened to somebody else.

CHAIRPERSON: We understand that, but all that he wants to know is, do you have any specific reason why you particularly remember that the time was announced?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I remembered that after, I recorded that in my mind. I remembered the time because after the time was announced the attack took place.

MR LOWIES: Do you know what time the attack stopped?

MR RAHANTLHANE: From our street I think it took about 20 minutes.

MR LOWIES: You see, there's another reason why I'm crossing swords with you pertaining to the time. There was a memorandum prepared pertaining to the allegations of the Boipatong residents and paragraph 2.1 reads as follows:

"Between approximately 19H00 (that means 7 o'clock in the evening) and 21H00 (that means 9 o'clock in the evening), the SAP moved around the township dispersing youths who were on patrol as part of the Self Defence Units."

Now it appears to me that read in context, if anything happened it must have happened between 7 and 9, not 10 as you say. When I say "anything happened" I'm referring to the dispersing by the police.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I don't know the person who wrote that statement. What I'm saying is what I saw because I was there.

MR LOWIES: And it also appears to me that the people who were patrolling, it's common cause that they were Self Defence Units, you say you've never heard of them. From what I've read it appears that it's common cause that they're Self Defence Units, you say you've never heard of them, or not?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No, I've never been an SDU member.

MR LOWIES: Have you heard of the SDUs?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I have said this before, I have never heard about that.

MR LOWIES: What caused the police on the night of the 17th, to use teargas? Can you just describe the scenario there at the time when this happened, what was happening? Can you give us detail regarding that?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I cannot answer that question because they just said to us: "Go and sleep". They forced us to go and sleep.

MR LOWIES: Didn't you want to go?

MR RAHANTLHANE: We were patrolling.

MR LOWIES: Didn't you want to go?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That is our township, therefore we wanted to patrol in our township.

MR LOWIES: But I still don't understand. It's actually a simple question. Why did the police use teargas, describe the reason why, what happened, how did it happen that they used teargas?

CHAIRPERSON: If you know why they used the teargas, tell us, if you don't know, you don't know.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I have explained that I don't know why they used teargas and there's no-one who can tell you to go and sleep because we sleep at midnight sometimes.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it a fact that when you were told to go and sleep, that I think round about nine twenty or thereabouts - at the time when you were told to disperse, that would not be the normal time that you would disperse, is that right?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No.

CHAIRPERSON: You'd normally disperse at about midnight, from what you've just told us.

MR RAHANTLHANE: Sometimes we'd disperse around 3 o'clock in the morning.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes. So when the police told you to disperse, did you resist that order?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That night when they said we should go and sleep we went away and we went to sleep. I also went to sleep.

MR LOWIES: And is the only reason that you did so because of the order by the police?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, that's the reason.

MR LOWIES: The only reason?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That's correct, that is the only reason, because if it was not their instruction to us, we would have dispersed in the early hours of the morning.

MR LOWIES: I see. Now were you requested by the police on previous occasions to disperse, where you were part of a group patrolling?

MR RAHANTLHANE: It only happened on the 17th.

MR LOWIES: Now did you ever arrest or catch people whilst on patrol?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No.

MR LOWIES: Did you ever have to intervene in a fight when you were on patrol, to protect a person or persons?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No, I have never come across that.

MR LOWIES: Did you have no contact with the civics in these positions that you held and that you described to us?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, we used to work with them as they were the community leaders.

MR LOWIES: Was that an ANC structure, the civics and the community leaders in Boipatong in '92?

MR RAHANTLHANE: All members of Sanco come from different political organisation like ANC, IFP and others.

MR LOWIES: And that was the situation in '92?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, that's correct.

MR LOWIES: And is it not so, Sir, that you had meetings with Sanco? - you personally.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I have never had a meeting with Sanco. There were leaders from Sanco.

MR LOWIES: Did you attend meetings with those people?

MR RAHANTLHANE: There are different meetings, there is a general meeting. Can you please explain which meeting are you referring to.

MR LOWIES: Did you ever attend meetings with Sanco or people from Sanco, you personally? That's the question.

MR RAHANTLHANE: You don't go to a meeting if you are not invited.

MR LOWIES: Do you want to answer the question? Did you go?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I have never attended Sanco meetings, I only attended the general meetings. So you cannot attend for example, the NG meeting if you belong to the apostolic church.

MR LOWIES: Now the meetings that you attended - now we know that you've attended meetings, between which parties was it, who were the people at the meeting?

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, Mr Lowies, you've asked him a lot of questions about the meetings, the organisation, I mean where is this going to take us to?

MR LOWIES: I would suggest this person tries to create the impression that he was not involved in politics at that time, which is not true and this will explore that. It's in the process of exploring it.

CHAIRPERSON: We've got to get to a point at some point.

MR LOWIES: I'm almost finished, Chairman, but this is an important point.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: You see the impression that you wanted to create earlier is that you never attended meetings, but we now heard that you did attend meetings. I want to put the following to you as the result, Sir. You are trying to make as if you had no political affiliations to anybody and that is not correct because of three things. It's common cause that the comrades and the SDUs patrolled the streets in Boipatong on the night of the attack, you pretend not to know anything about it. Your comment?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Where do the comrades belong, to which organisation?

MR LOWIES: Second point ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rahantlhane, counsel has the right to ask you questions and you have to answer those questions. If there are any questions that you want to ask you can tell your legal representatives to ask those questions on your behalf, do you understand that?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Yes, I do.

CHAIRPERSON: He has put to you two propositions. The first one is that you are denying deliberately your political affiliation, so what do you say to that, do you agree with him or don't you agree with him?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I disagree with him that I was involved in politics.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. What was the second proposition, Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: I'll phrase it as follows. It's common cause that the SDUs were busy that night with patrols on the 17th, yet you pretend not to even know about them, whilst you were a member of a group patrolling.

MR RAHANTLHANE: When I answered you, Mr Lowies, I said as a parent or the father in a household, when it is said that you should go and patrol, you have to go, you cannot expect other men to do that for you. That is why I went out. I also went there because I was a member of the Boipatong community.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Lowies is putting to you, and listen very carefully, he says it is common knowledge that the Self Defence Units patrolled the township. What do you say to that?

MR RAHANTLHANE: Even if it was like that, what I'm saying is that at that time I was patrolling, I was not belonging to a political party, I went out there to patrol because I was a member of the community.

MR LOWIES: ...(inaudible)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.

MR LOWIES: On your version you only saw one vehicle that night, police vehicle?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That's correct.

MR LOWIES: Because in paragraph 2.6 of the memorandum which I've referred you to, mention is made of armed vehicles at the specific street, Baralong. It reads as follows"

"Armed vehicles dispersed other groups of youths at the corner of Baralong and Thaba Baseu Street, at all the intersections along Amatola Street and Umzimvubu Street."

Do you know anything about this?

CHAIRPERSON: Well that's a matter of interpretation you know. These armed vehicles, there may have been one at the corner of Baralong and Thaba Baseu, another one at the intersection of Amatola Street and Umzimvubu Street.

MR LOWIES: I retract the question, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, so I think it would be unfair to put it to him.

MR LOWIES: I hear what you say, Chairman.

Now did you only patrol in Baralong Street that night, the night of the 17th?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That's correct.

MR LOWIES: You did not hear other vehicles, you only saw this one vehicle? When I say other vehicles, vehicles like a Koyoco.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I only saw one vehicle.

MR LOWIES: Chair, could you just bear with me for a second?

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

MR LOWIES: Did you see the occupants of the Koyoco on the night in question?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I did not see them.

MR LOWIES: Are you sure that Afrikaans was spoken on that night, by the people inside the Koyoco?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I said they said in Zulu: "Go and sleep". I never mentioned Afrikaans.

MR LOWIES: That night you did not hear Afrikaans?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No, I did not.

MR LOWIES: Because initially you said the people also spoke Zulu and Afrikaans. It appears to me you are trying to put white people on the scene that night and that is why there's now a discrepancy, because you forgot the lies that you told earlier.

CHAIRPERSON: What is being put to you, Mr Rahantlhane, is that what was conveyed to us by the interpreter is that you said they spoke in Afrikaans and in Zulu. Did they speak in Afrikaans and in Zulu?

MR RAHANTLHANE: They spoke in Zulu, but you could hear that the person who was speaking was an Afrikaans-speaking person, when he said: "Go and sleep", in isiZulu.

CHAIRPERSON: So they did not speak in Afrikaans?

MR RAHANTLHANE: No, they did not.

MR LOWIES: But if they spoke Zulu, how could you hear that they were Afrikaans and not Sotho, or any other language for that matter?

MR RAHANTLHANE: If you are a Zulu it's easy to hear that. Even if a white person, when he speaks Zulu you can heard that he's a white person.

MR LOWIES: So it sounded like it's a white person speaking Zulu?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That's correct.

MR LOWIES: Now these 10 to 15 chaps that were with you that night patrolling, did you ever go to Thaba Baseu?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you mean these 15 chaps or him?

MR LOWIES: It was you and them.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) they were patrolling in and around that area.

MR LOWIES: Sorry. You and them.

MR RAHANTLHANE: No, we never went to Thaba Baseu.

MR LOWIES: Just to get it clear; not you, not them, as far as you know?

MR RAHANTLHANE: I'm speaking on my behalf because I never went to Thaba Baseu.

MR LOWIES: Do you know Mr Baloyi, the previous witness?

MR RAHANTLHANE: The first time that I knew is here at these hearings.

MR LOWIES: He said the purpose of the barricades was to keep the police and other attackers out of Boipatong, do you deny this? I'm specifically talking about the purpose to keep the police out of Boipatong.

MR RAHANTLHANE: I said the main reason for the barricades was to prevent the hit and run cars that would come into Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Did you want the police in Boipatong? Did you have a problem with them going into Boipatong, because Mr Baloyi says they did not want, the people did not want police inside Boipatong. What is your version?

MR RAHANTLHANE: That time I never had problems with the police, I loved them.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, next question please.

MR LOWIES: I'm almost finished, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: I mean if you're looking for the notes, let somebody else go on.

MR LOWIES: Sir, there is good news, I'm really within my last one or two questions. So I'm almost there.

Now did your girlfriend sleep that night when you got into bed, was she already asleep?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

MR RAHANTLHANE: ...(no English interpretation)

MR LOWIES: I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LOWIES

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Pretorius, do you have any questions?

MS PRETORIUS: Only one or two, Chair.

MR STRYDOM: Chair, before my learned friend proceeds ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: And then do you have any? Would you have any, Ms Tanzer?

MS TANZER: One or two.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Mr Mapoma? I'm trying to assess whether we should try and finish this witness now or whether we should, so that he doesn't have to come here tomorrow if not necessary. Because if we're going to be long with him, we might as well adjourn at this stage.

MS PRETORIUS: Chair, I can't give a promise that it will only be 10 minutes, because I can't limit myself to that. It may be a bit longer than that.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, very well. Did you want to say something?

MR STRYDOM: Chairman, I'm sorry to raise this, but I was requested by my clients to raise it. Exactly this time yesterday, when I stopped cross-examining - and this is leading to trouble between the different parties, there's laughter at what is perceived to be, either myself or my clients representing them, as just happened now. This with respect - and this is a problem and I'm highlighting it, to me it's not a problem, but to my clients it's a problem, the perception is created again that when doing so they are intimidated and they perceive it as an insult to them and their legal representatives and I think it's appropriate that I raise it now while this incident is fresh in your memory, because that was actually, as I understood it, that sparked off something yesterday, which we have discussed this morning. I must apologise that I had to mention it, but it's unfortunately one of those things I was requested to do.

CHAIRPERSON: What is it that you're mentioning?

MR STRYDOM: Sorry, I missed your question.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, I didn't get what your ...

MR STRYDOM: The reason was that my clients specifically stated that it's this laughter that happens that they perceive as something which is against them and their legal representatives.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. My colleagues have observed since these proceedings started, that there has always been laughter in the audience, either coming from the applicants' side or coming from the victims' side. We have not interfered with that, we have allowed that because it has not disturbed these proceedings in any manner. I will therefore ask both sides, because insofar as we are concerned, our observation has been that both sides on different occasions have laughed, either to themselves or to the other side. If this laughter is creating a problem, perhaps the rules must be changed.

I have mentioned at the beginning of this hearing today that there shouldn't be any abuse at either side and I continue to do so, to urge both parties to do so. Even though we're dealing with quite a serious matter here, on some occasions things have happened at these hearings which has caused one or other person to laugh at. We have not regarded that as being unbecoming because it is only natural that if something happens which causes one to laugh, it is so, but if that is intended to be an abuse, I think it must stop. In the form of what must stop is the abuse, that's all that must stop. Very well.

It seems to me that we are not going to be able to finish this witness now. We will adjourn and resume with his evidence tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock.

Mr Rahantlhane, we are unable to finish your evidence today. You are required to attend these proceedings tomorrow morning. Yes, very well. Okay, we will rise.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

The O’Malley Archives

Name: Machihlile Wilson Baloyi - Witness