About this site

This resource is hosted by the Nelson Mandela Centre of Memory, 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 It is the product of almost two decades of research and includes analyses, chronologies, historical documents, and interviews from the apartheid and post-apartheid eras.

Name: Andries Matanzima Nosenga

03-05-1999: Day 1

Application No: Am2778/96

Held At: Iscor Club Hall, Vanderbijlpark

Matter: Boipatong Massacre

CHAIRPERSON: It has become somewhat customary that it seems that these hearings will never will resume. There are certain technical delays resulting us starting somewhat later than we were scheduled to start. We apologise for starting late but we had to attend to certain important matters. Very well now, I gather that there ise this new counsel who wants to place himself on record. Yes, would you do so Sir?

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson, before the new counsel places himself on record I just want to withdraw on behalf of certain applicants.

I won't be appearing for the following applicants anymore, Jack Mbele and Timothy Stals Mazibuko, Moses Mthembu ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Wait a bit, do you have a list of those? I'm just going according to my list here. Okay you said Mazibuko, Mbele and Moses Mthembu?

MR STRYDOM: Moses Mthembu and Petrus Mdiniso.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: And the outstanding applicant Mxoliseni Mkhize is not here to give evidence and I will be withdrawing his application as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that he would - let me just record this for the time being.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Chairman, I think I must word it differently, I'm not withdrawing his application now.

CHAIRPERSON: I would have thought so.

MR STRYDOM: I don't want to do that in his absence, what I'm saying is that I won't appear on his behalf any more.

CHAIRPERSON: Look, now you're asking for leave to withdraw?

MR STRYDOM: Ja, on his behalf.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Now who is your instructing attorney?

MR STRYDOM: My instructing attorney is the firm J H van der Merwe and that firm's representative at the hearings here is Mr Fredrech. Yes, Mr Fredrech will still be the attorney of record or J H van der Merwe for Moses Mthembu and Petrus Mdiniso but they've instructed another counsel to appear on their behalf but as far as Jack Mbele and Timothy Stals Mazibuko is concerned, Anina van der Westhuizen is the instructing attorney so J H van der Merwe ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Wait a minute, as far as who is concerned?

MR STRYDOM: As far as Timothy Stals Mazibuko and Jack Mbele are concerned my attorney also withdraws. Attorney Anina van der Westhuizen has been instructed to appear on their behalf.

As far as the other two applicants which I withdrew from, Moses Mthembu and Petrus Mdiniso are concerned, they are still represented by the same firm of attorneys, J H van der Merwe, but another counsel has been instructed to appear on their behalf.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes very well.

MR STRYDOM: And lastly Chairperson, I would also want to mention that to the extent that I appeared on behalf of Mr Vanana Zulu on a watching brief basis, my mandate has also been ended and so has my attorneys mandate been ended. Anina van der Westhuizen also appeared on his behalf. Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. What is the name of the applicant who you have been appearing for and you are now seeking leave to withdraw from representing?

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, that is Mxoliseni Mkhize.

CHAIRPERSON: Mxoliseni Mkhize.

MR STRYDOM: I think it's number 14 on the list.

CHAIRPERSON: We have a different list.

MR STRYDOM: On the form it's number 13.

CHAIRPERSON: Number 13 yes, 13. Do we have the same? Yes we do, okay. Mxoliseni Sibongeleni Mkhize, very well.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Mr Chairman, may I then place myself on record on behalf of the following applicants, Mr Jack Mbele, Mr Timothy Stals Mazibuko. My instructing attorney pertaining to these has been placed on record by my learned friend, being Anina van der Westhuizen. Regarding Petrus Mdiniso and Moses Mthembu, as you were informed Mr Chairman, I'm appearing on their behalf, the instructing attorney here is Attorney J H van der Merwe. Regarding the person who had been implicated in these hearings, Mr Vanana Zulu, I'm also appearing on his behalf, instructed by Anina van der Westhuizen.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Chair, if it meets with your approval, I informed you in chambers and the learned Members of the Committee that there will be an application. I am now instructed that the matter had been handed or the application had been handed to Mr Chairman and the Members of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, before my learned friend proceeds with his application, might I ask on behalf of the victims if we are entitled to an explanation for this strange state of affairs and that is that my learned friend Mr Strydom has been debriefed in respect of certain applicants and his attorney has briefed Advocate Lowies in respect of two of them, in respect of two other applicants the attorney has also changed. It appears to us that this is a stratagem designed firstly to increase costs and secondly to have more bites at the cherry so to speak, in other words to have more people to cross-examine the victims when they give their evidence. There would appear to be no other reason for this odd state of affairs.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you finished Sir?

MR LOWIES: Mr Chairman no, I would like to place on record whilst I was still busy with the notice of application, you had also been informed Mr Chairman in chambers that for the purposes of the application that I would be acting on behalf of all the applicants mentioned in the application so as to prevent duplication of applications.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: That has been informal arrangements between the parties.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, okay very well. Is Mr Mazibuko here? Would you stand up Sir? Mr Mbele? We are informed that the attorney who has been representing you up until the last hearing no longer represents you, do you confirm that?

MR MAZIBUKO: Yes that is correct.

MR MBELE: Yes that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And your counsel now is Mr Lowies. Do you confirm that?

MR MAZIBUKO: Yes I confirm that.

MR MBELE: Yes I confirm that.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Sit down.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mthembu, Moses Mthembu ...(intervention)

MR LOWIES: May I just assist you in this regard Chairman? I understand that Mr Mthembu is not available, he is at work and he has problems attending the hearing and he requested to be excused. The situation is as follows, it has been explained to him that I would be looking after his interests even if it's in his absence.

CHAIRPERSON: Well at least we should have been told rather than us having to enquire about whether he is present or not.

MR LOWIES: I understand.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes very well.

MR LOWIES: Chair now just to assist you in that regard, this position is one hundred percent the same pertaining to Mr Petrus Mdiniso.

CHAIRPERSON: So both of them are not here?

MR LOWIES: Both are not here.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, I did indicate to you in chambers that we would like to read your application first before the matter is argued and that is preferable that it should also be served on the other legal representatives as well so that they consider the application.

MR LOWIES: That is correct Mr Chairman and it's been done, I think there are one or two representatives who haven't received theirs yet but extra copies have been made available. It will be done in the next minute or so.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, very well.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: We will determine in due course when it will be appropriate to hear this application. Yes, very well.

Yes Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: Are there any others who are not present?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes before we get there, are there any other applicants who are not present?

MR STRYDOM: Yes Chairperson, I should have told Chairperson earlier on but people from the prison are not here. The first applicant is Tebogo Magubane, he is the applicant who serves sentence apparently now in Klerksdorp Prison and I've informed the people to try to get him here. The same would apply to Sonny Michael Mkwanazi, there's again uncertainty about his whereabouts, apparently he is in Sasolburg Prison, I'm investigating that. Yes I would ask that we continue in their absence, they have already testified, I will look after their interests, I've got instructions on a previous occasion.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS PRETORIUS: Chairperson, Mr Mthembu has not arrived yet but apparently he is on his way. He was not - ...(indistinct) sent to the prison, but he is on his way.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS PRETORIUS: Chair, he has just arrived.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Yes Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, in anticipation of these hearings and since the last adjournment, Ms Cambanis, Advocate Malindi and I directed certain correspondence to various parties, amongst them Iscor, the South African Police, Mr Armin Kluth on behalf of the South African Defence Force and the Inkatha Freedom Party. We received certain replies which may become relevant at a later stage in these proceedings and we didn't want to hold back on anything so we've prepared bundles. Might I hand up the bundles to you, Chairperson. If they can be given an exhibit number, we're not going to refer to them at the moment but just so that my learned friends can have copies and consider their position in due course.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, what was the last bundle, was it S?

MR BERGER: Sorry, if this then could be Exhibit T?

CHAIRPERSON: T, yes.

MR BERGER: We've made copies for the Committee, I could hand that up and then copies for my learned friends as well.

CHAIRPERSON: So that will be bundle T?

MR BERGER: As you please Chairperson. I had four copies for my learned friends, I didn't anticipate Mr Lowies being here today but it will be handed over now.

Chairperson, the other point that we just wish to make and I make this on behalf of Advocate Malindi and Ms Cambanis at this stage of the proceedings, is that our learned friends, Mr Strydom and Mr da Silva have indicated that they do not intend leading any ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Wait a minute, just before you get to that?

MR BERGER: Yes?

CHAIRPERSON: Oh yes, I'm sorry, yes go ahead.

MR BERGER: That they do not intend leading any evidence at this stage. In particular, we would just like to make one point abundantly clear if it hasn't been made clear already and that is in regard to Advocate Strydom's clients and up until this point and I think it still continues to represent the interests of the IFP, we will argue at the end of this amnesty hearing that the applicants, amongst other things, do not qualify for amnesty because they do not meet the requirements of Section 22(a) of the Act. In other words, that they were not properly authorised to act on behalf of the Inkatha Freedom Party. Their case is that they committed these crimes on behalf of the Inkatha Freedom Party. The evidence thus far is that the person who sanctioned the attack was Mr Bhekinkosi Mkhize, on his own evidence not an official of the Inkatha Freedom Party.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: Nowhere in any proceedings before any Committee were we able to establish anywhere whether Inkatha Freedom Party, any official of the Inkatha Freedom Party has come forward to say that we sanctioned the attack either before or that we sanctioned the attack or approved the attack afterwards and we will argue at the end of the case that there is no evidence before the Committee of any approval either before or subsequent on behalf of the IFP. We don't want that argument to come as a surprise, we're not asking for anything to be done at this stage, we just want to make it abundantly clear that that will be the argument so that Mr Strydom can consider his position and consider whether there are not any officials of the Inkatha Freedom Party that he wants to lead evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma, is there anything you want to place on record?

MR MAPOMA: Except Chairperson to record that Mr Themba Khosa and Chief Mangosuto Buthelezi were notified and Advocate Strydom has confirmed with me that he takes care of their interests.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well just so that there is clarity on the rules to the extent that there is now representation of a group of applicants by more than one counsel. The rule that we applied to the legal representatives of the victims will also apply to the applicants and that is to say we will not allow a counsel to go over a matter which has been canvassed by the other counsel. We would please ask counsel to make sure that they don't cover the same ground that has already been covered by the other counsel. I'm directing this specifically to you Mr Lowies because you have not been here before so that you understand that that's the way you're proceeding here, do you understand?

MR LOWIES: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: So that when you do cross-examine we would expect someone to conduct a cross-examination at least on behalf of all the applicants to the extent that they have an identity of interest.

MR LOWIES: May I just enquire chair, what is the position regarding Prince Vanana Zulu?

CHAIRPERSON: He's not an applicant is he?

MR LOWIES: No, he's only implicated.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes indeed. Yes very well. Are you ready to proceed ma'am?

MS TANZER: I am ready to proceed, I would just like another set of headphones, this is a bit static.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh really? Just for the record, we intend rising for lunch at about half past one and then we will resume at about quarter past two. Forty five minutes should be okay, is that okay? Yes very well.

Have you gentlemen and lady received a copy of the application?

MR BERGER: We've received one copy yes Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: You have, okay very well. During the course of the day, perhaps this evening, would you please consider the application and let us know how you intend responding to it whether you just want the matter to be argued of these papers or whether you would like to file affidavits so that we can determine, you know, when it can be heard.

MR BERGER: We'll let you know our attitude tomorrow morning at 9.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes very well.

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MS TANZER: Mr Nosenga, you completed and signed two forms, two form 1's in the bundle. One Form 1 was signed on the 25 September 1996 and one Form 1 was signed on the 15 May 1997. Do you verify your signatures on these forms?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry to interrupt you, the applicant's application is contained in bundle R is it as I see it, is that right?

MS TANZER: Yes it's bundle R.

Do you verify this as your signature?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have bundle R in front of you?

MS TANZER: Yes I do have bundle R in front of me.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh you do. Alright, okay. As you are leading Mr Nosenga, will you be referring to bundle R?

MS TANZER: Yes I am.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay very well, now when you do so Ma'am, because it is numbered up to page 17 I think it is, would you indicate to us what page you are on, okay?

MS TANZER: I'll do so Mr Chair.

On page 6 you find the first Form 1, is this your signature? Do you verify the signature?

INTERPRETER: Chairperson, the speaker is not coming through.

CHAIRPERSON: The testimony that you are rendering here is not for your legal representative but it is manned for us who are sitting here as well as those who are sitting at the back of this hall, so you should not speak as if you're talking to your legal representative only. So if you want to speak Zulu, if you want to speak English, go ahead and do so.

MS TANZER: Do you verify that this is your signature?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that's my signature.

MS TANZER: On page 13 you signed a second Form 1, do you verify that this is your signature?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not my signature, I do not quite know this one very well.

MS TANZER: You did not sign this Form 1?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know where this comes from.

MS TANZER: Now on page 15 of the bundle you applied for indemnity, is that your signature?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not my signature, that is not how I sign.

MS TANZER: So you are telling me that the only signature that is your signature in this bundle is on page 6?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, this is my signature.

MR LAX: What about the one on page 17 Ms Tanzer?

MS TANZER: This letter that was addressed on page 17, is this your signature?

MR NOSENGA: No, that's not my signature.

MS TANZER: Now there is also on page 8 and unsigned affidavit which deposes under oath to certain information which obviously you have not signed because it is unsigned. Have you ever seen or read this affidavit prior to my reading it to you in the prison a few days ago?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, ...(inaudible)

MR NOSENGA: I cannot speak louder than this.

MS TANZER: Had you ever seen this affidavit before?

MR NOSENGA: Yes this is the statement that I gave to my legal representative if I still remember very well.

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not activated.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon. This is the affidavit at pages 8, 9 and 10?

MS TANZER: Yes, this is the affidavit I'm referring to.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Nosenga, what is your standard of education?

MR NOSENGA: I went as far as Standard 1.

CHAIRPERSON: Standard 1?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MS TANZER: Let me clarify, I read this affidavit to you last week in the prison. Had you seen this affidavit before I read it to you, has anybody presented this affidavit to you?

MR NOSENGA: I do not quite understand, would you please repeat?

INTERPRETER: May I just find out, is his machine tuned into the correct language? Can the technicians check that please? Mr Nosenga, do you hear Zulu in your earphones?

MR NOSENGA: Are you referring to my statement?

INTERPRETER: Just hold on, I'm going to check for you.

MR LAX: Peter, just so that we can announce this, what languages - yes? 4 is Sotho and English is 2?

MR NOSENGA: I speak Zulu.

MS TANZER: Alright, I think he has been now placed on the correct channel.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you hear now Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can hear you now.

MS TANZER: Alright, this affidavit on page 8, I read to you last week in the prison. Before that, had you ever seen this affidavit, has anybody read this affidavit to you at any time?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct, many people did come, I cannot know which statement it is, so many people came to me in prison.

MS TANZER: No, my question is did anybody come back to read the statement that they took from you and read it to you to ask you if it was correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, they did not come back to read them to me since they took the statements.

CHAIRPERSON: Just wait a minute. You ask him whether he had seen the statement which occurs, repeated the question, which occurs at pages 8, 9 and 10, whether he had seen the statement. What was his answer there initially? Didn't he say that this is the statement that he made to his attorney?

MS TANZER: As I understand he wasn't hearing the correct language, it was on the wrong channel number, now he's understanding it.

CHAIRPERSON: Forget about whether he understood or not but I want to know what was his answer to that?

MS TANZER: As I heard his initial answer was yes but I think he did misunderstand the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Well we can clarify that with him, I want to know what was his answer to that? Yes very well.

MS TANZER: Has this affidavit ever been read to you before after the information was taken from you?

MR NOSENGA: No I do not remember. May somebody please read it to me because I do not remember very well.

MS TANZER: If I may Mr Commissioner, may I read the affidavit?

CHAIRPERSON: Have you gone through the statement with Mr Nosenga.

MS TANZER: Mr Ngcobo, I have gone through the statement at the prison and he indicated that he had never seen the statement before. I had read the statement and I'd read the signed statement that he had signed and we have gone through it before, yes. Last week.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, you're being asked about the statement which is - just show him the statement. Do you see that document?

MR NOSENGA: I am not educated. May she please read it to me?

CHAIRPERSON: Did you go through the document with your attorney?

MR NOSENGA: No, my attorney came, I do not understand, I am requesting that she reads it to me.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you at Sun City?

MR NOSENGA: No I am in Leeuhof, Vereeniging Prison.

CHAIRPERSON: I thought you said you were at Sun City?

MR NOSENGA: Before I came here I was indeed in Sun City.

MS TANZER: If I may clarify, he was just transferred for purposes of this hearing on Friday, this last Friday to Leeuhof.

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not activated.

CHAIRPERSON: Was he not in prison?

MS TANZER: He was in prison at Sun City until Friday and on Friday he was transferred to Leeuhof.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MS TANZER: Does the Commissioner require me to read this statement to him? Alright.

"I, the undersigned, Andries Nosenga, do hereby make oath and say that:

(i) I am 23 years old, am presently serving a 16 year prison sentence for murder at the Maximum B Prison in Leeuhof. I was convicted in February 1995. I have a Standard 1 education.

(ii) I resided at 671 Newman Road in Everton until 1990 when I left the township and went to live in the kwaMadala Hostel in Sebokeng. There I joined the Inkatha Freedom Party, the IFP. Themba Khosa was the chairperson of the IFP in the Vaal Triangle. The IFP used KwaMadala Hostel as a base from which they would launch attacks on residents of the township.

(iii) I was part of a group from the hostel that went on the rampage in Boipatong in June 1992. Before we left the township we performed various rituals. Just before we were about to leave, Sergeant Peens of the SAP came and gave Katisi Victor Kezwa some money. Themba Khosa also took guns from Peens.

(iv) When we got out of the hostel onto the road we were picked up by a police casspir driven by a white man whose name I don't know. In the Hippo there was Chaka of the security branch, a white policeman known to me as Rooikop who had red hair, Peens and our driver. There were fourteen or fifteen IFP members inside the Hippo. Others were walking alongside. Those that I remember who were in the Hippo were Gatchene, who had ordered us to get into the Hippo, Rubin Themba, Blackie, Makuka and Dondo.

(v) ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I just want to say that I don't know this statement, the statement that says I was sentenced to sixteen years.

MS TANZER: This statement has never been read to you before I read it to you last week in Sun City, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you now recognise this statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I understand the statement which she is reading now.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that this is not your statement?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about the sixteen years and Themba Khosa being chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS TANZER: Alright, can we then go to the statement on page 18?

CHAIRPERSON: Well, let me understand this, are you saying that you now recognise this statement as a whole?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I recognise the one that she's just read now but it is not mine, it is not true that I was in jail for sixteen years or that Themba Khosa was the chairperson. The legal representative first read it to me in prison.

CHAIRPERSON: She has not yet finished reading it, there is still a lot to go, but are you saying that what she has just read is what you don't agree with? You see the reason why your attorney is asking you these questions, there is a statement here which we are told she has gone through with you before. It bears your name but it is not signed, okay?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what your attorney wants to find out is whether do you know what is written in that statement. Some of the things that may be in the statement may be true, you may know some of the things in that you may be 23 years of age, you may have resided at 671 Newman Road, but what she wants to find out is this whole statement, do you know it? Did you make this statement to anyone? Is that what you want?

MS TANZER: Not whether he made the statement but once the statement was put down in writing was it ever read to him and presented to him.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: It was not read to me, it was first read to me by my legal representatives in prison.

ADV. SIGODI: I'm sorry, I did not get that answer, what was your answer about the statement.

MR NOSENGA: I said my legal representatives first read it to me in prison, it had not been read to me before then.

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

CHAIRPERSON: No one had read this statement to you before, before you had tendered it?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I do not remember. What I know is that my attorney first read it to me in prison, that was the first time.

MS TANZER: I now refer you to page 18 of the bundle. A sworn statement which bears your signature, do you verify that this is your signature?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that I signed this statement but I have made many statements before.

MS TANZER: Page 22 of the bundle.

MR MAPOMA: I'm sorry Chairperson, may I just clarify? This bundle R, there was an affidavit which was handed in in supplement to bundle R where pages 18 up to 23 were added. Unfortunately it was not attached into this bundle.

MS TANZER: This was a statement that was taken from you in the prison in Groenpunt and the fact that you signed it in January whilst at the TRC here, before that, do you not recognise the signature.

MR NOSENGA: Yes I recognise my name.

MR LAX: Do you - sorry, could I just clarify something here, your answer was whether - you were asked whether this was your statement, you said "yes, I recognise my name." Does that mean you recognise your signature as being your name on the bottom of page 22? Look at it.

MR NOSENGA: I said yes it's possible that is mine.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, it's not a question of whether it could be you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did sign the statement.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS TANZER: Your Form 1 application on page 1 of the bundle, in fact 1 until 7, yes, contains certain information which is inaccurate. Can you clarify for this Commission or let's clear it up with this Commission some of the information which is incorrect. Okay, firstly, what date were you born?

MR NOSENGA: I was born in 1973.

MS TANZER: Are you aware of the exact date in 1973 you were born?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not know.

MS TANZER: What date were you sentenced for the crimes regarding the attack on Zone 12, Sebokeng and Everton?

MR LAX: Ms Tanzer could you, just to assist us, you know if you're going to refer to a specific part of this form perhaps just alert us to which page you're referring to and then ask a question in relation to it otherwise we've got to scrabble around trying to find what you're referring to?

MS TANZER: I'll do that for the Commissioner.

ADV SIBANYONI: Maybe while you are checking the pages, Mr Nosenga, do you know the month on which you were born?

MR NOSENGA: No I did mention that I do not know the month on which I was born.

MS TANZER: I going to detract that question because it actually related to something which is now a ...(indistinct)

On page 2 - at page 9(a)(ii) when you were asked to furnish sufficient particulars of the offences associated with a political objective in respect of which amnesty is sought including the date, place and nature thereof and the name or names of any other persons involved, you say 1993. Can you clarify for this Commission what date did the offence take place?

MR NOSENGA: Are you referring to the Sebokeng incident?

MS TANZER: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: It happened in 1992 on the 15th June 1992.

MS TANZER: That is two days prior to the Boipatong attack?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MS TANZER: Were you already at the hostel on that date?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was staying at the hostel.

MS TANZER: Who instructed you to attack these people? The Sebokeng and Zone 12. Zone 12, Sebokeng and Everton incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that application before us?

MS TANZER: It is before us in the sense that it's in his application in terms of Form 1.

CHAIRPERSON: That's not the application we have to concede though?

MS TANZER: No but it actually overlaps.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I understand but I just want to make sure you know.

MS TANZER: Yes, it's not the actual application before us, no.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright.

MS TANZER: Okay. Who instructed you to proceed with this attack?

MR NOSENGA: The Prince Zulu.

MS TANZER: Who were your fellow attackers?

MR NOSENGA: Those I remember were Michael Ramakawu, ...(indistinct) Ndlovu, I don't remember the other names, as well as Sipho if I remember well.

MS TANZER: Was Victor Kezwa in the car with you?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MS TANZER: Did these people that you mention, they were in the car with you on the 15th June, did they take part in the Boipatong attack two days later?

MR NOSENGA: The person I remember is Michael Ramakawu but I do not remember seeing Victor Kezwa.

CHAIRPERSON: You did not see Victor Kezwa where?

MR NOSENGA: She's asking me about the incident when we attacked Boipatong and that is what I was referring to.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR LAX: This Sipho you're referring to, do you know what his surname is?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know his surname, just the first name.

MS TANZER: When you completed the Form 1 application you described offences that you committed on the 15th June 1992 relating to drive by shootings in Zone 12, Sebokeng and Everton. No mention is made of the Boipatong Massacre in your application. Can you explain to this Commission how it transpired that your activities relating to the Boipatong Massacre became known and why you are applying for amnesty in respect of this massacre?

MR NOSENGA: The reason I seek amnesty for the Boipatong Massacre is because I was also involved and the people of Boipatong did not know what had happened. That is why I also seek amnesty for the Boipatong Massacre.

MS TANZER: So you were never convicted of the Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: No I was not, there were also others who were not convicted.

MS TANZER: Were you ever interrogated or charged for the crimes committed in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, I was charged for the offences I committed in Sebokeng, not Boipatong.

MS TANZER: Now on page 18 of the bundle at paragraph 2 you state that Themba Khosa chaired the IFP in the Vaal Triangle, is this correct?

MR NOSENGA: What I said that was he was the chairperson of the Youth Brigade, that is the IFP Youth Brigade.

MS TANZER: Now you also said that you had - on the same paragraph, that you had not been involved in any other attacks prior to the Boipatong Massacre. Is this correct?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat the question?

MS TANZER: In the affidavit you state that you were not involved in any other attacks prior to the massacre on Boipatong, is that correct? This is in paragraph 2 on page 18.

MR LAX: Sorry, are you not referring to paragraph 4 on page 19 where you say you were not involved in ...(indistinct)

MR NOSENGA: I was involved in the Sebokeng matter as well as in the Small Farm incident.

MS TANZER: Which took place on the 15th?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MS TANZER: In paragraph 3 on page 18 of the bundle you said that Mtwana Zulu gave instructions to break into shops and steal food. Was that accurate?

MR NOSENGA: No, he did not authorise us to break into shops, we did this on our own initiative.

MS TANZER: What instructions did you receive from Mtwana Zulu?

MR LAX: Sorry, sorry. Can you just hear the Chairperson is asking you something about where did this occur, what are you referring to? Please refer us to the right section and let the witness answer before you then ask him another question?

MS TANZER: I said it was on page 18 at paragraph 3 of the bundle.

CHAIRPERSON: So is the position then the statement which says "we will break into shops and steal food" that's not correct?

MS TANZER: That's my question, yes.

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did say that it isn't correct. We did this, the breaking into shops, we did it when we were not staying at KwaMadala Hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: The statement that Themba Khosa chaired IFP in the Vaal Triangle and he was a frequent visitor at the hostel, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I said he was the chairperson of the IFP Youth Brigade in the Vaal Triangle, he was in charge of the youth.

CHAIRPERSON: What I've said to you, is it correct or not? In the statement at paragraph 2, the statement that you made, you say "Themba Khosa chaired the IFP in the Vaal Triangle and he was a frequent visitor at the hostel". Now I want to find out from you is that statement true?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that Themba Khosa was not the chairperson of the IFP but he was responsible for the youth.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS TANZER: Well can you clarify was he a frequent visitor at the hostel, was that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes he was a frequent visitor.

MS TANZER: Now in paragraph 3 you said Mtwana Zulu gave instructions to break into shops and steal food. Is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not true.

MS TANZER: What instructions did Mtwana Zulu give you, if any?

MR NOSENGA: The only order he gave us was to kill the people of Sebokeng, not to break into shops. He said this because those people were IFP enemies, they were involved in the killing of IFP members.

MS TANZER: Now on page 19 of the affidavit, at paragraph 5 on the second line, you say the meeting was held in a big hall and was attended by a lot of people. Was it a big hall or was it a stadium?

MR NOSENGA: It's like a sports ground.

MS TANZER: More like a stadium?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MS TANZER: Now on paragraph 19 of your affidavit which is page 21 you say you entered eight houses that night, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, when we went to Boipatong we entered into five houses. Please just explain to me are you referring to the Boipatong or the Sebokeng matter?

MS TANZER: I'm referring to the Boipatong matter.

MR NOSENGA: In that regard we entered into five houses not eight.

MS TANZER: Are you presently in prison and on what charge?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I am in prison and I have been sentenced with regards to the murders in Sebokeng and Everton.

MS TANZER: Where were you born?

MR NOSENGA: I was born in Everton at 671 Newman Road.

MS TANZER: When did you leave Everton?

MR NOSENGA: If I remember correctly it was in 1991 after comrades had threatened me about the burning of a certain garage.

MS TANZER: So when you left Everton, where did you go live?

MR NOSENGA: I went to live at the Boipatong Hostel.

MS TANZER: Boipatong or KwaMadala?

MR NOSENGA: KwaMadala Hostel at the Iscor Hostel.

MS TANZER: When did you go live in the KwaMadala Hostel, what date, do you remember? Or the year?

MR NOSENGA: It was in 1991, I do not remember the month.

MS TANZER: When did you become an IFP member?

MR NOSENGA: In 1991.

MS TANZER: As you arrived at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat the question?

MS TANZER: As you arrived at the hostel did you become an IFP member?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, after I had arrived at the hostel.

MS TANZER: When you arrived at the KwaMadala Hostel, were they suspicious, the leaders suspicious that you were an ANC spy?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they were suspicious.

MS TANZER: Were you questioned by any committee about your political affiliations or your reasons for coming to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: If I remember correctly, the person who questioned me on my arrival at the hostel were Mtwana Zulu, Damara and Rita Xongo.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Zulu, Damara Xongo and who else?

MR NOSENGA: Damara Xongo, Dakie Xongo as well as Gatchene.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS TANZER: Were you ever presented - well you said to the IFP Senior Committee at the hostel either voluntarily or by force. Were you taken by force? According to the evidence of Richard Dlamini you said you were taken by force, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember that, I do not remember being presented to the Senior Committee of the IFP.

MS TANZER: Do you remember who assigned you a room at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: The person who issued me a room was Prince Zulu.

MS TANZER: So what are your comments regarding Moses Mthembu's allegations that he assigned you a room after the attack on Boipatong.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about what he said because I remember very well that it was Prince Zulu who issued me a room.

MS TANZER: Do you remember your room number?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember clearly because I went through several rooms but I think it was Room 3.

MS TANZER: Were you employed whilst you were at the KwaMadala Hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No I was not employed, I was just an IFP supporter. We did not work anywhere but we maintained ourselves by stealing cars and breaking into shops.

MS TANZER: What kind of instructions did you receive from the leaders at the KwaMadala Hostel and who gave you these instructions?

MR NOSENGA: I did explain that the commander who issued instructions when we attacked - sorry, are you referring to instructions issued when we went on an attack or to a person who commanded the hostel?

MS TANZER: Well let me rephrase, what was the policy of the leaders of the IFP at the hostel that you were aware of?

CHAIRPERSON: Ma'am, with due respect, I mean that's a very broad question. Would you just try and narrow it down so that he can understand what is it that you want him to say?

MS TANZER: I'll do that. Did the leaders of the hostel give instructions to the hostel dwellers or to IFP members to attack ANC comrades in the Vaal Triangle?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MS TANZER: Were you aware of the acrimony between the dwellers of the KwaMadala Hostel and the residents of Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I heard about that, that there were IFP members who had been killed in Boipatong.

MS TANZER: When did you first become aware of the fact that an attack Boipatong was imminent?

MR NOSENGA: There was a meeting held on the 14th, that is there was a meeting held two weeks before the 14th meeting. That was where the Boipatong attack was discussed but the order to attack Boipatong was issued on the 14th June.

MS TANZER: This meeting took ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: What happened at the meeting two weeks prior to the 14th?

MR NOSENGA: That's where Peens arrived as well as Themba Khosa. They came to discuss the Boipatong matter. There was an Induna present at the stadium, they said Boipatong should be attacked. Thereafter, Peens said he will supply the weapons, the firearms. The person who was interpreting that Afrikaans was Gatchene.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR NOSENGA: They said we would get our instructions from the Induna on the 14th June.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR NOSENGA: If I remember correctly, that is what I remember about that meeting.

MS TANZER: Do you remember who else spoke at that meeting?

MR NOSENGA: The meeting of the 14th?

MS TANZER: The meeting two weeks prior to the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember.

MS TANZER: In your affidavit on page 19 at paragraph 6 you state that Themba Khosa spoke at that meeting and that you said a certain insect should be killed, referring to the Boipatong residents that there was a certain Inkatha member had been killed in the location. Do you recall this?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, he did say that the dogs of Boipatong should be killed because at that time IFP members had been killed in Boipatong.

MS TANZER: You further state that the Induna's agreed with what Themba Khosa had said, is that correct? Do you stand by that?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MS TANZER: In your affidavit you also said, it's still paragraph 7, that Peens and Danie who you said is a member of the SAP said they would supply Rooikop, okay, who is a policeman known to you, with weapons and that he would give them to Themba Khosa who would bring them to the hostel. Do you remember that, do you stand by that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I remember Peens speaking at that meeting although I do not remember Danie quite well. I think it was just Peens who was at the meeting not Danie.

MS TANZER: Are you sure Danie was not at the meeting? You mention him in your affidavit?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I'm sure. Peens was the person present at the meeting. We only met Danie on our way to attack Boipatong, that's where I saw him.

MS TANZER: Do you remember who accompanied Peens to the meeting, Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: It was Chaka.

MS TANZER: Chaka being the policeman?

MS TANZER: He is a policeman who works in Vanderbijl in the murder and robbery unit.

MS TANZER: Now at this meeting of the 14th June were you aware that on the next day you were going to attack Sebokeng, Zone 12, Sebokeng and Everton with the other people that you had mentioned?

MR NOSENGA: No, we were not aware of it, we heard it from Mtwana Zulu.

MS TANZER: When did you hear it?

MR NOSENGA: The order was issued on the same day in the evening, I'm not sure of the time. That was when he told me we should go and attack Sebokeng.

MS TANZER: And Everton that is?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MS TANZER: Were there lots of meetings held at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes there were meetings that were held amongst the hostel dwellers and sometimes Themba Khosa would be present at those meetings.

MS TANZER: Would the Indunas always preside at these meetings?

MR NOSENGA: Yes it will always be an Induna, Gatchene, Indwana and others who were from Natal.

MS TANZER: How did you know when a meeting was taking place?

MR NOSENGA: There was a siren and that would be sounded, that was how we knew a meeting would be held.

MS TANZER: Do you speak Sotho?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not know of Sesotho, I speak Zulu.

MS TANZER: Do you understand Afrikaans or English?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not understand either language.

MS TANZER: Do you know personally any dweller of the KwaMadala Hostel who was killed in the Boipatong location?

MR NOSENGA: No, I remember that there was a person from Natal who was killed although I do not remember the person's name.

MS TANZER: Were you aware of complaints ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You say you don't speak Sotho?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I do not, I speak Zulu.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand Sotho?

MR NOSENGA: No, I can only catch a word here and there.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you speak it?

MR NOSENGA: No, I only speak Zulu.

MS TANZER: Did you have any reservations about yourself participating in the Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not.

MS TANZER: Did you have any personal motive for attacking the people of Boipatong, like revenge or anger?

MR NOSENGA: No, the reason we attacked because it was something issued by IFP members but I had no personal grudge against the people of Boipatong.

MS TANZER: So why did you participate in the Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: It was because it was IFP policy that if you are a male or you were above 16 years of age you were required to go on attacks. It was only women and children who were allowed to remain behind.

MS TANZER: And how old were you in June '92, do you remember?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know, I don't remember.

MS TANZER: You mention in your affidavit on page 19 at paragraph 7 that weapons were delivered by Themba Khosa to the hostel and kept in the ceiling. Can you describe the ceiling in which these weapons were kept?

MR NOSENGA: It was made of corrugated iron and there were holes in which you could put these weapons.

MS TANZER: So okay, do you know a policeman by the name of Rooikop?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I know him.

MS TANZER: Had you seen him at the KwaMadala Hostel prior to the Boipatong attack?

MR NOSENGA: I started knowing him when we went on the attack at Boipatong, I never saw him at the hostel. I also saw him when I was arrested.

MS TANZER: Did you ever see him give weapons to Themba Khosa?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say that I saw him, I only heard Themba Khosa speaking about it but I did not see him personally.

MS TANZER: Can you tell us about the meeting that took place on the 14th June 1992 three days before the attack?

MR NOSENGA: It was held on the 14th, that's where we were told that we were going to attack Boipatong and the police, Peens and the other police would be waiting for us outside the hostel near the BP garage and the weapons were displayed at the stadium by Daki Xongo, that was when we were given Indelesi.

CHAIRPERSON: We're talking about the meeting of the 15th.

MS TANZER: Of the 14th.

CHAIRPERSON: Of the 14th, yes.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's the meeting on the 14th. No, on the 14th we were told that we should attack - I'm sorry I did not get that question properly?

MS TANZER: Alright, on the meeting of the 14th, who were the Indunas that presided at this meeting, do you remember?

MR NOSENGA: It was Gatchene and Mtwana Zulu, as well as Daki Xongo and others whom I did not know.

MS TANZER: And what did they tell you at this meeting?

MR NOSENGA: They said the day had come that we should prepare ourselves for the attack on the 17th June. That was when we learned that we would meet the police at the BP garage on the 17th.

MS TANZER: Now ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Where were you supposed to meet the police?

MR NOSENGA: Outside the hostel towards the BP garage, that is outside the KwaMadala Hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: Near the BP garage?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, near the garage.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS TANZER: At this meeting were women present on the 14th?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they were present on the meeting of the 14th.

MS TANZER: Were you informed at this meeting of the time when the attack would take place?

MR NOSENGA: No, I just remember the date well.

MS TANZER: At this meeting what were your instructions, what were you told to do? In Boipatong that is.

MR NOSENGA: We were just told that we would destroy the entire township. They said that we should destroy everything and everyone because the people of Boipatong supported the ANC, that is what I heard at the meeting.

MS TANZER: Now was explained or was it said when you should destroy everybody that included women and children?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's what was said, they said everyone, children, old people, pregnant women, everyone should be killed.

MS TANZER: Were you told at this meeting that you would be supplied with weapons?

MR NOSENGA: They said we would receive the weapons at the stadium.

MS TANZER: And when the attack would be finished did they tell you at the meeting what would happen to the weapons, did they tell you what to do with the weapons?

MR NOSENGA: What I remember was that it was said that the weapons would be returned back to the stadium and that Xongo would collect them.

MS TANZER: At this meeting of the 14th was any mention, meeting about a rally that would be held in Ulundi after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I first learned of that after the attack on Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: Ma'am, when it is convenient, would you let us know so that we can adjourn for lunch?

MS TANZER: Well it's convenient at this point because I'm proceeding to the next stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we'll rise and come back at twenty past 2.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

MR BERGER: Chairperson, whilst we're waiting for Ms Tanzer, might I just say that we've had an opportunity to glance briefly at the application that Mr Lowies intends proceeding with tomorrow morning. It would appear that there are a number of people who are being accused of some very serious misconduct, amongst them the African National Congress. In fact it is being alleged that the African National Congress is part of a conspiracy to manufacture evidence and other people as well. We don't act on behalf of the African National Congress but it would appear as though their interests are being effected by this application and we would have thought that they should be given proper notice of this because they might want to make either certain representations or place certain evidence before the Committee?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) the application?

MR BERGER: Well our attitude is that we are going to have to prepare papers.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Yes Ms Tanzer?

MS TANZER: (continues) Thank you Mr Chairman.

I just want to go back and clarify with you the question of the unsigned affidavit which is on page 8 of the bundle R. Although this affidavit had not been signed by you and you had not - and had not been read to you after it was drawn, is it correct that this affidavit was taken or was made as a result of information that you had given to certain persons who had visited you in a prison for the intention of your application for amnesty?

MR LOWIES: Mr Chairman, I have to object against this question on behalf of my clients. My submission is that this evidence is suggesting an answer and it is one of the crucial aspects not only in the application but also in the merits of this matter and I would submit that under those circumstances the question would be admissible suggesting an answer.

MS TANZER: I think that it's a question as crucial in fact to the application of this applicant in that it presupposes that if this affidavit is unacceptable then his whole application is out of time, is not timeous. Now what evidence I'm trying to draw or what information I'm trying to obtain is that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: The issues is not, it has never been whether his application is out of time. The objection here is that it's a leading question, that's what it should address you.

MS TANZER: Alright then I understand that question. I'll rephrase it.

Did anybody visit you at a prison in order to obtain a statement from you to support your application for amnesty in respect of any offences that you have committed?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (s.u.o.) Yes that is correct, that was Mr Berger and Mr Brian.

EXAMINATION BY MS TANZER: (cont)

Do you remember when they ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: Sorry? I'm saying Mr Berger and Mr Brian visited me at the Maximum Stoffberg Prison. Mr Brian.

MS TANZER: Can you clarify who is Mr Berger and Mr Brian?

MR NOSENGA: They came to me and introduced themselves as Advocates and Brian said he is in Johannesburg, based in Johannesburg, and they requested me to give them my statement, my amnesty statement.

MS TANZER: In making your statement, did you give information relating to the Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MS TANZER: Now the affidavit that you did not sign and I read to you at the prison a few days ago, is a lot of that affidavit correct insofar as information you did tell them at the prison? The advocates?

CHAIRPERSON: Well there's a suggestion that this statement which occurs at pages 8 through 10 is the statement that was given by Mr Nosenga to Advocate Berger and Brian?

MS TANZER: That is what I'm asking him.

CHAIRPERSON: Well then ask the question directly.

MS TANZER: The information on this affidavit, on page 8, 9 and 10, that I read to you in a prison last week, that was not signed by you, is this affidavit - does this contain information that you did tell or give to Advocate Berger and Advocate Brian when they visited you at the prison?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't because I did not sign it.

MS TANZER: But did you tell them any - did you tell them about the Boipatong attack and the Zone 12, Sebokeng, Everton attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there is something that I told them about the Boipatong incident.

MS TANZER: And that was part of your application for amnesty?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MS TANZER: Alright. Just on more question, Advocate Brian and Advocate Berger, did they ever come back to the prison and read or indicate that there was a statement that you needed to sign?

MR NOSENGA: No, they did not.

MS TANZER: Alright. Okay, let's go back to our questions relating to your stay at the KwaMadala Hostel. When the siren was sounded on the evening of the attack on the 17th June 1992, did you proceed to the stadium knowing that from there you would be attacking Boipatong?

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Chair, I object to that question, my submission is there is an easy way to ask, just say "when you heard the siren what happened then?" but I mean to suggest that the Boipatong was going to be attacked is very leading?

CHAIRPERSON: But I thought the evidence of this witness is at least two weeks prior to the 14th they were told that they were going to attack Boipatong. On the 14th they were also told that they were going to attack Boipatong, so the question is really whether on the 17th he went there knowing that Boipatong was going to be attacked?

MR NOSENGA: Will the question please be repeated?

MS TANZER: When you heard the siren on the 17th June in the evening, did you go to the stadium knowing that you would be attacking Boipatong that night?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MS TANZER: Now did you receive instructions at any of the meetings or on the night in question only to attack and kill SDU members or anyone else to be found at the location of Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, they did not refer to the SDU's, they actually said that we should attack anybody that we came across, any resident of Boipatong.

MS TANZER: So no reference was ever made to SDU's, comrades?

MR NOSENGA: No, I'm hearing that for the first time.

MS TANZER: Now you stated in your affidavit on paragraph 10 on page 20 that on the day of the attack you saw Peens and a member of the South African Police Force, Chaka, arrive in Peens' private car and hand money over to Victor Kezwa. Could you be certain - sorry?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct, that was during the day on the 17th when Peens arrived at the hostel, that was just outside the hostel and he gave him some money, I'm not quite sure how much.

MS TANZER: Do you know the reason why he gave him money?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not have any knowledge why Peens gave Gadisi the money.

MS TANZER: Were you a member of Victor Kezwa's hit squad?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MS TANZER: Was Victor Kezwa present at the hostel on the day of the 17th June 1992, of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I didn't see him on the day of the attack, I only saw him last during the day.

MS TANZER: Can you just clarify, did you see him last on that day but not in the evening? When did you see him last?

MR NOSENGA: I only saw him during the day, not in the evening, I did not see him at the meeting in the evening.

MS TANZER: Now you said that you have often seen Victor Kezwa meeting with Peens. Did these meetings seem friendly or hostile?

MR NOSENGA: They used to laugh together, that's what I can say.

MS TANZER: So it was not that Peens was interrogating Kezwa or anything like that?

MR NOSENGA: No that is not how they seemed, they seemed like happy in the company of each other.

MS TANZER: Did you ever discuss the attack on Boipatong with Victor Kezwa?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MS TANZER: Where did you receive the weapons and who gave you the weapons on the night of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Damara Xongo. I'm sorry Daki Xongo.

MS TANZER: Where were the weapons?

MR NOSENGA: These weapons were hidden in the ceiling to which I referred. Near the showers.

MS TANZER: And at the stadium?

MR NOSENGA: He placed the firearms there and said that each one of us should come and choose whatever weapon to take.

MS TANZER: Where did he place the firearms?

MR NOSENGA: He scattered these weapons on the ground at the stadium.

MS TANZER: Can you tell us what happened at the stadium that evening before you proceeded to Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: There was Indelesi. We were made to drink this Indelesi. After that there is another Indelesi which was sprinkled over our bodies so that we could not get shot.

MS TANZER: Did you sprinkle the Indelesi on your weapons?

MR NOSENGA: Yes we had different types of Indelesi.

MS TANZER: How did you feel after drinking Indelesi?

MR NOSENGA: It intoxicated me and I felt like I had lost my mind a little bit.

MS TANZER: Who gave the Indelesi to the people at the stadium?

MR NOSENGA: If I still remember very well, I think it was Mtwana Zulu was at the stadium that night?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I saw him at the stadium on the day of the attack, that is at the hostel on the 17th.

MS TANZER: Did any of the Indunas or any leader speak to you at the stadium or speak to the people at the stadium regarding the impending attack at Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: There were many Indunas, people such as Gatchene, they addressed us there and many others some of whose name I do not know and people such as Daki Xongo were present as well.

MS TANZER: Do you remember what they were saying to you, what was the message to the people?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot remember very well what people like Damara was saying because the Indelesi was I think working at me at the time.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, you swallow your words, Mr Nosenga, and you make it very difficult for us to understand.

MR NOSENGA: Okay I understand.

MS TANZER: Did any women arrive at the stadium that night?

MR NOSENGA: No, I saw only men because women were ordered to remain behind, they were not wanted at the stadium.

MS TANZER: Were they ordered to stay behind that night or before that night?

MR NOSENGA: Because they were actually told before we went to the stadium, they were told that there was going to be a meeting on the 17th in the evening at the stadium and that they were not to come. They were told during the day before we went to the stadium in the evening. They were told about the meeting that very same meeting and that they were not wanted, only men who were wanted.

MS TANZER: Were you divided into groups and were you grieved about what would happen when you arrived at Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, we were not in groups. We left the hostel in one group until we crossed the bridge where we came across Casspirs.

MS TANZER: Now can you just describe in a little more detail for this Commission from when you left the stadium till you reached the Casspirs, the direction you followed?

MR NOSENGA: We took the main road, when you leave the Iscor from the gate you can join the main road, that's the one that we took and we went towards the BP and there was an open veld that we crossed through down to the bridge where we came across the Casspir.

MS TANZER: Who would you say was leading the attack on Boipatong?

MS TANZER: In my group I was being led by Induna Gatchene and other groups were led by different Indunas respectively.

MS TANZER: So were you divided into groups or did you just fall into groups?

MR NOSENGA: There were others who were in Casspirs and others were walking on foot and we went to the entrance of the township where we decided to take different directions for cover.

MS TANZER: My question is, was it a planned action, was it planned into which groups you would be or did you just fall into groups informally?

MR NOSENGA: No, I only started to know once we were with Peens, that's when I was informed as to who was going to be my Induna and into which group I will belong.

MS TANZER: And who informed you of this?

MR NOSENGA: It was Gatchene.

MS TANZER: How many Casspirs were waiting for you in the field?

MR NOSENGA: There were four of them.

MS TANZER: Now did you enter into a Casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MS TANZER: Who was in the Casspir with you?

MR NOSENGA: I saw Peens, Chaka, Rooikop and one other white male who was driving, one other white person who was driving the Casspir.

MS TANZER: Did you know this driver?

MR NOSENGA: No, I was seeing that person for the first time.

CHAIRPERSON: This other person, was he the driver? You've mentioned Peens, Chaka, Rooikop?

MR NOSENGA: She was asking me as to who was driving the Casspir.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, well the person who you got into the Casspir with were Peens, Chaka, Rooikop?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's what I said and other police people whom I did not know.

MR NOSENGA: How many of the policemen?

MR NOSENGA: I think there could have been six or five, I'm not quite sure.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS TANZER: How did you know they were policemen?

MR NOSENGA: I saw Rooikop, the presence suggested to me that these people are police, the presence of Chaka as well and the others that I knew.

MS TANZER: And amongst the hostel dwellers, do you remember who were with you in the Casspir that night?

MR NOSENGA: Will you please repeat the question?

MS TANZER: Do you remember who from the hostel, the KwaMadala Hostel were with you in the Casspir that night?

MR NOSENGA: I still remember Gatchene, he was in my group and Sipho, Dondo and Stikenau, Lucky. Those are the ones that I still remember very well.

MS TANZER: Do you remember if Themba Kubeka was in the Casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I remember he was present.

MS TANZER: Was a person known as Rubin the Casspir with you?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Ma'am, you know, he has told us who was and who he remembers. You are now leading him.

MS TANZER: Alright, I'll retract that, I was just referring to the affidavit that he had signed previously, but I'll retract that.

MS TANZER: Do you know any other people that were in a Casspir with you that night?

MR NOSENGA: There were many of us that evening but I can only remember ones with whom I was travelling in the Casspir when we went to attack.

MS TANZER: Can you describe the scene to the Commission as you arrived at Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: We got off the Casspirs and took cover. There is one first house that is painted white I think and we started breaking down windows.

CHAIRPERSON: Speak up and slow, we're making notes here and there's someone who is also interpreting.

MR NOSENGA: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, start again.

MR SIBANYONI: Through you Mr Chairperson, maybe Mr Nosenga, if you cannot tough the microphone, once it's on it will stay on, if you touch it then do this, there is a lot of sound coming in.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying we got off the Casspirs and we went into this first house painted white, broke windows and doors. I think we found a male and a female there. These two people were killed, were shot dead.

MS TANZER: Can you give any ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Listen, the man speaks a hell of a lot, just give us a little bit of a chance to make decent notes? Carry on.

MS TANZER: Can you describe any physical features of that road that you entered and that could help identify which street it was?

MR NOSENGA: I am not quite familiar with the street, there is this one main road that proceeds towards Boipatong and we took the one road or street that ultimately led us to the first house.

MS TANZER: Did you shoot anybody in that first house?

MR NOSENGA: Yes even though I don't know the person's identity.

MS TANZER: What happened after you left this first house?

MR NOSENGA: We went into the second house, we found some children and adults, they too were shot and I also fired shots in that house.

MS TANZER: What kind of weapon were you using that night?

MR NOSENGA: An AK47.

MS TANZER: Did you yourself shoot any of these people, the occupants of this house?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MS TANZER: How many people were with you in the second house?

MR NOSENGA: I think there were six if not five. Dondo and Rubin Themba included.

MS TANZER: What happened after that?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, would you please stop looking at the notes of your attorney. Look up when you answer the question because sometimes your last word we don't hear them because you speak very softly. Yes, yes?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying there were five of us, that is the second house, my legal representative is referring to the second house.

MS TANZER: What happened after you left the second house?

MR NOSENGA: We went into the third house in which we also found people and there was another group from among our group which was shooting from outside and we went inside and fired shots as well. There could have been three of these people inside.

MS TANZER: And then what happened after that?

MR NOSENGA: We went into the fourth house then we also found people in this fourth house, some of them were running away, jumping the fence then we went into the house and started shooting the people that we found inside.

MS TANZER: And then, go on?

MR NOSENGA: And we went to the last house which was the fifth house and we also found people in this fifth house. The door and windows were broken and started shooting. We looked for people under the bed and wardrobes.

MS TANZER: Do you remember shooting anyone that night or were you shooting randomly around each house?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot say I could have spotted anyone individual because I was also under the influence of the Indelesi so that I also do not know the identity of these people that I shot.

MS TANZER: Did you notice any of your fellow attackers breaking windows and damaging houses?

MR NOSENGA: The one person that I saw was Stikenau because another group was breaking windows and doors on the other side. I could not have seen those.

MS TANZER: Why did you stop after the fifth house?

MR NOSENGA: I had two magazines, we continued to Slovo Park and another group continued attacking on the same street and I finished my job at the shacks.

MS TANZER: Did you see anybody rape a woman that night?

MR NOSENGA: No, I only heard that Stikenau had raped someone but I'm not sure about that.

MS TANZER: Did you ask him if he had raped a woman

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not question him about it, he just mentioned it.

MR LAX: Sorry, just repeat that last answer? I didn't catch the interpretation very well, I'm sorry.

INTERPRETER: He said that he did not question him about it, the person Stikenau had volunteered information.

MS TANZER: Had you ever been to Boipatong prior to this night in question?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I had been to Boipatong before I became a member of the IFP.

MS TANZER: On page 21 of the bundle at paragraph 20 you mention that Peens also shot people, that he shot them from the Casspir. Can you elaborate to this Commission on what you saw Peens doing that night?

MR NOSENGA: The Casspir was driving slowly and Peens would get off the Casspir and shoot at the people on the street. He would not go into the houses.

MS TANZER: Did you see what kind of weapon Peens was using?

MR NOSENGA: I just saw that it was a small gun, I'm not sure what type it was.

MS TANZER: Tell this Commission, after you left the Boipatong location, where did you proceed??

MR NOSENGA: Do you mean on our way back or during the attack?

MS TANZER: During the attack.

MR NOSENGA: We took the taxi routes towards the Boipatong Hostel as if we were going towards ...(indistinct)ville, there were a lot of shacks around that area and that's where we launched another attack.

MS TANZER: Did you pass a hostel on the way?

MR NOSENGA: Yes there was a hostel near a lot of trees and there were also shacks nearby and our last attack was launched on a Xhosa Hostel, that was after we'd been to Slovo Park.

MS TANZER: Did you shoot anybody in the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not remember, I only fired at Slovo Park.

MS TANZER: Do you remember shooting anybody specifically at Slovo Park or were you shooting randomly?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot identify the people I shot at Slovo Park but I just saw people falling as we were moving around the shacks.

MS TANZER: What did you steal that night from the houses that you were attacking?

MR NOSENGA: If I remember correctly, it was a video machine and a T.V. and cash, we stole this from the houses, not from the shacks.

MS TANZER: What did you do with the stolen items while you were at Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: They were put into the Casspir because there were many items stolen from the houses including beds and duvet sets.

MS TANZER: How did you know that you were supposed to put the loot, the stolen loot into the Casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: I was informed by Gatchene that he had spoken to the police who had agreed that the loot should be put in the Casspir. That was information that I received from Gatchene.

MS TANZER: Did he tell you that the loot would be returned to you when you got to the hostel, when you returned back to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat the question?

MR LOWIES: Sorry Chairperson, I have to object against the question.

MS TANZER: I'll withdraw the question.

MS TANZER: Did you see any military vehicles during the attack or on your way back to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not see military vehicles.

MS TANZER: How did you get back to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: We walked on foot and the Casspirs were carrying the loot and the weapons back to the hostel but the rest of us walked on foot.

MS TANZER: Can you describe the route that you took back to the KwaMadala Hostel, can you remember?

MR NOSENGA: When we came back from the shacks, we went into the main street in Boipatong where there were shops. We passed a group of factories along the way and we proceeded towards the street near the BP garage. I'm not sure of the name of the street.

MS TANZER: Was this the same direction that you had taken to Boipatong in the beginning before the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, it was not the same route, we took a different route. It was when we came back from the township we took a different route, we did not go the same way as we had done before.

MS TANZER: What were your instructions regarding the weapons you had used during the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Weapons such as AK47's, pump guns, spears and pangas.

CHAIRPERSON: What instructions had you been given in regard to these weapons that you had used?

MR NOSENGA: On our way back or during the attack? We were ordered to return the guns to the stadium.

MS TANZER: What were your instructions regarding the stolen loot that you had taken from the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Dakie Xongo, they discussed that the loot should be burned because it would be evidence of the attack on Boipatong.

MS TANZER: On the night of the attack was there any celebration after you had returned?

MR NOSENGA: Yes there was, we were singing and when we arrived back at the stadium we received another Indelezi to drink so that we would be cleansed.

MS TANZER: Did Themba Khosa and Mtwana Zulu take part in the attack?

MR LOWIES: No, Mr Chairman, I must object again, I submit that that would also be suggesting an answer.

MS TANZER: I'll rephrase the question. Did any of the known leaders take part in the attack, did you see any of the known leaders of the KwaMadala Hostel or the IFP during that night of the attack in Boipatong, did you see them at Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: The only people that I saw were the Indunas. The leaders, I saw the leaders at the stadium.

MS TANZER: Can you describe to this Commission what happened during the days after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat the question?

MS TANZER: Can you describe what happened on the day and days after the attack. What took place at the KwaMadala Hostel after the attack on Boipatong and the days afterwards?

MR NOSENGA: Themba Khosa arrived at the hostel after the attack and he had come there to collect all the guns that had been used in the attack.

MS TANZER: Did he tell you anything else?

MR NOSENGA: No, he had a meeting with the Indunas, he didn't speak to us directly, so we were informed by the Indunas that he had come to collect the guns.

MS TANZER: Was there a meeting or any meeting that took place after the attack, regarding the attack at the KwaMadala Hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember well because I just remember Themba Khosa arriving to have a meeting with the Indunas with regards to the weapons that were used in Boipatong.

MS TANZER: What did you do with your weapon?

MR NOSENGA: I returned it to the stadium on the night of the 17th after the attack.

MS TANZER: Did you put it on the floor or where did you put your weapon?

MR NOSENGA: There was an open ground where all weapons were placed and Dakie Xongo is the person who removed them.

MS TANZER: Did you see Peens, Chaka, Rooikop or any other member of the South African Police Force at the KwaMadala Hostel during the weeks after the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, I last saw them on the day of the attack on Boipatong, I never saw them at the hostel again.

MS TANZER: Did you see Victor Kezwa on the days after the attack at the hostel. Did you ever see him again?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, I last saw Victor Kezwa during the day of the attack, I did not see him after the attack was launched.

MS TANZER: In your affidavit, on page 22 at paragraph 25, you stated that Themba Khosa came to collect the weapons?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MS TANZER: You mention "we were told that other policemen, not the policemen from Vereeniging, would come and search for weapons."?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct because the IFP worked closely with the police from Vereeniging so they would not have been able to come and search the place.

MS TANZER: You also mention that Themba Khosa was very happy and praised the people at a rally that was held at the hostel the same day?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that?

MS TANZER: You mention that, you stated under oath that Khosa was very happy and praised the people at a rally that was held at the hostel the same day?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember that well. What I remember about the rally is the one that was held in Natal at Ulundi, that was a rally at which Themba Khosa was excited.

CHAIRPERSON: But what do you say about this statement?

MR NOSENGA: I said Themba Khosa arrived after the attack at Boipatong and he spoke to the Indunas.

CHAIRPERSON: So there was no rally at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, we were informed by the Indunas after they had held a meeting with Themba Khosa.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, is the position that Themba Khosa did not meet with the hostel residents?

MR NOSENGA: He had a meeting with the Indunas and with the authorities. Those other people that he spoke to, he did not speak to us. I only got the information from Gatchene.

CHAIRPERSON: Did Gatchene report to you that Khosa was very happy and had praised the people?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, a meeting was held after Themba Khosa had left and we were informed about the purpose of his visit.

CHAIRPERSON: So there was a meeting at which you received a report from Isinduna as to what Khosa had said to them in connection with the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Themba Khosa had said that the police were going to come and search the hostel and therefore he wanted to collect all weapons that had been used in Boipatong so that they be burned.

CHAIRPERSON: You see because what you're saying, what says in your statement, paragraph 5, Khosa was very happy and praised the people at a rally that was held at the hostel the same day but as I understand your evidence, Khosa did not meet with you, he only spoke with Isinduna?

MR NOSENGA: I think ...(intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: Forget about what you said to your attorney, I just want to tell you what is it you are saying to us now. Okay, so you received a report back from Gatchede, his Induna, as to what Khosa had said to them?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS TANZER: Can you tell the Commission about the rally in Ulundi?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember the month but it was after the attack on Boipatong but there was a rally in Ulundi, an IFP rally and IFP leaders such as Buthelezi and Felgate addressed that rally. I travelled with Indwana in an E20, which was driven by Daki Xongo. We were with other Isinduna, some of whom I did not know.

MS TANZER: What happened at the rally?

MR NOSENGA: There were speeches made. The one person who spoke was Themba Khosa because he was a leader from the Vaal Triangle. He mentioned the Boipatong Massacre. Dr Buthelezi, Mangosuto Buthelezi was pleased about what had happened because he made a speech after Themba Khosa had spoken and he spoke about the Boipatong Massacre and said that he was happy about it.

MS TANZER: Were you ever on the same stage as Chief Mangosuto Buthelezi where you were shown up as an ANC spy?

MR NOSENGA: Can you please repeat that question?

MS TANZER: Were you ever on the same stage at the rally as Chief Mangosuto Buthelezi where you were shown up as an ANC spy?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not true. There was no way that an ANC person would be found in KwaMadala Hostel. I do not think the ANC would support such a statement.

MS TANZER: What are your comments regarding your other applicants' allegations that you only joined the KwaMadala Hostel after June 17th 1992, that you were not at the hostel prior to the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know what they are talking about, that is their own fabrication. I do not know about that. The people from Boipatong know very well as to when I left Sebokeng. Even now I cannot enter the township of Boipatong or Sebokeng. I would like to challenge them on that matter because I do not know what they are talking about.

MS TANZER: What are your comments regarding the allegations that you were planted in the hostel by the ANC as a spy to blow up the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: They do not know what they are talking about, they must be confused because they've made statements because what they have done is they are trying to shield the IFP leadership. I would like somebody to come here, come forward and debate this matter with me. If I was an ANC spy I should have been killed in the hostel. As I mentioned before when I arrived they were suspicious of my presence but I explained everything to them. I do not know what they are referring to.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that shortly upon your arrival they did not trust you?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, they would not trust anyone who arrived at the hostel so they also did not trust me at first but eventually, as time went on, they learned to trust me.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you have to do anything for them to trust you??

MR NOSENGA: Yes because I managed to go back to my own township to kill people of the township, that is how they began to trust me.

CHAIRPERSON: And when was that attack, was that in 1992?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: The attack on Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Yes in 1992.

CHAIRPERSON: 15th of?

MR NOSENGA: 15th of June.

CHAIRPERSON: And you had been at the hostel since 1991?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now before - you don't remember the month when you arrived at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No I don't.

CHAIRPERSON: Prior to the attack on Sebokeng, did you do any other thing which ensured that you had the confidence of the hostel dwellers?

MR NOSENGA: Yes because as an IFP member you have to wear the IFP tee-shirt publicly in town and that is how they will recognise you or identify you as an IFP member but for them to trust me, I proved myself by going back to Everton and shooting, killing people in that township.

MS TANZER: Why did you come forward regarding the attack on Boipatong if you were never charged or convicted in respect of this attack?

CHAIRPERSON: I thought that he has already told us that there were two reasons. The first one was that he took part in the attack. The second one was that the other applicants were not telling the truth.

MS TANZER: Thank you, is that correct what was just put to you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did say that I spoke about the Boipatong incident because we were not arrested or should I say not all of us were arrested and I decided to speak out because these people are not telling the truth. There are many people who died with the police involved. Many people from Boipatong who fled can testify to this effect.

MS TANZER: Now do you confirm the political objectives of the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MS TANZER: And to your mind, what were the political objectives of this attack?

MR NOSENGA: I did not go to Boipatong out of my volition, it was the IFP that was pushing us into committing the crime. It is not something that I did on my own, we were actually being forced or pushed by the IFP to do this, that is why I am saying it is politically motivated.

MS TANZER: What are your comments regarding the other applicants who state that there were no police or military assistance during the Boipatong attack?

MR NOSENGA: We should not play tennis at this Commission, many people died, old women, children and to now say that the police were not involved during the attack in June 1992 is not understandable by myself. We are not playing marbles here like children.

MS TANZER: I've no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS TANZER

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) what order are we going to follow? Mr Lowies will start, right? Cross-examining, followed by Adv Pretorius and then Mr Strydom. You've not been implicated, unless you want him to say that they were there?

MR LOWIES: No Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, okay. Okay then we'll cross over there, we'll start with Mr Berger, Malindi - no I beg your pardon. Who is the last? Okay, Cambanis and then of course subject to the rule that we don't cover the same grounds.

Okay, 9 o'clock tomorrow morning. I will look at your application this evening and then we will hear what Mr Berger and his colleagues have to say after concerning the application and then we will then indicate when we're going to hear the application.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: It concerns me that on more than one occasion we've had to start late after lunch because the legal representatives did not have their lunch in time. If there is a problem shall we deal with that, I mean I don't know what is the problem but it does concern me because we've heard on more than one occasion when there is some delay in - and it concerns me because it interferes with the progress of the hearing.

Mr Mapoma, would you look into this matter so that you just make sure that proper arrangements are made for the other legal practitioners ...(intervention)

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Chairman, pardon, I don't want to interrupt but Mr Klute says he will see to it that he orders our lunch a quarter of an hour before we stop if we just know what time we're going to stop for lunch. That may solve the problem.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

04-05-1999: Day 2

Application No: Am2778//96

Held At: Iscor Club Hall, Vanderbijlpark

Matter: Boipatong Massacre

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga? Is he here?

MR LOWIES: Chairman, if this is an appropriate time? A matter outstanding from yesterday is still the application, what is the situation if I may enquire regarding the application at this stage?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Yes, I've gone through your application, it seems to raise three issues.

The one is the investigation of Mr Nosenga's application. The second one is in the form of a declarator, the issue there being whether or not this Committee is bound by the findings of the Commission.

The third issue is whether Members of this Committee ought to recuse themselves, right, because of their participation in the preparation of the Report which gave rise to the finding contained in the Truth Commission Report. Is that right?

MR LOWIES: I would submit, with respect Chairman, yes, with a rider.

Pertaining to the first two issues I would agree with respect with your summary, however, the last aspect pertaining to the recusal of this Committee, if I may call it like that because it's strictly speaking not so, I would like to make the following observations and submissions.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)

MR LOWIES: No, what I would submit there is the application is, at this stage there is a prime facie suspicion of bias which needs to be investigated.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Because Chair ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: And that is bias on the part of the Committee?

MR LOWIES: Of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, which arises from what fact?

MR LOWIES: Which arises from inter alia the finding by the TRC relating to the participation of police officers ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: And White people, which I would submit is crucial to the nature of the application.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes and what is the other fact which gives rise to this perception of bias?

MR LOWIES: The second leg of course is ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Because if you are correct in that first submission it means that this applicant would not get a fair hearing before any Committee of the TRC and for that reason they can't apply for amnesty if your argument is to be upheld?

MR LOWIES: No Chairman, that is why I said I must qualify the manner in which the last application was paraphrased by yourself in the beginning. The operative words are prima facie, in other words there's a prime facie view.

CHAIRPERSON: The fact of the matter is that you are relying upon the findings of the Truth Commission's in their Report in regard to the presence of the police which the applicants are denying and you are submitting that because of that finding, prima facie, the matter has been prejudged? This is simply the issue isn't it?

MR LOWIES: With the rider, Chairman, with respect, that if any Member of this Committee participated in deliberations, in that finding, it means there is annexes stronger than just, it is your parent body. The annexes is ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: In terms of the Act, I think it's Section 5, I think it is, the Amnesty Committee, whilst the Truth Commission may review the decisions and procedures of other Committees including the Reparations Committee and the Gross Human Rights Violations Committee, it has no power whatsoever over this Committee. That in itself should be sufficient to indicate the independence of the Committee, apart from the fact that when this Committee has to make it's decision, it has to base it's decision in terms of Section 20, Sub-Section 3 of the Act.

MR LOWIES: Again Chairman, the test to be applied whether of not a Member of the Committee or the Committee itself should recuse itself is not the following and I submit it's important to note that it's not the following because if this is the situation then it is easy to understand the nature of the application. It is not whether there is bias on the part of this Committee, there is no suggestion at this stage and I don't think there was at any other stage a suggestion that there is bias on the side of this Committee. As it is not a test and as it is common cause that there is no such suggestion, I now turn to the true legal principles pertaining to bias and that, with respect Chairman, is simply the following. Would a reasonable litigant in the position of these applicants or a reasonable applicant have reasonable cause to believe as a result of various objective facts that there is bias. Now let's look at these facts ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, no. I'm not - the other parties still have to respond to your application.

MR LOWIES: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: All I want you to do is to make up your mind whether you want this Committee, whether you're making an application that this Committee recuse itself, or what?

MR LOWIES: Chair, I can respond to that. In the last part of the ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Because if that is what you want to do, it may well be that your application must be heard as soon as possible so as to deal with that issue.

MR LOWIES: Chair, page 6, main paragraph on page 6 reads as follows and this answers, with respect, the question put to me:

"Please take notice that the above applications are based in the pursuance of justice in that the applicants are dependent thereon to enable them ..."

And this is important:

"...to respond to the TRC findings which implicate them and are detrimental to their applications, thereby exercising the right to the rule of audi alteram partem"

and the second point ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies ...(intervention)

MR LOWIES: Chair, with respect ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: This is not the occasion to challenge the findings of the Truth and Reconciliation Report. The issue before us here is whether these applicants are entitled to amnesty in the sense that they meet the criteria. If you want to challenge the findings of the Commission on the basis that you were not given a fair hearing, in other words there was no compliance with the audi alteram partem rule, this is not the forum to do that, the forum for you to do that is not this one. The issue here is whether the people that you represent meet the criteria set out in the Act for the granting of the amnesty. I can understand if the essence of the application is to ensure that you get information in order to deal with the issue of full disclosure which is an issue here which arises from the presence or otherwise of the police during the day of the massacre, but this is not the forum to challenge the Commission Report. If you want to challenge that Report you've got to go to some - this Committee has no jurisdiction to hear that matter, but what we can do is to hear that evidence surrounding the issues relevant to whether or not there has been full disclosure. I think that must be clear. You must be aware that the issue of the Report was challenged in the High Court?

MR LOWIES: Chair, with all due respect, I am not challenging the TRC Report. It is there, it's a given - and with respect I have not had the chance to read the second paragraph at page 6 which answers your question and that is, the information is needed and now I quote:

"Further, to consider whether to apply for the recusal of the Committee or any other member thereof"

In other words, with respect Chair, we are not asking you to judge the correctness of the TRC Report, you are the forum, with respect, where we apply for information. Firstly, you are the forum, with respect, where we apply for a recusal if needs be. You have to hear that and nobody else. We say the application that we are bringing is the following, there is a prima facie report wherein damning findings were already made against my clients. You are an extension of that body, brings in my argument of the reasonable suspicion of bias. Now, in order to make a value decision on this, based on all the facts, we say on behalf of the applicants, please supply us with information whereafter we can make a value decision whether or not to ask for your recusal. An important aspect would be the - the most important aspect - if yourself or any Member of the Committee formed part of those deliberations, with respect, it means that you were privy to a finding already on record, detrimental and prejudicial to my client's application and one of two things should then happen and I'm not asking you to rule on that yet because we're not there but the argument will go the relevance hereof is the following. If this Committee or a Member thereof had prima facie prejudged a lay person in the position of my clients, the applicants, will form the opinion that the matter has been prejudged and I say this with the greatest of respect, to proceed would be a farce but it is not the allegations yet.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you approached the TRC for the information that you're seeking before making a subsistive application?

MR LOWIES: No, we're approaching this Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you approached the TRC itself?

MR LOWIES: I said no, with respect Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps that's where you should start first, if that is refused you make a subsistive application here.

Mr Berger, what's your attitude to this application?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, our attitude is that this application is ill-conceived, it's impertinent to this Committee, it's grossly insulting to the victims and above all, it's factually incorrect and when I say it's factually incorrect, I'm only dealing with that part of the application that relates to the application of Mr Nosenga.

Chairperson, we're in the process of compiling affidavits to place the correct facts before the Committee, unfortunately we've only managed to make contact with one person, we will be meeting with him tonight, we hope to make contact with the other person tonight but there's no guarantee that he will be there. We will draft the affidavits and we will place them before the Committee as soon as we reasonably can, I can't say that will be tomorrow or the next day but it will be this week.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, well would you be in the position to have all the facts at least by Friday?

MR BERGER: We hope so yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR BERGER: And that there's one person, Mr Shongwene, who shuttles between Cape Town and Gauteng and so depending on where he is, will determine when we can get the affidavits for you. But Chairperson, we hope to get it before Friday.

Can I just add that having read the affidavit of Mr Riaan Malan, there are certain documents referred to in his affidavit which we will require before we can finally settle our affidavits and they are the following. He says that he wrote four articles on the Boipatong Massacre, only two of those articles are annexed.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR BERGER: The second thing is, he said he had an interview with Mr Peens, he says that a copy of that interview is in the possession of the TRC, we need a copy of that interview and thirdly, he talks about certain Cell Registers which determine the whereabouts of Mr Kezwa. We need copies of those Cell Registers and if needs be the original but obviously Mr Malan wouldn't have that.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay very well.

MR BERGER: Chair, in terms of the rules of the High Court relating to applications, we would be entitled to copies of those documents before we submitted our answering affidavits.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, this is not the High Court.

MR BERGER: I know that, I'm well aware of that but I would ask in the interests of fairness so that we can place proper facts before you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: That those three documents are given to us before we submit our answering affidavits.

CHAIRPERSON: This application will be heard on Tuesday at 9 o'clock and I require heads of argument to be finished at least by Friday and the very latest by Monday to the extent that the applicants are making serious allegations against the African National Congress, they shall serve a copy of this application on that body. And Mr Mapoma, would you make sure that the legal department of the TRC receives a copy of this application as soon as possible so that they can consider their response, if any, to this application and to the extent possible, would you provide Mr Berger with such information as he might desire in order to prepare a proper response and the applications will furnish to all the other representatives any other information in their possession which is referred to in the application which has not been included as annexures. Okay?

MR LOWIES: As you please Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Lowies? Mr Nosenga, may I remind you that you are still under oath?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (s.u.o.) That is correct.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LOWIES: Sorry Chair, may I proceed?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, your version if I understand it correctly is that at a stage you went to the place called Ulundi and there you saw Chief Minister Buthelezi, you also heard him congratulating people regarding the Boipatong Massacre. That is your version, am I correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: So if I understand you correctly then, on your version, it met with the approval of the leader of the Inkatha Freedom Party?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: And if I understand you correctly so much so that he also in front of a crowd of people expressed his opinions in that regard?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: On your version, precisely what did the Chief Minister say?

MR NOSENGA: I heard him say his grateful, thanking the people for what they did at Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: How many people were at this meeting, you have to give us an estimate, only an estimate?

MR NOSENGA: There were many of them, I'm not in a position to approximate.

MR LOWIES: And on your version, if I understand you correctly, anybody who wanted to have been at this meeting would have been welcome, correct?

MR NOSENGA: I still maintain that it was the members of the IFP who had attended that meeting, not anybody who did not belong to the party.

MR LOWIES: The point is, any member who wanted to be there could have been there, do you agree?

MR NOSENGA: I would not say I agree with you, I am saying to you there were so many people at the conference, there were many of them. Yes, some of them did not go to the conference even though they were members of the IFP.

MR LOWIES: I'll make it simple, was it an open meeting where everybody who wanted to be there could be there? Question is, who wanted to be there?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, do you know whether there were any restrictions in terms of who could attend that meeting?

MR NOSENGA: As I have already indicated, it was a national conference, there were many Inkatha followers, some of them had come from Johannesburg and others from other different parts of the country.

MR LOWIES: And the press was no doubt there as well because it's a national conference? Do you agree or do you disagree?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say whether I agree or not, I did not see them.

MR LOWIES: If needs be evidence will be led that the national conference, anybody who wants to be there including the press, television networks etc could attend. Will you deny this?

MR NOSENGA: I have already indicated that I don't know, I did not see them.

MR LOWIES: Therefore I put it to you Sir that you cannot deny it?

ADV SIBANYONI: I'm sorry Mr Lowies, is it not so that normally during conferences there would be a session which would be open for public where the press and media will be there but there will also be a closed session dealing with the issues pertaining to that particular organisation or body?

MR LOWIES: Not according to my instructions at a national conference. I will check, however I do not want to mislead anybody.

But at this stage, Sir, I put it to you that this was not a meeting in secret and I think you will agree with me, not so?

MR NOSENGA: No, I indicated that I do not know.

MR LOWIES: Well ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it was a conference of the IFP, whether it was open or not I cannot say.

MR LOWIES: But let's get the picture here. Where was the Chief Minister when he congratulated the people, on your version? Was he in a building, was he in a hall, was he in a veld, what is the situation, that's what I want to get at?

MR NOSENGA: He was in a tent at Ulundi, there were many tents around.

CHAIRPERSON: Unless my memory is failing me here, I have thought that it is common cause that Mr Nosenga was taken to Ulundi at some point?

MR LOWIES: It's not denied, that's not the point.

CHAIRPERSON: At a rally that was in Ulundi.

MR LOWIES: It's possible that he could have been there.

CHAIRPERSON: Well wasn't it the evidence of the applicant, some of the applicants?

MR LOWIES: Yes but that's not the issue.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, just listen to what I'm saying.

MR LOWIES: I'm listening.

CHAIRPERSON: As far as I understand, I want to know where is this taking us to because it is not an issue that at some point Mr Nosenga was taken to Ulundi at a rally that was held there, that's not denied, is that right?

MR LOWIES: Correct, as you please.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, okay, then continue.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, returning to the scene where Chief Minister Buthelezi on your version congratulated the people. How many people from kwaMadala Hostel were there that you know of?

MR NOSENGA: I only know the ones with whom I travelled. Yes, others travelled in their own private vehicles but I remember names like Gatchene and Mr Zulu and others. The taxi in which we were travelling was driven by Darkie Chonco.

MR LOWIES: Sorry could I just get that clear, there was a noise in my microphone and I think it could probably be because you're touching the microphone, please don't. Who were the people?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying that I remember Darkie Chonco, Mtwana Zulu and Gatchene as well as many others who had come from KwaMadala Hostel, many Indunas actually.

MR LOWIES: I see.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you travel in a bus, kombi?

MR NOSENGA: No Sir, we travelled in a 16 seater Kombi E20.

CHAIRPERSON: Apart from the Kombi in which you were was there any other transport that went to Ulundi that you know of?

MR NOSENGA: I saw Oupa who is working at the offices and I saw some private vehicles, I would not no.

CHAIRPERSON: Darkie Chonco, Mtwana Zulu, Gatchene, these were the people who were travelling with you in what you've described as the 16 seater?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: Thank you Sir. Now Mr Nosenga, if you have to give us an estimate, how many people would you say were inside this tent where Chief Buthelezi was at that stage when he congratulated the people on the Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: I said I won't be in a position, there were many of them really.

MR LOWIES: More than the people on the night of the attack, participating in the attack? More than those?

MR NOSENGA: I think they were less than the number of people that attacked Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Why, why do you say that?

MR NOSENGA: Because some others had to remain behind at KwaMadala Hostel and I would not know as to why they decided to remain behind.

MR LOWIES: But were there people from Ulundi in the tent?

I'm talking at the time when the Chief on your version congratulated the people?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did mention that there were people from around Natal. I don't know them, yes they were present.

MR LOWIES: How many people from Natal, not from the hostel would you say were there?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I would not know, there were many people really, I could not count them.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you want Mr Nosenga to tell us how many people at that rally or meeting came from Natal, is that what you're asking him to do?

MR LOWIES: I'm asking him to give us an estimate as to how many people he would say were not from KwaMadala and were from Ulundi because he says they were from Natal, on his version.

CHAIRPERSON: But how on earth do you expect him to know that?

MR LOWIES: Chair I would have thought it works as follows ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Well let's get the answer from him.

Mr Nosenga, had you been to a rally in Ulundi before?

MR NOSENGA: No, that was my first time.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you in a position to tell us who of the people who were at that meeting came from Ulundi, Mashlabatini, Nomgoma, Durban, Johannesburg and Orange Free State?

MR NOSENGA: No I would not be in the position, there were many of these people.

CHAIRPERSON: The people that were in the 16 seater, was the Kombi full? The Kombi in which you were travelling?

MR NOSENGA: Yes it was full.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes and did these people sit together with you, that is the people that were in the Kombi?

MR NOSENGA: I was sitting on the engine of the Kombi.

CHAIRPERSON: No I mean once you get to the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, turning to that issue in the tent, you said that you're of the opinion that some of the people from - I repeat - some of the people in the tent were from Natal and not from KwaMadala. Having got your opinion on record that there were some from Natal, my question is can you tell us how many people were there from Natal as you see it.

MR NOSENGA: I have indicated that I don't know, there were so many of them I still maintain.

MR LOWIES: More than 50? I'm asking for an estimate only.

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I cannot commit myself, I do not know, there were many of them.

MR LOWIES: Could there have been less than 50?

ADV SIGODI: Mr Lowies, sorry, where is this ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I still maintain that I did not know these people, there were many of them, I therefore cannot approximate.

ADV SIGODI: Where is this cross-examination going to take us insofar as how many people from Natal were there, how many from Gauteng were there? I mean if you are trying to say, I mean that there were many people and what the applicant is saying did not happen that the Chief Minister did not say what he's saying he said, why don't you simply put it to him that this never happened and then get onto the other aspects?

MR LOWIES: On the face of it I should agree with you but that would be defeating the purpose of cross-examination, with respect, because one of the aspects of cross-examination which you would know is vitally important, is whether or not this witness is telling the truth and therefore I'm simply putting to him that it's denied, I will be effecting an important objective, being testing his credibility as to this aspect.

CHAIRPERSON: That may well be the case, no one challenges that proposition. The fact of the matter is, when the witness has repeatedly told us he doesn't know, he can't estimate, what else can he say? He doesn't know, he can't estimate, he didn't count them.

MR LOWIES: I missed the part that he didn't say that he can't estimate, that he said that he can't estimate but I will move on, with respect Chair.

MR LAX: Mr Lowies, he said that right at the very beginning of his testimony under cross-examination. He said "I'm not sure, I can't estimate" but you carried on asking these questions. It's right at the very beginning of my notes of his reply to your answers.

MR LOWIES: Be that as it may, Chair, I will proceed. I take it then that I've missed that, the estimation then.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I understand that. Mr Nosenga, when you tell us that there were people from Natal as well, do you have any basis for that or do you just assume there must be people from Natal?

MR LOWIES: Yes that is true, there were people who had come from Natal and Mashlabatini, I'm just not in a position to give you a number.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, how many tents would you say were there on the day of the rally when the Chief spoke, on the day of the meeting, sorry, when the Chief spoke?

MR NOSENGA: There were many tents, I cannot say exactly how many. There were many of them.

MR LOWIES: You were a resident of KwaMadala Hostel?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: That being the case, my question is the following. At the meeting, tents included, would you say there were more people there that day than reside in the KwaMadala Hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot explain.

MR LOWIES: Why?

MR NOSENGA: I did say I don't know, you asked me as to how many people were there, I said I don't know and you asked me about tents and I told you there were many, I don't know how many.

MR LOWIES: To summarise then, you can't even tell us how many people were at the meeting in total even with reference to the KwaMadala Hostel and I'm talking about the number of people residing there?

MR NOSENGA: I said there were many of them. Some of them had come from Johannesburg, Thokoza etc. I just cannot say, I'm not in the position.

ADV SIGODI: Mr Nosenga, were the buses bringing people at this rally?

MR NOSENGA: I found many buses at arrival or on arrival. I had left in a Kombi.

ADV SIGODI: Yes but what I mean is were the buses at the rally, bringing people in at Ulundi?

MR NOSENGA: I saw many buses on arrival, I did not see them arriving. I did not see them arriving at the conference, I just found them there.

MR LOWIES: Put simply, it was an open meeting, anybody could attend, not so?

MR NOSENGA: I did say it was an IFP rally or conference. Yes some people remained behind at KwaMadala Hostel, people who were interested attended and some remained behind.

MR LOWIES: I should maybe describe to you what I mean by open meeting. Open meeting does not mean that people stayed behind, open meeting means anybody who wanted to attend could have done so. Do you understand my question?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I understand but I cannot commit myself to something like that. All I'm saying is that some people remained behind.

MR LOWIES: Why can't you commit yourself as to whether or not this was an open meeting as defined? What is your problem in that regard?

MR NOSENGA: I am simply saying I cannot answer your question, some people I'm saying remained behind.

MR LOWIES: Was there anybody at the tents preventing members of the IFP who were there to enter these tents when the Chief Minister spoke?

MR NOSENGA: I didn't witness that, I didn't know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: Well let's talk about you yourself, you could come and go as you please, not so?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was free to move as I pleased because I was an IFP member.

MR LOWIES: And there was no way of them checking whether or not you were an IFP member, not so? In other words it was not required of you to show a card or anything to say, listen I'm an IFP member, I'm entering this tent, correct? Or any other manner of proving that you're a member, correct?

MR NOSENGA: As I've already mentioned before, IFP members were known and it was not just anybody who could come through. I did see security guards at the gate. I was free because I was an IFP member.

MR LOWIES: Did you have to show your pass at the gates?

CHAIRPERSON: What counsel is - just listen to the question, Mr Nosenga, what counsel is trying to find out from you was as people were coming to the rally, was there anyone who was at any particular point checking whether people coming in were members of the IFP or not?

MR NOSENGA: Yes there were security guards.

CHAIRPERSON: Now were these people asking everyone who was coming in whether he or she was a member of the IFP?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they were asked.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, you were also asked if you were a member of the IFP?

MR NOSENGA: It was the Prince Mtwana Zulu who spoke on our behalf, I didn't.

MR LOWIES: And who were in your group with Prince Mtwana Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: It was Gatchene, Darkie Chonco and other Indunas that I did not know from Natal.

MR LOWIES: And all that happened is that the Prince said "we are from the IFP and you were allowed to pass?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he produced an IFP membership card.

MR LOWIES: Only him?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that's the only person I witnessed producing a card.

MR LOWIES: Now besides your group, did anybody else at the gate when they wanted to go through have to produce a card or not?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say because I did not witness, I did not see with regards to any other people because after we had gone through the gates that was it.

MR LOWIES: The reason why I'm asking is and I'd just like to get clarity there, I initially got the impression and you must now tell me whether this impression is wrong, the impression I got is that it is within your knowledge that you had to prove at the gates that you were an IFP member before you would be allowed because there was security? It now appears that they just basically asked you whether you were a member and you didn't see whether anybody else and also you, I mean your group, and you didn't see whether they asked anybody else whether they were members of the IFP. Am I wrong?

MR NOSENGA: No as the judge asked me, I explained that there were people who were security officers and the only person who produced a card was Prince Zulu.

MR LOWIES: And of the other members of the public you did not see anybody producing a card?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, I was already inside the venue, I did not see any people, any other people producing cards, if they produced them or not because I was already inside the venue.

MR LOWIES: Now are you an IFP member at present?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct because I am here because of the IFP.

MR LOWIES: You're still a member?

MR NOSENGA: I have already answered your question that I am.

MR LOWIES: Now you as an IFP member, you are not a leader in the IFP of any sorts, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I'm just a supporter of the IFP.

MR LOWIES: On your version you were part of the attack at Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: To come back to the structure, turn to the structure, is it correct that you are not always part and parcel of the decisions made by IFP members irrespective of at what level it is made, you as a normal member?

MR NOSENGA: No, there were meetings called at KwaMadala Hostel and all persons living in the hostels would attend those meetings.

MR LOWIES: And if the leadership of the youth brigade had a meeting, would you be part of that?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, if it was a meeting for leaders then I would not be but if it was a meeting, a general meeting then I would attend that meeting.

MR LOWIES: Ja, that's the point I'm trying to make. So it seems to me that there are different meetings, some of the meetings the leadership get together and they make decisions, correct and you're not part as a normal member of those decisions, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: And is it not so that all the aspects pertaining to the IFP is not always related to normal members if it concerns a matter of say for instance tactics or campaigns etc. You're not always informed of all the details because it is held at a specific meeting and you're just informed of the smaller details, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there were matters that we were not informed all.

MR LOWIES: And I take it that if there is a meeting where a decision is made by the leadership of any party, I'm talking of any political party to attack people they would not just convey it to a normal member, that would be kept secret, not so?

MR NOSENGA: That is news to me, I do not know about that.

MR LOWIES: No, the reason why I'm asking is we've heard evidence that it was kept secret until the very last day of the Boipatong attack ...(intervention)

MR LAX: With respect Mr Lowies, you're not being fair to the witness. The decision as to which day the attack would happen on was kept secret. There's evidence before us that the decision to attack was taken before the meeting in a public meeting with many people present so - and there's conflicting evidence in that regard but be that as it may, it was not true to say that the decision to attack was only taken in secret. The date of the attack, some people have alleged, was only taken at a later stage. So just to clarify that.

MR LOWIES: That's also the way I have it and if I've put anything different I would retract and I would rephrase. I apologise.

CHAIRPERSON: Just to be sure, my understanding of the evidence was that in the days proceeding the real attack, everyone knew that there was going to be an attack at some point but no one knew when it was going to occur and I think the Boipatong was mentioned probably a day or two before, but still no date was fixed and again it was in response to the calls by the hostel residents that something at least must be done.

MR LOWIES: I agree, there are two important things which you raise, with respect, and I agree with those.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: The first is there was a decision to attack but there's evidence that there was no clear decision as to where the attack would be firstly and secondly there was no clear decision as to when it would be made. That was kept secret as one of the witnesses said, I think it's Buthelezi that gave that evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now having heard those aspects, Mr Nosenga, my question to you is the following. You would agree with the following proposition that not all aspects pertaining to the attack of Boipatong were conveyed to the normal members, it was kept secret by leadership, correct? Having heard the discussion now you would agree with that?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible they did mention that Boipatong would be attacked but they did not mention the date so I will not disagree with you.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon, just repeat what you have said?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying as there was a meeting held discussing the attack but the date was not mentioned, it is possible that some information was withheld from ordinary members.

CHAIRPERSON: But are you saying that you knew that there was going to be an attack on Boipatong but you didn't know the date?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I knew that an attack would be launched but I did not know on which date.

MR LOWIES: You see, you would also agree with me that the IFP operated as follows. There was the Youth Brigade and they had their leadership. Then there was the older people, the Indunas and they had their leadership, correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Chair, I am just trying to make a point, I would like to place one thing on record. The evidence pertaining to the structures of how the IFP worked will be canvassed by my learned friend but in order to just make a logical conclusion, I'm just asking these as preliminary aspects and I'm not going to delve too much into them. Having stated that my question to you is the following ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: In mind that I think that was consistently in canvassed with the applicants and that was extensively canvassed with the individual applicants.

MR LOWIES: But there may be something regarding how he views it that will be covered by my learned friend.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes indeed, yes.

MR LOWIES: I'm just trying to make the point, that I'm not going to delve too deeply into that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes very well.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

The point I'm trying to make is the following for purposes of what we're busy with now, you would then agree with me, if the older people, the Indunas, had their separate meeting, where they make a decision to attack people in Boipatong and in the Vaal for that matter, you would not be part of it because you are a normal member and not part of that leadership, correct? You were not privy to that, you would not know about it?

MR NOSENGA: No I would have known because I did learn about it because we were told as IFP members that we were going to launch an attack but it was only the dates that was not mentioned.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what counsel is putting to you is this that the leadership of the IFP would meet at some point alone, take decisions and thereafter convey those decisions to the general membership of the IFP at meetings which are attended by the ordinary members of the IFP, such as yourself?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is so but with regards to the Boipatong attack, we were called to a general meeting where we were informed about the attack but the date was not mentioned.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes but you have repeated now on more than one occasions that you were not told initially when Boipatong was going to be attacked. We've heard that, you don't have to repeat that.

MR LOWIES: I'm indebted to you Chair.

So Mr Nosenga, if they had plans at regional level to attack for instance people in Pretoria which does not concern KwaMadala, unless you are one of the attackers, you would never know about it, correct, because it does not concern you and it would remain with leadership, that's the point, do you agree?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: And is it not so Mr Nosenga, did you hear the question so far? Is it not so, Mr Nosenga, that not everything that leadership decide will be conveyed to the members? Let me give you give you an example of what I want to know from you. If it is policy of leadership to attack everybody in the whole of Transvaal they would only convey to the people in a specific region, say for instance Boipatong, that which is necessary for Boipatong residents out of the KwaMadala residents to know and they would not convey to them all the other aspects which they have decided, correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, the Boipatong matter was conveyed to us by the leadership at a meeting.

MR LOWIES: Well I'll leave it at that, I'd like to turn to another aspect. Stripped of all the titles, the simple fact regarding Mr Themba Khosa is the following. He was a leader in the Vaal area, correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: And we have your version and I emphasis your version that Themba Khosa actually approved of the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, he did approve of it.

MR LOWIES: So on your version we have the following then. Chief Minister Buthelezi, leader of the IFP, approved of the meeting plus Themba Khosa, leader in the Transvaal or in the Vaal, approved of the attack in Boipatong, on your version?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: And on your version, not everything that leadership decide is always conveyed, some of it is kept secret, a good example is that a decision regarding two things. One, when Boipatong should be attacked and two, that the specific place Boipatong should be attacked, correct? Those were excluded at that stage and was only revealed at a very late stage.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, as I mentioned before they said we should attack the place but they did not specify the date.

MR LOWIES: And having regard to this, what we've just said, one can understand that it would not be always public knowledge to all the applicants exactly what was decided by the general leadership pertaining to the attacks on the Vaal, correct? Because you would simply not know, not everything?

Do you agree?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: And it is not a matter of you hiding something from this Commission that you didn't know, it's just a simple matter of you as a normal member do not know specifics, correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: And even you yourself, if I ask you what was decided at this leadership meeting, you would not know all the details, that would be unfair to say man, you are hiding something, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes but with regards to the IFP meeting on Boipatong we were informed of the attack although they did not mention the date.

MR LOWIES: Ja, exactly illustrates the point, not everything is always conveyed to everybody. So we agree with each other?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: You said to us previously in your evidence that you were a resident of Boipatong at some stage?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not say that I resided in Boipatong, you must have misunderstood me. Yes I stayed in Everton.

MR LOWIES: But you had some problems with the residents of Boipatong in the past, or not?

MR NOSENGA: No I said I no personal grudge against the people of Boipatong, it was only the people of Everton with whom I had problems.

MR LOWIES: How far is Everton from Boipatong more or less?

MR NOSENGA: It is a distance from Boipatong, I cannot estimate just how far it is but Boipatong is closer to Iscor.

MR LOWIES: Can you walk from Boipatong to Everton in an hour or less - I'm not sure, sorry, I just want to get a point here, maybe you can help us?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot give you an estimate.

MR LOWIES: No problem. Would you agree that Everton is in the Vaal area?

MR NOSENGA: Yes it is.

MR LOWIES: Now what were the problems that you had with the residents of Everton?

MR NOSENGA: The problem I had was that I had friends who were ANC members. There was a garage that was burnt down in Everton and it so happened that it was my friends who had burnt it and I was also implicated in that incident but I had not partaken in that incident, I was innocent. The comrades from Everton got hold of me and they took me to the garage and they locked me up in the toilet at the garage. Thereafter they went to the garage's owner and spoke to him. A certain girl who I cannot remember, whose name I cannot remember, asked me why I was locked up in the toilet. I explained to her what my problem was. She then opened the toilet back window and that is how I escaped. That is how I arrived at KwaMadala Hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: You mentioned ANC friends and you also mentioned the comrades. Now who was accused of having burnt down the garage?

MR NOSENGA: The ANC supporters alleged that it was myself and my friends who had burnt down the garage but I was not present when this happened. The comrades looked for me and they found me and captured me and took me to the garage.

CHAIRPERSON: Who are these comrades, I mean are these the comrades who were your friends?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, some of my friends had not been present in the incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, so is the position that certain comrades burnt down a garage?

MR NOSENGA: Yes ANC supporters.

CHAIRPERSON: And you were not part of that?

MR NOSENGA: No I did not take part.

CHAIRPERSON: And those other comrades who had not taken part in the burning of the garage accused you of having taken part in the burning of the garage?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they implicated me.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now are the comrades ANC members? I don't follow.

MR NOSENGA: Yes they were ANC members.

MR LOWIES: And are you saying some of the comrades burnt the garage and some of the comrades didn't and there was a faction or an argument between the two factions? Am I following your evidence?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct and that is how I was implicated.

MR LOWIES: Were you at that stage an ANC member?

MR NOSENGA: No I was not affiliated to any political organisation but I did have friends who were ANC members.

MR LOWIES: Now why would the comrades become involved in burning of garages, I don't follow that, why would the ANC want to burn garages? It doesn't make sense.

MR NOSENGA: I did not say it was ANC I said it was supporters of the ANC. When you speak of the ANC you refer to people like Oliver Tambo. I'm just referring to the followers, those were the people who burnt the garage. I do not know why they did it.

MR LOWIES: So do you have to be an ANC member to become a comrade or to be a comrade?

MR NOSENGA: No that's not what I was saying. You can join as a member of an organisation but what I'm saying is that the garage was burnt down by ANC followers.

MR LOWIES: And the comrades were they also ANC followers? You're not clear on this aspect. What is the situation?

MR NOSENGA: The ANC and ANC followers are two different issues. If I speak about the ANC I refer to people like Mandela.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, listen to the question please, what counsel wants to find out is whether were comrades members of the ANC?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Now once they'd decided, the comrades, to lock you up, did they say to you why they are acting in this manner?

MR NOSENGA: They said I was allegedly involved in the burning down of the garage.

MR LOWIES: But why would they become involved, it's not their garage or was it?

MR NOSENGA: No, I would not be in a position to respond to that question.

MR LOWIES: Were you afraid of them?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was afraid.

CHAIRPERSON: You see Mr Nosenga, what counsel wants to find out from you the following, the garage had been burnt down, the comrades are not members of the police force, why would they get involved in looking for people who had burnt down the garage?

Is that what you want to find out?

MR LOWIES: That's correct, I don't follow.

MR NOSENGA: At that time the comrades were responsible for all structures in the township and that garage's owner, Mr Gude, was aligned to the ANC and that is why the comrades got themselves involved in this issue.

MR LOWIES: What do you mean they were involved in all structures? Do you know what you're talking about?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question?

MR LOWIES: What do you mean when you say they were involved in all structures, the comrades?

CHAIRPERSON: I think what was probably not translated is a portion or his evidence which is to the effect that the comrades were responsible for looking after the safety of the residents in the township

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Which is why they took the active part in looking for people who burnt down the garage of course apart from the fact that - is it Mr Gude I think it was, was also a member of the ANC? Is that right Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Were there any other structures where they were responsible for, the comrades?

MR NOSENGA: No I didn't know about that because as I mentioned before I was not a member of the ANC so I was not aware of their activities.

MR LOWIES: Now thereafter did you have trouble with the comrades again?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: I think what I should do to make it easy for you is the following. Tell us why were you scared of the comrades?

MR NOSENGA: I mentioned before that they said I was involved in that burning down of the garage at Everton and they were looking for me. That is why I was afraid of them.

MR LOWIES: Yes but you said there were also other reasons and that's what I want to find out, in effect of your evidence.

MR NOSENGA: You misunderstood me. I said the problem I had with the comrades related to the garage that was burnt down in Everton.

MR LOWIES: Okay but now you were punished, the matter is over, why would you then flee to KwaMadala?

CHAIRPERSON: With due respect Mr Lowies, he wasn't punished at all. What happened was that he was taken to the garage, locked up in the room and a good Samaritan women came up and opened the window for him. He then escaped through the window, he left straight for KwaMadala Hostel.

MR LOWIES: So were you going to be punished more than that by the comrades, just by being locked up? I don't follow.

MR NOSENGA: Sir I explained before the reason why I ran away. Those people had firearms, that is the reason why I fled the township for the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Why would they have firearms?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know, I cannot respond to that question.

CHAIRPERSON: Why would they have firearms?

MR LOWIES: Yes that was the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: I missed the answer, sorry Chair?

CHAIRPERSON: He doesn't know.

MR LAX: He doesn't know.

CHAIRPERSON: Now after escaping from the garage did you return to Sebokeng or did you go straight to KwaMadala Hostel?

MR NOSENGA: From that point I went to the hostel on the very same day.

MR LOWIES: Now why were you scared of the firearms, was there the threat that they were going to use it or what? Because you mentioned that they had firearms?

MR NOSENGA: I mentioned before that I feared for my safety because those people had firearms, they would have shot me. I had mentioned that before.

MR LOWIES: And then you joined KwaMadala. Now the question is, why did you join the IFP?

MR NOSENGA: I thought it was a good organisation because all the people who had fled the township joined the people at KwaMadala. That is why I also went there.

MR LOWIES: So were there other people fleeing from Everton as well that you know of and that took refuge there in the KwaMadala Hostel?

MR NOSENGA: What I'm saying is I am the person who fled from Everton to the hostel. I do not know with regards to others.

CHAIRPERSON: Well we didn't say that but do you know of any residents from Sebokeng who sought refuge at KwaMadala Hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes there were.

MR LOWIES: Now Mr Nosenga, were you ever involved with the SDUs or did they mean anything to you?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about the SDUs.

MR LOWIES: You wouldn't know whether they're the same thing as the comrades or what? What is your opinion, can you express an opinion? If you can I'd like you to.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about SDUs. What I knew about was that there were ANC supporters.

MR LOWIES: Now after this incident could you roam freely in the streets of Everton?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: And Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: After I arrived at KwaMadala Hostel I was not able to walk freely at Boipatong as well.

MR LOWIES: Why? You've done nothing wrong to the people of Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: There were people who were residents of Serela who worked at Iscor and those people recognised me or they saw me when I wore my IFP tee-shirt and there was no way I could have gone back to the township after those people had seen me wearing that tee-shirt.

MR LOWIES: Why?

MR NOSENGA: As I mentioned before there were Iscor employees who resided at Boipatong and who had seen me wearing IFP tee-shirts.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is why wouldn't you go to Boipatong with your IFP tee-shirt?

MR NOSENGA: You wouldn't be able to go into the township if you had been seen wearing an IFP tee-shirt.

CHAIRPERSON: Why won't IFP members go to Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Because all IFP members were prevented from going into the township.

CHAIRPERSON: What would happen to you if you had to go to Boipatong with an IFP tee-shirt.

MR NOSENGA: They would have killed me in Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Who would have killed you?

MR NOSENGA: The ANC supporters from Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Not just the comrades, any ANC supporter?

MR NOSENGA: What I'm saying is that ANC supporters would have killed me, those people who resided in Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Even if you go there without your IFP tee-shirt?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they would have because they used to attack people even in Vereeniging.

MR LOWIES: But why would they do that, have you got a reason that you can advance?

MR NOSENGA: At the time there was friction between the ANC and the IFP people from the KwaMadala Hostel.

MR LOWIES: So can I summarise your evidence that irrespective of whether or not you wear an IFP tee-shirt, if you put foot in Boipatong you would be killed even if you didn't make any trouble there?

MR NOSENGA: That is what I'm saying. We did not go to Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: The reason why is because you are IFP and they are ANC?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question?

MR LOWIES: And another reason why this is so because you are IFP and the residents are ANC?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: So it seems to me then that there was actually a state of war between the two factions here at Vanderbijlpark and in the Vaal?

MR NOSENGA: I would not be able to respond to that, I cannot say whether there was war or not.

MR LOWIES: Now if a Boipatong resident would see you in another town he would also attack you?

MR NOSENGA: What place are you referring to?

MR LOWIES: Well in town?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they would have, they could have abducted me and taken me to Boipatong where they could have killed me.

MR LOWIES: So you could even be abducted?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they could have taken me there to kill me.

MR LOWIES: Now would any member of, any resident of Boipatong do this to you or would it only be comrades?

MR NOSENGA: I said it was ANC supporters residing in Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: How many people have you killed in your life?

MR NOSENGA: In the case that I have been convicted for there were nine people that I killed.

MR LOWIES: So are you in jail for the murder of nine people?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Are you serious because I thought it was only three?

MR NOSENGA: No I did not say three, I said there were nine people that I killed and that is why I was convicted.

MR LOWIES: Were you convicted of nine charges of murder to put it simply?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Now we know of the nine that you were convicted of, it appears to me that you also killed people that you were not convicted of. Am I correct?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: So you only in your life killed nine people? You killed nobody in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: There were people that I killed in Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Well then it's more than nine. Now you must please explain this. You were convicted of nine people and we know you were not convicted of anything happening in Boipatong. So how many people did you kill in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember.

MR LOWIES: Could it also be nine?

MR NOSENGA: No, what I'm saying is I do not know.

MR LOWIES: Why? The reason why I'm asking is it's quite extraordinary, I would have thought that if you killed somebody you would know about it? Why don't you know how many people you killed in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I did mention before that I had drunk the Indelesi and I was in such a state that I was not able to tell who died or who didn't. I just saw people falling.

MR LOWIES: So how many people did you see falling and if you can't give us exact figures give us an estimate.

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember well.

MR LOWIES: And the reason why they were falling is because they were gunned down by you?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: And you're talking of people falling so we know that it's more than one?

MR NOSENGA: Yes but I do not remember how many there were, I was under the influence of Indelesi.

MR LOWIES: Are you serious because it sounds ridiculous, even the people in this gallery are laughing at you.

It sounds incredible.

MR NOSENGA: I am serious because I do not remember how many people I killed. I shot at them and they died but I do not know how many.

MR LOWIES: You shot at them and they died and you shot at them with an AK47?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: And that was the only weapon that you had?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Do you know how to operate an AK47?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: By that I also mean how to load it, how to unload it, how to squeeze the trigger, how to make it safe etc?

MR NOSENGA: Yes you just load the bullets into the magazine and that which is what you put into the gun and then if you do not want to use it at the time you can lock the gun and you can set it so that you can only use single shots.

MR LOWIES: Now we know that you've killed people and we know that you have also killed people in Boipatong but there you're not clear about the figures. Besides these incidents, I'm talking about the nine for which you've been convicted on your version and the Boipatong incident, were there any other incidents where you shot at people, fired shots at people?

MR NOSENGA: No, the only incidents where I shot at people were the Sebokeng and Boipatong matters.

MR LOWIES: Now the Sebokeng matters, did all this happen on one day or more than one day?

MR NOSENGA: They happened on 15th June 1992, two days before the Boipatong massacre.

MR LOWIES: Did it all happen at the same place or at different places?

MR NOSENGA: It was at different places.

MR LOWIES: Where were these places and I'd like you to name them all?

MR NOSENGA: In Zone 12, it was in Zone 12 at a bus stop called Bosweni, there was a bus that was shot at at a small farm as well as in Everton at Jabu's place. Those were the places that we fired shots at.

MR LOWIES: Chair, at this stage if it's appropriate for you to take the adjournment, I see my colleagues draw my attention to it that it's time for an adjournment?

CHAIRPERSON: We'll take the tea adjournment now and come back at 11.13.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, you're still under oath.

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (s.u.o.) Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: (continues) Thank you Chairman.

Mr Nosenga during the adjournment my attention was drawn to the fact that you were indeed convicted of nine charges of murder but what I would like to put further to you is that in addition to that, you were also convicted of six counts of attempted murder wherein you fired shots at six different individuals. Is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: How were you arrested on these charges that you were convicted for?

MR NOSENGA: I was arrested in Parys for a stolen vehicle, I was brought to Vereeniging and ultimately taken to the police station where they questioned me about the murder incidents of Sebokeng. Captain ...(indistinct) is the one who was questioning me.

MR LOWIES: But listen to this, you were arrested on a completely different charge and now they question you on murder charges. How did they link these two incidents with each other, that's what I want to know from you?

MR NOSENGA: I was questioned on the matters, I was brought here to be questioned about what had happened at Sebokeng and I ultimately ended up telling them about the Sebokeng incident as well.

MR LOWIES: Out of your own free will?

MR NOSENGA: No I was tortured, I ended up telling them the truth because I had to go out and point out the places where these things took place as well.

MR LOWIES: And then you pleaded guilty?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did because I was being tortured.

MR LOWIES: So we have the following, you were arrested and tortured and you confessed to certain offences including nine counts of murder. Thereafter, you were again tortured and you must help me if I am wrong, so that you must plead guilty to these charges, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: So what you're saying is your plea of guilty on these charges was done under coercion, you were forced?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was being electrocuted, I was tortured.

MR LOWIES: But what I don't understand is why didn't you just tell them the truth in any event? I'm talking about the police firstly, let's leave the court out for a moment.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, ...(indistinct) one allows a cross-examiner a somewhat large latitude because one doesn't know what may or may become relevant from that line of cross-examination. I've been listening to you for some time now. Now having regard to what we'll have to consider in this matter, what is the relevance of the applicant not admitting to killings which have no relevance to the matters before us? You should know that our constitution guarantees to a suspect the right to remain silent, he was not in your application to admit or to say anything to the police and where's it going to take us?

MR LOWIES: I would answer this Chair, I would submit and I can state it categorically that this in my instructions. Mr Nosenga is an utter liar on various aspects. He is a liar in this regard and what I'm trying to do is to show to you that he has a propensity of telling lies even when faced with the consequences and therefore it is relevant as to his credibility. You would agree with me, with respect Chair, that the purpose of cross-examination is two fold, one of them is to ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I understand that, all I want you to do Mr Lowies, sorry to cut you short, is simply to illustrate to us the relevance of your line of questioning. So you are saying that the purpose of this line of questioning is to indicate that Mr Nosenga is a stranger to the truth?

MR LOWIES: Yes and to prove a modus operandi.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Perhaps in the interest of these proceedings you should endeavour to make sure that we get to the point at least as soon as we can?

MR LOWIES: I have instructions to do so Chair, I will endeavour to do so, I will give you an undertaking.

CHAIRPERSON: In addition to the instructions you now have a direction to that effect?

MR LOWIES: I'm indebted to you Chair.

Right, now Mr Nosenga, what I don't understand is, your plea then, you had legal representation in these matters for which you were charged in the Supreme Court and convicted of, not so?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Why did you not tell them listen I was forced and I'm still being forced to plead guilty to these charges because this is serious?

MR NOSENGA: I was afraid of the police at the time because the police would kill you if you denied all activities or involvement in all the crimes.

MR LOWIES: Now what has changed from then up until today, why are you not scared today to tell us these facts that you have hidden before?

MR NOSENGA: We have a Black government today, we no longer have this Boer government and we don't have things happening as they used to happen at the hands of the police then.

MR LOWIES: I have to take issue with you on this, because you were convicted on the 14th February 1995 when the present government was in power. What is your answer now?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: So, your argument then cannot stand. I'm going to repeat the question. What has changed in the meantime, why were you afraid in '95 and not today?

MR NOSENGA: It is because today we have a constitutional government which has the TRC as a platform where people can come forward to tell the truth, we don't have the Boer government anymore.

MR LOWIES: We had it in 1995 as well? We had a constitution in 1995, that's the point, Sir. One last chance.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, I made my application to appear before the TRC a very long time ago, I don't know when exactly in which year.

MR LOWIES: But we know one thing for sure, Mr Nosenga, had you not been tortured you would not have done two things sitting here today and that is (a) confessed to these charges on which you were convicted and (b) plead guilty to them?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct, I would not have confessed to those charges, I would have denied everything.

MR LOWIES: Up until today?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: And you understand my question?

MR NOSENGA: Will you please repeat your question?

MR LOWIES: The question is up until today you would have denied these charges had you not been tortured?

MR NOSENGA: Which offences are you talking about, the Sebokeng or Boipatong offences?

MR LOWIES: It can't be that difficult, you were only tortured for the Sebokeng offences, not so?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Okay, so I'll rephrase then or I'll repeat. So had you not been tortured up until to date, you would not have pleaded guilty?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I would not because they would not have known who was involved in the killing of the people in Sebokeng.

MR LOWIES: That raises interesting questions, you were not implicated in these offences for which you are applying for amnesty now, why are you applying for something which you are not implicated in?

INTERPRETER: May the speaker please repeat the question?

MR LOWIES: You were not implicated in these offences for which you are applying for amnesty? Why are you doing to now?

MR NOSENGA: Are you referring to the Boipatong incidents?

MR LOWIES: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: I was involved as well. I felt bad about it, it was not only Inkatha that killed people there, the police were also involved. These people are telling the truth.

MR LOWIES: So, why are you asking for amnesty for something in which you are not implicated?

MR NOSENGA: I was involved at Boipatong except to say I was not arrested. The people who came forward to testify before this Commission are not telling the truth. Old ladies died on that day. People who could have lived to support their families.

MR LOWIES: Yes ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Wait a minute.

MR LOWIES: I'm sorry Chair, I apologise.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Are you saying that you applied for amnesty in respect of the Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Because you realised that the people were not telling the truth?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: When did you realise that?

MR NOSENGA: At the start of the TRC I think, you see I'm in Leeukop so I cannot keep track of the dates. I think it was at the time when I submitted my application after I was arrested for the Sebokeng offences. The people who had come forward to seek amnesty, I mean the people are involved in the Boipatong incident, there were police involved there.

CHAIRPERSON: You see you're saying that you decided to apply for amnesty firstly because you were involved in the massacre?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And in addition to that the people who were involved were not telling the truth about what happened during the massacre?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now when did you realise that - well first of all, who are the people that you are referring to, are you referring to the other applicants?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now when did you first realise that the applicants were not telling the truth?

MR NOSENGA: It's been a long time, I cannot say exactly but it's been quite a while now.

CHAIRPERSON: Where did you hear them telling the what you consider to be the untruth?

MR NOSENGA: I was here at the TRC before I came to testify, they were still testifying.

CHAIRPERSON: But you had already applied for amnesty at that time?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

So I didn't follow exactly what you said in this last response? So then you heard there were being lies told when you were here?

MR NOSENGA: I had already submitted my application when they told lies.

MR LOWIES: Well, if that is the situation, you are now telling a lie. Let me tell you why and I'd like your comments. You had been clear yesterday that one of the reasons why you applied for amnesty and I repeat why you applied for amnesty was because the people were telling lies. Now your version is you only heard that they were telling lies after you have applied for amnesty. This is a contradiction. Would you like to explain this?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I was also involved during the Boipatong Massacre, that's the reason why I had come forward to seek amnesty because the people who came here to testify are not telling the truth. I had submitted my application pertaining to the Boipatong Massacre a long time ago.

MR LOWIES: The point simply is the following, then that could not have been a reason for you applying. The fact that the police are lying is not a reason for you applying for amnesty, correct?

MR NOSENGA: I still maintain that I was involved in the Boipatong Massacre.

MR LOWIES: Are you retracting your evidence that the reason for applying for amnesty is because lies are being told at this forum which was what you said clearly yesterday and earlier on today?

MR NOSENGA: No, I still maintain that I had come forward to tell the people of Boipatong what happened that evening.

MR LOWIES: But yet you would not tell the people from Sebokeng what happened because had you not been forced you would never have confessed to these crimes? Do you see the difference? Do you see the glaring inconsistency?

MR NOSENGA: I have already submitted an application with regards to the Sebokeng incident.

MR LOWIES: No sir ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) any further, man says that the reason why he came forward is because he realised that the applicants were not telling the truth and secondly because he was also involved. He was involved in the Sebokeng attacks, we know that he - whatever he may have said, you know, in the criminal court, I'm not too sure it is of any consequence to us here.

MR LOWIES: I would agree with you on one regard but I also disagree with respect but I just put the following to you Chair in respect the motive as you will see from the application of this witness is suspect and everything ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: A motive to do what?

MR LOWIES: For applying for amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: But he has told us why he's applying for amnesty in regard to this. He said that yesterday, he's repeated it today on more than one occasion.

MR LOWIES: No but Sir, with respect ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: And the record speaks for itself.

MR LOWIES: Chair if you rule that I can't proceed then I will abide by it but I would submit that there are various aspects that's still got to be canvassed in this regard and I would beg you to afford me the opportunity of doing so.

CHAIRPERSON: Provided you get on with the work, we can't ...(indistinct). Go on with the questions.

MR LOWIES: Thank you.

Mr Nosenga, the point is simply the following. You admitted on two occasions today that had you not been tortured by the police in regard to the Sebokeng shooting, you would not have confessed up until today, correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Yet for an offence you are not convicted you apply for amnesty, that does not make sense. Why in the one would you never have but in the one you do so freely and voluntarily?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand the question or do you want me to simplify the question to you? Here is the question. You were involved in the Sebokeng attack, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. You were not prepared to admit that to the police but because of the torture you admitted your part in the Sebokeng attack?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: You've told us that had it not been for the attack, I mean for the torture up till today you would not have disclosed that?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Right.

MR NOSENGA: I will not have been sentenced for it.

CHAIRPERSON: If you had not been convicted you would not have disclosed the Sebokeng attack and your role in that attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now in regard to the Boipatong Massacre you were not arrested?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What you are being asked therefore is why would you confess in regard to the attack, in regard to which you've not been convicted and not have been tortured and be unwilling to confess in regard to what you really took part in, tortured and so on. Do you understand the question?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. I mentioned before that I was involved in the Boipatong Massacre. No one coerced me to apply for amnesty, I did it out of my own violation.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, the point is, you raised a point and that's why I'm taking it up with you. In the nine charges where you were convicted of murder you also killed a woman by the name of Elizabeth Gadebe. You killed a sixteen year old child, Justice Skumeng and you killed a seventeen year old child, Jacob Ditebe. You fired shots at a lady by the name of Jane Mbele and Maria Mlangene. So what is the difference between those attacks and the Boipatong attacks if you want to rely on the fact that ladies were involved and children involved?

MR NOSENGA: I mentioned before that the Boipatong Massacre was not out of my own personal violation but it was following an order issued by Mtwana Zulu and I was with Tswe ...(indistinct)

MR LOWIES: Sorry, the last part was not caught by myself in interpretation Chair?

INTERPRETER: The applicant said that the applicant was with the people he mentioned when he went to Sebokeng to launch that attack, he was explaining that the attack on Boipatong was not out of his personal violation.

CHAIRPERSON: This is his question, perhaps if you answer this question or can't answer it let us know. You see what counsel is trying to put to you is this, why would you be willing to tell us about Boipatong attack because you were not arrested in regard to that attack and you were never convicted and yet be unwilling but for, you know, your confession to disclose your involvement in the Sebokeng attack. Did you understand the question?

MR NOSENGA: I did mention the Sebokeng incident in my application.

CHAIRPERSON: But this follows up on the line of questioning that was being pursued in which you indicated that had it not been for the torture, had it not been for the conviction, you would not have admitted your role in the Sebokeng massacre or attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is so but because I've already been convicted there's nothing further that I can hide.

CHAIRPERSON: Now the question therefore is why would you be willing to disclose your role in the Boipatong where you were never tortured, where you were never convicted and yet be unwilling to disclose your involvement in regard to your matter where admittedly you took part? Do you understand the question? No, no, do you understand the question or do you want me to repeat it to you in Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I understand. You're asking me why I volunteered the information on Boipatong. I was present together with many others who were never convicted for that incident. With regards to the incident in Sebokeng I submitted an application because I was involved too.

CHAIRPERSON: You would have not disclosed the role you played in Sebokeng if you had not been tortured and made to confess, is that not correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is so.

CHAIRPERSON: You have told us that you would have not disclosed this information up to this date if you had not been tortured?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words it would have remained your secret, no one would have known about it?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now with regards to the Boipatong incident you were never arrested for it?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: No one tortured you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: But you are willing to volunteer information?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: The legal representative would like to know why you would volunteer the information on Boipatong and not on Sebokeng where you killed nine people where you have already informed us this, you would not have admitted to it. The attorney would like to know why you are willing to keep the information regarding Sebokeng secret and not the same with Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I have already explained that I have already been convicted on Sebokeng therefore I have no reason to hide it any further but had I not been convicted, I would not volunteered the information.

CHAIRPERSON: The attorney would like to know why you volunteered information on Boipatong because you were not convicted on it?

MR NOSENGA: With regards to Boipatong I felt bad because many people were effected, old people were killed and the police and IFP were involved in this attack. The people who survived know very well what trauma they went through.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

So to take you up on an aspect is the following, you have killed in the past in cold blood, it appears that you suddenly have a moral attack. That does not make sense. The question is why all this morality all of a sudden?

MR NOSENGA: I did kill people but it was under the command of Prince Zulu that I should do so.

MR LOWIES: Which incident are you now referring to?

MR NOSENGA: I would like you to repeat the question because I am not sure the incident you're referring to.

MR LOWIES: Let's leave it at that, I'll repeat my question. You have killed people in cold blood before and you chose to hide it, now it appears that you have a moral obligation to talk on your ....(inaudible) I'm asking you what has happened, why the sudden change?

MR NOSENGA: It is out of my own violation out the bottom of my heart.

MR LOWIES: But I thought you also said to us that you were under instruction of Prince Vanana Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, with regards to the Sebokeng matter.

MR LOWIES: So Vanana Zulu forced you, am I correct to attack the people in Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: That is so, you would have not disobeyed an order if you were issued with one at KwaMadala Hostel.

MR LOWIES: And in Boipatong were you forced by anybody?

MR NOSENGA: That is something which was discussed in a meeting and the only people who were allowed to remain behind were women and children.

MR LOWIES: But I don't get your answer, was it yes or no, were you forced or not?

CHAIRPERSON: I think the import of his evidence is that if you were made resident of the hostel there was no way you could not have taken part in these attacks. I think implicit in that there was some kind of indirect order to go and do these things.

MR LOWIES: Now having regard to what has just been highlighted by the Chairman, I would like just to say this, what would have happened to you if you refused to go on the night of the Boipatong Massacre, would anything have happened to you? Did you have a choice not to go?

MR NOSENGA: The situation did not allow because every adult there was supposed to go out on that attack. The only people who were to remain behind were the children and the women.

MR LOWIES: Now to get back to your evidence yesterday, your evidence in chief and specifically when you were questioned by the Chairman, you said that you heard that lies were told here at the Commission regarding complicity of policemen and White people in the attack and that caused you to bring this application for amnesty for which we are here today. Do you still confirm that evidence or do you want to change it?

MR NOSENGA: I do not wish to change it.

MR LOWIES: So it's still the same?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I stand by it.

MR LOWIES: Then my question is when did you hear that lies are being told here regarding police complicity and White complicity in the Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: I was present when they gave evidence, when the other applicants gave evidence.

MR LOWIES: So you say very first time that you wanted to apply for amnesty was when the proceedings in the Boipatong matter was already in progress and the amnesty I'm talking about is the amnesty for Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No I had already submitted an application for the matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Is this in respect of Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes when the hearing commenced I'd already submitted an application form.

MR LOWIES: But then you could not have heard here at the hearing that they are lying and that could not have been the reason for your application?

MR NOSENGA: It is true that I've submitted my application form a while ago and later when I came to this hearing and heard the applicants telling lies about the incident.

MR LOWIES: Okay, there's some confusion now and I'm going to afford the opportunity to clear that up. I started off with the following, yesterday you told the Chairman specifically because he wanted to get clarity on the following point, you told the Chairman specifically that the reason why you applied for amnesty in Boipatong was because you heard that lies were being told here regarding the police complicity in Boipatong attack. Do you still agree with that evidence?

MR NOSENGA: I said I was involved in that incident that is why I submitted an application form and people were not telling the truth about the incident.

MR LOWIES: No but I want to hear whether you agree with what you said to the Chairman yesterday. Forget anything else, my question is focused on the following, do you agree with what you told the Chairman yesterday and that is the reason why you applied for Boipatong amnesty is because "I heard that there were being lies told here at the amnesty hearing regarding police complicity". Yes or no?

MR NOSENGA: I was present here, I was listening to them as they spoke, it's not that I heard about it, I was present myself when they said that the police had not been present but the police had been present when people were killed.

MR LOWIES: Yes, yes, yes, I think I agree with you but the important point is the following, the point is those lies that you heard here caused you to apply for amnesty in the Boipatong hearing, yes or no?

MR NOSENGA: I said the reason why I've lied for amnesty is because I was also involved in the attack, that is the truth. MR LOWIES: I agree with you but you also said and this is what I'm establishing with you, was the other reason, the second reason in other words not that you heard here during the amnesty that lies are being told and that made you Sir apply for amnesty in the Boipatong matter, that's what you said? Am I correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I had already submitted my application by then.

MR LOWIES: So what you told the Chairman yesterday then was not correct and that is I heard lies being told and that is why I applied for amnesty. That cannot be correct, you can't have the one or the other? Or the one and the other?

MR NOSENGA: I said I was involved in the incident, that is why I applied for amnesty.

MR LOWIES: I agree with you but that's not the point in issue at this stage. I know that you said that. The point in issue is you told two things which are mutually destructive. The first is you said to the Chairman you heard lies being told about police complicity and that made you apply and you said on two occasions or three occasions yes that is the reason and that evidence is correct. Now I want to know finally from you, is that the correct version?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was also involved in that incident.

MR LOWIES: Yes, we have one thing now and I'm going to leave it at that and that is you admit that you've heard here at the hearing that the other applicants are telling lies and that made you apply for amnesty.

MR NOSENGA: I was present when they told those lies.

MR LOWIES: And that caused you to apply for amnesty to set the record straight, yes or no?

MR NOSENGA: I mentioned before that I had submitted my application by that time.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, just to clarify something, were you not in prison, are you not in prison.

MR NOSENGA: I am in prison.

ADV SIGODI: Okay, so when you say you were here at the TRC when you heard the applicants telling lies, what had you come to do at the TRC if you had not applied by then for this Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: I said I had submitted my application even before the hearing started and I was present here when the co-applicants have evidence.

ADV SIGODI: Were you here at this building when you heard them telling lies, were you here in this building?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was in the premises, not in this hall.

ADV SIGODI: So when were you brought to these hearings?

For the first time, for the first time when were you brought from prison to these hearings for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember but I was in Leeukop and I was transferred to the prison here, that was when the hearing started.

ADV SIGODI: So do you know why you were brought from the prison to these hearings, were you brought because you were an applicant or what? Do you know?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was.

ADV SIGODI: So can you remember at what stage did you come? Who was giving evidence when you came here for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: No, who was giving of the applicants, who was giving evidence when you came to the hearings for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: I remember Victor Mthembu.

ADV SIGODI: And when he testified, when he was testifying you had already made your application, is that what you are saying for the Boipatong matter, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Just bear with me for a second please?

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry, we will be adjourning at 1 o'clock for lunch.

MR LOWIES: Sir, but when Victor Mthembu gave evidence you were not in the hearing, nobody knew of you at that stage of the applicants and it was at a different venue? Your answers preceding my questioning now can therefore not be true?

MR NOSENGA: When Victor gave evidence I was already here, I was present.

CHAIRPERSON: But Victor Kezwa was not an applicant was he?

MR NOSENGA: I mean Victor Mthembu.

CHAIRPERSON: Well you see the point that's being made is this, the very first occasion when you attended these hearings was when this Committee was sitting at these premises, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, what's being put to you is that Victor Mthembu gave evidence not at this venue but at some other venue so you could not have been present when he gave evidence, that's what's being put to you, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I do understand.

CHAIRPERSON: So what's your comment?

MR NOSENGA: I must have misunderstood the question.

MR LOWIES: But Sir, why did you answer that you heard Victor Mthembu stating that there were no police involved? That was the effect of your evidence, you agree that cannot be true?

MR NOSENGA: Yes it is not true.

MR LOWIES: Let's hear this then. Did you ever hear what Victor Mthembu's evidence is all about?

MR NOSENGA: I think I heard it on TV.

MR LOWIES: So you heard Victor Mthembu's evidence on TV?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was in the Stofberg Prison and I heard him on TV.

MR LOWIES: You actually saw Victor and you heard what he said?

MR NOSENGA: Yes he said that he - he gave evidence to the effect that a snake gives birth to another snake, that is why he killed those babies.

MR LOWIES: And that you heard over the TV?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Because I'm going to do the following and I want you to be quite sure in that so that there's no misunderstanding, we're going to request the raw tapes from the SABC and we're going to check whether you're telling the truth so I want to make sure. Your version is the following thus, it was on TV that Victor Mthembu was reported as saying a snake gives birth to another snake?

MR NOSENGA: Yes it was on the news, they showed it. I was also on the news yesterday.

CHAIRPERSON: Well is the position therefore this and if this is not correct would you let me know, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You first saw the hearings or heard of the hearings when you watched a television set whilst you were in prison?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, with regards to Victor Mthembu it was on the news and I was in Stofberg prison.

CHAIRPERSON: Victor Mthembu was the first person or the first applicant, that's why I'm asking you did you hear of this hearing for the first time when you were in prison that they were in progress?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was at Stofberg.

CHAIRPERSON: So that's where you saw Victor Mthembu giving evidence?

MR NOSENGA: Yes but I listened to the evidence of others.

CHAIRPERSON: You were not present from what you are telling us when Victor Mthembu have evidence before this Committee?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was not present.

CHAIRPERSON: But you were present when some of the remaining applicants gave evidence?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

ADV SIGODI: Now if you are saying you were present when the others were giving evidence, so I want you to be very clear and tell us when you came to the hearings for the first time from the prison, who was giving evidence at this hearing?

MR NOSENGA: If I'm not mistaken it was Buthelezi who was supposedly in charge of the IFP youth.

ADV SIGODI: And where were you taken to, I just want some clarity, I want to hear it from you, which venue did you go to, did you come to this venue or did you go to another venue?

MR NOSENGA: I was taken to this venue, the ISCOR club.

ADV SIGODI: Alright and were you sitting with the applicants or where were you sitting, where were you sitting were you in the same hall?

MR NOSENGA: I was in the other back room, not in the hall with them.

MR LOWIES: Now was it the evidence of Victor Mthembu that caused you to apply for amnesty in the Boipatong matter?

MR NOSENGA: I have already mentioned that before that by that time I had already submitted an application form with regards to that matter.

MR LOWIES: The Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Now when did you hear for the first time that mention or that it was denied rather that there was any police involvement in the Boipatong attack. When did you hear that for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember quite well but I think I was brought here on a Tuesday where I heard that some of the applicants were giving evidence to the effect that the police were either not there or that they saw one or two Casspirs. I was present when Buthelezi gave his evidence with regards to Victor, I was still in prison.

MR LOWIES: So I just want you to be clear on this, so your evidence is the first time you heard that it's denied that there were any policemen involved was when Buthelezi gave evidence or the guy that you think is Buthelezi, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes it was him and others.

MR LOWIES: Then I want to put it to you that you've been telling deliberate lies in that, you specifically stated yesterday that that was the reason for you applying for amnesty? You said so on more than one occasion, yesterday and today.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying that I had submitted by application sometime before the hearing commenced.

MR LOWIES: I'm not talking about your application, listen carefully, we're talking about a lie that you told yesterday and today, the lie was the reason why you were applying for amnesty is because you heard people stating that the police were not involved, that is why you applied for amnesty. Then that is then a lie?

MR NOSENGA: I mentioned before that these people were not telling the truth because the police were present, I was present there. They are just trying to protect the police even the lawyer himself was trying to protect those people.

MR LOWIES: Is that your answer?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: I put it to you Sir, that the reasons why you apply for amnesty in the Boipatong matter is riddled by contradictions by yourself and I will list those. Firstly, you testified yesterday that the lies that were being told regarding police complicity caused you to do so, whereas today you say you only heard it after your application. Comment?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. What I remember about yesterday is that the statement that was discussed that Mr Berger took from prison, that did happen.

MR LOWIES: Which Mr Berger? Did you say Dannie Berger, I think it wasn't translated as Dannie Berger.

MR NOSENGA: Berger, Mr Berger.

MR LOWIES: Is it Mr Berger sitting over there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes he arrived in Stofberg Prison and took a statement from me which statement I did not sign.

MR LOWIES: How do you know he took an unsigned statement from you? Did he write it down?

MR NOSENGA: They questioned me on what happened and they were writing this down but they never requested me to sign anything.

MR LOWIES: At that stage did you apply for amnesty yet or not?

MR NOSENGA: I had submitted a long while ago when they came, that is Mr Berger and Mr Brian.

MR LOWIES: No but listen carefully, I think it's common cause that you applied for two sets of amnesty, correct? Two sets of applications, the one for the Sebokeng matter and the one for the Boipatong matter, am I correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Now did you apply for these applications at different times, for these acts?

CHAIRPERSON: Who asked you about Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Mr Berger and Mr Brian.

MR LOWIES: So the first people - I'm sorry Chair, can I proceed? I'm sorry, I apologise.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say that you refused to sign the statement?

MR NOSENGA: They did not make me sign the statement.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know why you didn't sign the statement?

MR NOSENGA: No I do not.

MR LOWIES: Do you say that the first person to whom you have mentioned your complicity in Boipatong was Mr Berger and Mr Brian?

MR NOSENGA: Yes but I had told Mongese at Leeukop, at Stofberg it was Mr Berger and Mr Brian whom I first told about my involvement.

CHAIRPERSON: In which prison were you first detained, is it Leeukop?

MR NOSENGA: I was kept in Leeuhof.

CHAIRPERSON: And is it Mr Mongese who visited you at Leeuhof?

MR NOSENGA: No I did not get the question quite well, I had already been convicted and he came to Leeukop Prison. Berger and the other one came to the other prison.

CHAIRPERSON: Once you were convicted you were then sent to Leeukop Prison?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay and is that where Mr Mongese visited you?

MR NOSENGA: At Leeukop?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And did he ask you about the Boipatong matter?

MR NOSENGA: Yes he did.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now is it your evidence then that Mongese was the first person you told about the Boipatong matter?

MR NOSENGA: I think so if I'm not mistaken.

MR LOWIES: Yet it was not Mongese who took this unsworn statement from you it was Mr Berger?

MR NOSENGA: No, I am saying Mongese came to Leeukop and Mr Berger and others came to Stofberg.

CHAIRPERSON: Did Mr Mongese take a statement from you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes he did at Leeukop.

MR LOWIES: But I'm talking about the unsigned statement. Was that taken by Mongese or by Mr Berger?

MR NOSENGA: It was taken by Mr Brian and Mr Berger.

ADV SIBANYONI: I'm sorry Mr Lowies.

Mr Nosenga, when Mongese visited you at Leeukop what is the position about your application, had you already applied or not?

MR NOSENGA: I think I had not yet submitted this application, I think I submitted this application when I was at Leeukop and it was before the TRC thing started.

ADV SIBANYONI: Was that before Mongese's visit or after?

MR NOSENGA: I gave this application to Mongese and later on to Mr Brian when I was in Stofberg.

ADV SIBANYONI: Did you complete any form when Mongese visited you in prison?

MR NOSENGA: He was writing as I was speaking I only filled in my application form properly when my legal counsel came.

ADV SIBANYONI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: And when was that?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall, well it's been a while now.

CHAIRPERSON: Had the hearings started already?

MR NOSENGA: No I think it had not yet started, I think it was just about to start, I cannot recall quite well.

ADV SIGODI: And which lawyer are you referring to, who assisted you with the filling in?

MR NOSENGA: The one legal counsel that is representing me now, that is after Mongese and Brian had arrived and then my legal counsel who is representing me now arrived. She found me in Stofberg and she is the one who assisted me in filling in the application form.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga you are making serious allegations and I want you to reflect on what you're saying. So you are saying that your application was only filled in by Ms Tanzer sitting here next to you, properly filled in, to use your words?

MR NOSENGA: Yes because she is still representing me now, the others did not come.

MR LOWIES: So if I understand your evidence correctly, the only application that we had previously was that for Sebokeng but the Boipatong was filled by Ms Tanzer, properly filled in, do I understand you correctly?

MR NOSENGA: She filled in two application forms for the Sebokeng as well as for the Boipatong incident.

MR LOWIES: Your answer?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, Boipatong and Sebokeng.

MR LOWIES: So to summarise then am I understanding you correctly that nobody else but Ms Tanzer filled in applications for amnesty?

MR NOSENGA: I did indicate that some came like Mr Brian came to me in Stofberg, another one came while I was in Leeukop and my legal rep came to help me fill in the application form for the Boipatong incident.

MR LOWIES: The legal rep as you call her, is Ms Tanzer?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, I want to urge you please to be honest with us because you see if that is the case there has been some fraud committed by various people and that cannot be allowed. Are you honest in your answers?

MR LAX: Chairperson I'd like Mr ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR LAX: I've been instructed to leave it.

MR LOWIES: So I want to urge you, can I proceed then Chair?

I want to urge you to be honest because it appears then that there must have been some fraud somewhere along the line. Are you serious that Ms Tanzer assisted you to apply for amnesty for Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, she's the one who assisted me because the other ones never came, she's the one who assisted me in filling in the TRC forms pertaining to the Boipatong incident.

MR LOWIES: And Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that one too.

MR LOWIES: But Tanzer, Sir, was only briefed after the hearing had already begun, if I read the record correct. That means your application was finalised after the hearing began?

MR NOSENGA: I have no knowledge to that effect.

ADV SIGODI: Mr Chair excuse me, just to clarify something? Mr Nosenga, do you know what the TRC amnesty form looks like?

MR NOSENGA: No, it was filled in by my legal counsel.

ADV SIGODI: If you look at page number 6 where you have signed, page number 6 of the bundle R, you've confirmed that was your signature there?

MR LOWIES: With respect I think he did not, that was the one he denied?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I'm the one who signed here.

ADV SIGODI: Yes he confirmed.

MR LOWIES: I apologise my mistake.

ADV SIGODI: Now if you look at this form can you perhaps recall who filled in this form for you or who filled in this form? Form from page 1 to page 6? Can you recognise that handwriting?

MR NOSENGA: I do not see it quite well.

ADV SIGODI: Do you remember when you signed this form at page 96, when was that, do you remember?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall.

ADV SIGODI: Can you perhaps tell us if this was the form which you signed when you were assisted by Ms Tanzer?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, this is.

ADV SIGODI: Did you say this is the form which Ms Tanzer assisted you to sign?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, this is my handwriting.

MR LAX: You're not being asked if this is your handwriting. You must understand something, just listen to the questions carefully. You're being asked whether this is the form that Ms Tanzer assisted you to sign? Are you able to tell us whether this is the form that she assisted you to sign or not?

MR NOSENGA: May she please read it to me because I am not well educated?

ADV SIGODI: In other words you cannot read what is on this form, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I'll be telling a lie, I cannot read.

ADV SIGODI: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms?

MS CAMBANIS: I'll hold over till lunch time to discuss with my colleagues, there's some disagreement. It's almost lunch time, well deal with it then.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MS CAMBANIS: I'll withdraw. I'll withdraw, no comment.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, did Ms Tanzer when she came there explain to you the purpose of her visiting you?

MR NOSENGA: She told me that she is my legal counsel.

MR LOWIES: And did she tell you that she's here to finalise your application and you must sign forms, is that what you're saying?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, to fill in the application form for amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, various people came to see you in prison we understand from your evidence.

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Did any one of these persons require you to sign a document, if you cannot remember say so. If you do, say so?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall because many of them came to me.

CHAIRPERSON: You may have signed such documents?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is possible, I cannot recall really.

CHAIRPERSON: Now Mr Nosenga, did Mr Berger ask you to sign any application form?

MR NOSENGA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Definitely not?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: Did Brian ask you to sign any form?

MR NOSENGA: No, they just wrote things down and they took those things along.

MR LOWIES: So he definitely did not ask you to sign?

MR NOSENGA: No I do not recall them making me sign anything.

MR LOWIES: The only person that you can recall who wanted you to sign documents was Ms Tanzer? Or am I wrong in this? This is a question it's not something I put to you.

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: So even though you can't write, we have the following from you then and that is the only person who requested you to put your signature on TRC documents is Ms Tanzer?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: This you are sure about?

MR NOSENGA: Yes she came to me in Sun City.

MR LOWIES: And the reason that she gave you is "listen, you must sign these so that I can complete your application for amnesty for Boipatong" that was the crux of the discussion, correct?

MR NOSENGA: I am the one who gave her the statement, yes.

MR LOWIES: And you signed?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: In other words you signed the statement that you gave her? Sorry?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Who is Mongese?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know that person, the person identified himself as Mongese from Johannesburg.

MR LOWIES: Did he say why he is coming to visit you, on what authority, on whose request?

MR NOSENGA: No I cannot recall who had sent that Mongese to me.

MR LOWIES: Did he say why he is there?

MR NOSENGA: Mongese wanted to know, to get information about the Boipatong Massacre and wanted to assist me filling in the application form.

MR LOWIES: Did he assist you to fill in any form?

MR NOSENGA: I gave Mongese information which was written down.

MR LOWIES: But written down and filling in a form is a different thing, do you know the difference?

MR NOSENGA: Mongese used paper similar to the ones you are having here, I was speaking as he or she was writing.

MR LOWIES: Could you just show us the paper that you are referring to when you say paper similar to these here? Could you just identify these papers with the permission of the Chair?

MR NOSENGA: He would like - like this one, papers like this one.

MR LOWIES: He indicates a writing pad. Thank you Chair.

Is this an appropriate time to take the lunch Chair? Chair at this time I may still be for a half an hour or so.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR LOWIES: I say I may be with this aspect for half an hour.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. We'll take the adjournment now and come back at quarter to 2.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, may I remind you that you're still under oath?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (s.u.o.) Yes thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LOWIES: (cont)

Thank you Chair.

Mr Nosenga, your evidence is somewhat confusing regarding this Brian person who went to see you. What was the purpose of his visit, did he explain that to you?

MR NOSENGA: No I cannot recall, he did come to me but I cannot recall.

MR LOWIES: Well, can I ask you this ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall what he said, yes he did come to me.

MR LOWIES: Can I ask you this, did you discuss with this Brian person the question of amnesty. It doesn't matter for what or in regard to what but did you discuss the question of amnesty with him at all?

MR NOSENGA: I only knew him when he came to Stofberg wanting to know about the Boipatong incident.

MR LOWIES: Wanting to know what?

MR NOSENGA: He wanted to know what happened at Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Did he say why?

MR NOSENGA: No he just asked me what happened at Boipatong and I told him.

MR LOWIES: Now off the record - off the subject for a little bit, it is common cause that what happened this morning, Sir, is the following ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, off the record what?

MR LOWIES: I'm sorry, off the subject, that's what I meant.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes very well.

MR LOWIES: To jump to another aspect it's common cause that there was an order this morning that certain documents should be handed to the ANC. My question is the following, Mr Mapoma the evidence leader introduced to us a certain Brian Kopedi from the ANC TRC Desk and we handed the documents over to him, now just before the proceedings started and my question is did you see this person when this happened, did you see the incident when the documents were handed over to him? Now, just shortly before he started?

MR NOSENGA: Which person are you talking about, I did not see anyone?

MR LOWIES: Okay. Now on the last occasion, according to my instructions, the same Mr Kopedi to whom these documents were handed had a consultation with you at the hearing according to Mr Fredrech, can you recall?

MR NOSENGA: I did not see him, maybe it's possible that I did speak to him.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the point of asking this witness whether the same Brian is the person who consulted with him when he tells you that he didn't see anyone? Shouldn't you first clarify, I mean whether he knows the Brian that you're talking about first?

MR LOWIES: I thought he would be able to do so if he saw the incident, but he didn't Chair. I hear what you say, with respect we'll go into that.

CHAIRPERSON: Or is that Brian here, is he here?

MR LOWIES: I don't know, I don't see him now. He's just left shortly before I think.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, very well.

MR LOWIES: Well Mr Nosenga, let me just hear this. Did you consult with the same Brian that went to see you in jail on the previous occasion when we were here during the TRC hearings? If I say we I mean you.

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall quite well.

CHAIRPERSON: Let's put it this way, you mentioned that a certain Brian, is that his first name, is that his surname?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know whether it's a name or surname, I know him to be Mr Brian.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you consult with Mr Brian at any stage after these hearings had commenced?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall quite well, what I remember is he spoke to me in Stofberg.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I think what counsel wants to find out is whether after - I mean since you've been attending these hearings, did Mr Brian come and see you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Now where did he come to see you, this Mr Brian?

MR NOSENGA: He came here.

MR LOWIES: And what did he want to discuss with you?

MR NOSENGA: He told me that they would come to attend the hearing.

MR LOWIES: Yes?

MR NOSENGA: That's all that he told me.

MR LOWIES: Who would come to attend the hearing, if you say they? Who was he referring to?

MR NOSENGA: He was in the company of a certain lady.

MR LOWIES: Who was the lady?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know her.

MR LOWIES: You've never seen her before or after?

MR NOSENGA: Maybe but I do not recall, I was seeing her here for the first time.

MR LOWIES: Did they discuss the nature of your application with you like they did on a previous occasion maybe?

MR NOSENGA: As I have stated they just indicated to me that they would attend the hearing. They said they would come to listen to my amnesty application proceedings.

MR LOWIES: Why would they say that?

MR NOSENGA: I have indicated that they don't know.

MR LOWIES: And did they indeed listen to your amnesty proceedings?

MR NOSENGA: No I only saw them last then. I did not see them since.

MR LOWIES: Well that's strange, I mean they said they - that's strange because you said that they come here specifically with that purpose and then they don't do it? Are you sure that's all that happened?

MR NOSENGA: Maybe, I don't know what happened.

MR LOWIES: Now at that stage was your present legal representative Ms Tanzer already appointed and acting on your behalf when they approached you as such?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall.

MR LOWIES: Because I asked her if she gave anybody permission to consult with you and she said no, that's common cause between us. Do you know whether she was consulted by them, by Brian and the other lady?

MR NOSENGA: No I cannot remember.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, I've urged you before ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Could you just let me - when you first attended these hearings, you were already represented were you not?

MR LOWIES: I think yes, I think I did not have a legal counsel but then I later on had the counsel who is next to me now.

CHAIRPERSON: When you started to attend these hearings, you were already legally represented were you not?

MR NOSENGA: The one person who came is my present legal counsel, she's the one who came, she's the one whom I saw.

CHAIRPERSON: Well then she was your lawyer at the time, was she not?

MR NOSENGA: Will you please explain?

CHAIRPERSON: When you started coming here to the hearings, you already had a legal counsel, right, the hearing had already started?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I had counsel.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes and Brian, and Mr Brian you say came to see you after you had started to attend these hearings?

MR NOSENGA:

CHAIRPERSON: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: And on what you can remember so far, only with the message they are here, they will be listening to your application?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now the Brian person that you ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Just before you go on.

MR LOWIES: I'm sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: You see shortly, a minute ago, you were asked, well one of your answers was when Mr Brian came to speak to you after you began to attend these hearings, you do not recall whether your present legal representative had already been appointed?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question?

CHAIRPERSON: You are telling us that your answer is at the time when Mr Brian came to speak to you here you don't know whether your present legal counsel had already been appointed to represent you?

MR NOSENGA: I might have said that.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I'm telling you you said that.

MR NOSENGA: Maybe I didn't get you well, I might have said that.

CHAIRPERSON: What is your answer, did you say that or didn't you?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember whether I said that. Would you please explain so that I can understand. I call him Brian.

CHAIRPERSON: You see what was being asked of you was when Brian came to speak to you here you already had a representative, a legal representative. You answered that you don't know whether your present legal representative had already been representing you at the time or not.

MR NOSENGA: I think we did not get each other well, I am saying my legal representative was already appointed.

CHAIRPERSON: No, you were speaking Zulu, that's what you said in Zulu, you said "I cannot remember whether my legal representative had been appointed at the time."

MR NOSENGA: I might have said that, I cannot remember but when I still remember very well, my present legal representative was here while Brian was here as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, your legal representative at present confirmed to me and I have no reason to doubt that that she was only appointed in August last year. She showed me a document - can I have a copy of that please? With your permission could I just ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Do you confirm that your present legal representative was appointed in August last year, can you recall that or not?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't recall that.

MR LOWIES: So if that is the situation, surely by then you must have already applied for amnesty before that? Why would she say to you she's finalising your documentation? The date that she showed me was the 17th August?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question?

MR LOWIES: She said to me and she now showed the document indicating that she's been appointed 17th August 1998 by the Legal Aid Board. The question arising from that, how could she assist you with the finalising of your amnesty application and require of you to fill in documents in that regard as you said just before the lunch adjournment?

MR NOSENGA: She did come to me.

CHAIRPERSON: Excuse me, would the person please who has the cell phone please try and switch it off otherwise it is interrupting us here? Yes?

MR LOWIES: Your answer?

MR NOSENGA: She did come to me and she took a statement, I don't know what she means when she says she only came in 1998 but she is the one who came and said she was going to represent me in this case.

MR LOWIES: I agree with that, she may have done that but we're not talking on representation, we're talking about your application for amnesty and please don't confuse the two. Now regarding the application for amnesty ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, in fairness to this witness, he's told us repeatedly, I think the record speaks for itself in this regard, that he's told us repeatedly that when these hearings started he had already made the application for amnesty and he has also told us that when Ms Tanzer came to visit him, wherever that was, she explained to him that she was there for the purposes of assisting him with an application for amnesty. I mean the record speaks for itself in this regard, what that assistance entailed with the pursuant application which had already been launched, one doesn't know, the witness cannot read and write, he can't tell us which of these documents, you know, he completed. You can't be debating this matter with the witness. The record speaks for itself here, his evidence stands.

MR LOWIES: Thank you. However, there is one thing that concerns me from what you said, Mr Nosenga, and that is she was the only person who requested you to sign an application for amnesty?

MR LAX: Mr Lowies, with the greatest of respect, he used the word form, he used the word statement, he used the word application, interchangeably in answering your questions about those things. You never clarified the matter, I know the man's illiterate so I'm not going to get picky about it but really, do you seriously expect an illiterate man to know what documents he signed?

MR LOWIES: No Mr Chairman, but my questioning is to ensure whether that was the only application lodged. Now there he can from what people told him the purpose is, he can give an opinion and that is the nature of the cross-examination.

MR LAX: Except to say...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: When I clarified these issues with him because I asked him I think whether these persons who came to see him, whether at Leeuhof or at Leeukop, did any one of them require of him to sign a document and his answer "I cannot recall, I may well have" but the only person that he says he clearly recalls requiring her to sign a document was Ms Tanzer. I think that's what the evidence says.

MR LOWIES: Correct, thank you.

Now Mr Nosenga, one thing is clear though, if you signed a document you would now that this is my signature if it is presented to you, not so?

MR NOSENGA: Yes if they can produce the papers maybe I can try.

MR LOWIES: No the question is simple, I will show you some documents just now but listen to the question first. The question is simple, if I show you a document and ask you whether you signed this, you would be able to see this is my signature, not so?

MR NOSENGA: Yes maybe if you can produce these documents.

MR LOWIES: Well you were asked yesterday and I would like to show you certain documents and I'm referring to Exhibit R in this regard. We've got on record today that you've admitted that page 6 was signed by you. Look at the signature only which Ms Tanzer has pointed out with her finger to you. That's yours?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I am the one who signed here.

MR LOWIES: Because you know your signature and you can say "that's mine" correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now we have another document which I'd like to show you, and in the sequence of my documents the next signature which may appear to be yours but you denied yesterday is on page 14. Ms Tanzer again points you to the correct place. Oh sorry, 13. With your permission may I rephrase Chairman? With your permission may I just retract the question and rephrase?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes indeed.

MR LOWIES: Sorry Sir, I made a mistake. The first document thereafter is page 13. Ms Tanzer again will show you a signature. You've denied that that is yours. Look at her finger?

MR NOSENGA: I do see that but that is not my handwriting.

MR LOWIES: Okay.

MR NOSENGA: It's not even legible.

MR LOWIES: I have a better copy, hers is not good, I have a better copy.

MR NOSENGA: I did mention that I might have signed other papers but this is definitely not my handwriting.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, you are not being asked how many documents you signed, you're simply asked to tell us whether the signature which occurs at page 13 of Exhibit R is your signature?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: And you say it because you know your own signature, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Page 14, Ms Tanzer will again show you with her finger, point you to a signature appearing on page 14. You said yesterday it's not your signature. Do you confirm today?

MR NOSENGA: No, this is my signature. Yes this is mine, it's written Nosenga Matanzima.

MR LOWIES: Now you say it is yours.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, here.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am the one who signed here.

ADV SIGODI: Mr Lowies, I wonder if - I don't know if my notes are hundred percent correct but if I remember well, yesterday he was not asked about the signature on page 14, he was asked about the signature on page 15?

MR LOWIES: With the greatest of respect, I think I made a mistake here and I must apologise, I think you are correct, Chair. I apologise.

Mr Nosenga, it was put to you and I apologise to you as well, that you said yesterday it was signature but apparently it's not, you were not even asked about page 14.

Then Mr Nosenga, page 15, again Ms Tanzer will indicate to you an application for amnesty and the signature. Is that your signature? Look at where she's pointing to.

MR NOSENGA: Is this the Stofberg one? This is not how I sign, this is not how I write.

MR LOWIES: It's not the Stofberg one in any case, but nevertheless, then there's a letter which starts at page 16 and continues onto page 17. Again Ms Tanzer will point you right at the place where a signature appears. Is that yours?

MR NOSENGA: That is not my signature. There's only Matanzima written in that space and somewhere else they've written Nosenga Matanzima.

ADV SIBANYONI: Excuse me, is that word Matanzima - was that word Matanzima written by you or not?

MR NOSENGA: I think the statement was made in court but I do not remember. This letter was written in court but I do not remember. It is possible that I may have written it.

CHAIRPERSON: Now where does that leave us are you saying that you signed the letter at page 17 or you could have signed it?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that I signed it because this was written in court.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, do I understand you correctly, is your evidence not that you have a specific way in fixing your signature to documents and this is not the manner in which you do it?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now I'd like you to just look at it finally and just give us a final opinion as to whether or not this is your handwriting, not signature, handwriting and I'm referring only to the place where Matanzima is written. Again Ms Tanzer points out the place to you.

MR NOSENGA: What I'm saying is I do not dispute that I may have written that.

MR LOWIES: Now the next page that I'd like you to turn to and again a request from you, your opinion, it's page 22. This your handwriting? I see there are two places where the name Matanzima appears, is that your handwriting at the bottom of the page?

MR NOSENGA: I don't see this clearly.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, would you just speak up please, I can't here you.

MR NOSENGA: What is written here is illegible.

MR LOWIES: I'll give you a better copy which is available, have a look at this one and see there are two places?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that I may have written that word Matanzima.

MR LOWIES: On both occasions?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying that it is possible that I may have written it.

MR LOWIES: Now yesterday you denied it? Sorry, I retract. If you could just bear with me please Chair?

MR LAX: Mr Lowies, it wasn't put to him yesterday at all. The only pages that were put to him yesterday were 6, 13, 15 and 17.

MR LOWIES: I'm indebted to the Committee. Now Chair, I've compared notes and the way I see it is that he said that he did sign this statement, it was put to him at a later stage.

MR LAX: Yes at a later stage, quite right.

MR LOWIES: But still, there was some confusion I must say.

Now you will recall that the whole issue about your statements so forth arose whilst I was still busy putting to you the discrepancies in your version and I put to you it's riddled with inconsistencies and the second point that I would like you to comment on is the following. You first led us to believe that you would never have disclosed the Sebokeng attack up until today had it not been for the fact that you were tortured by the police. Do you still agree with me?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I do.

MR LOWIES: But yet in this case you will come forward out of your own accord, no threats made, correct or not?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: And Mr Nosenga, on your own version you have also committed acts of theft before, correct? Stealing cars, breaking into shops and houses, correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: And when you were tortured on your version by the police you never conveyed to them that you broke into motor vehicles, stole cars, broke into shops, stole motor vehicles etc, or did you?

MR NOSENGA: No I did not.

MR LOWIES: Why not?

MR NOSENGA: I would have not told them unless they had arrested me for it just like they did in Parys.

MR LOWIES: But in Parys you were arrested on a different charge yet you confess to murder?

MR NOSENGA: I confessed to it because I was tortured. When I was arrested in Parys it was for a stolen vehicle.

MR LOWIES: Who arrested you?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know those police officers, they were patrolling officers.

MR LOWIES: Who tortured you?

MR NOSENGA: It was Havenga, Captain Havenga and others.

MR LOWIES: Can you mention the names of any others?

MR NOSENGA: They were white people who used to work with Black officers at Leeukop.

MR LOWIES: Was Peens one of them?

MR NOSENGA: Peens tortured me when I was in Vereeniging Police Station, he was not present when I was being tortured by the others.

MR LOWIES: Why did Peens torture you?

MR NOSENGA: He said if I ever divulged information with regards to the attacks that were happening in the Vaal Triangle they would kill me, including that one of Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: When did he torture you like this? Before or after the arrest on the murder charges?

MR NOSENGA: It was after I had been charged.

MR LOWIES: Did Chaka torture you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they were all involved in threatening me not to divulge information I had about the attacks in the Vaal Triangle.

MR LOWIES: Did Rooikop torture you?

MR NOSENGA: No he did not it was only Peens and Chaka.

MR LOWIES: And Danie, did he torture you?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: Now how did it happen that they tortured you? Did they just come to you out of the blue and say you mustn't talk or what happened?

MR NOSENGA: They came to me and they told me that if I ever mentioned the Vaal Triangle incidents I would be killed. I was at the Vereeniging Police Station.

MR LOWIES: Why were you there?

MR NOSENGA: It was the murder and robbery unit who were taking me to that Vereeniging Police Station.

MR LOWIES: But for what purpose?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know.

MR LOWIES: Were you already convicted?

MR NOSENGA: I was still attending trial, the trial was still in progress at that time.

MR LOWIES: So whilst the trial was in progress in the Supreme Court you were taken to Vanderbijlpark?

MR NOSENGA: They took me to Vereeniging, from there they transferred me to Leeukop and from there I was taken to Vereeniging, from there I went to Leeukop and from there I was transferred to Meyerton.

MR LOWIES: For what purpose?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know because I was being tortured and being made to point out the spots where I had committed these offences.

MR LOWIES: And it's then that Peens came to you whilst in custody?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember the time. He came to Vereeniging, he was in Chaka's company, I think they were driving a Sierra but I do not remember the exact time.

MR LOWIES: You said you were tortured to make pointings out, or not?

MR LAX: He didn't say that, he said - is that correct - he said I don't know, being tortured and made to point out where these events occurred, so he did actually say that, you're quite right.

MR LOWIES: Now where - what was the reason, what did you have to point out?

MR NOSENGA: It was Captain Havenga and them who informed me that I should take them to the spots where I had shot people and also point out where I stayed in KwaMadala Hostel.

MR LOWIES: And this already started after your hearing in the Supreme Court or not?

MR NOSENGA: My case was in progress in Leeukop. It was at the regional court.

MR LOWIES: Were you convicted in the regional court on murder, on these murder charges for which you're applying for amnesty?

MR NOSENGA: I was convicted in the Supreme Court for murder and attempted murder charges.

MR LOWIES: No, there's some confusion then, what was the situation regarding the hearing in the regional court, what were you charged with there?

MR NOSENGA: My case was transferred to ...(indistinct) where they transferred it to Vereeniging.

MR LOWIES: What was the nature of the charges at the regional court?

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't the position Mr Lowies, that he appeared in the regional court in connection with the charges and he was subsequently arraigned for trial in the High Court? Well is that right Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You appeared in the Regional Court in connection with the same charges but you were only convicted by the High - your case was subsequently transferred to the High Court where you were convicted?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes and was this after the Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: Yes it was after, I was not arrested on the same date because the Sebokeng incident took place on the 15th and I was only arrested in 1993.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes indeed and I understand your evidence, once you'd been tortured the police wanted you to tell them the role that you had played in the Sebokeng attacks?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, did they also enquire from you about the role that you played in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, I am the one who ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You told the police that you were also involved in the Boipatong matter?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not inform them.

CHAIRPERSON: And they didn't ask you about that?

MR NOSENGA: No, they did not ask me. The people who were investigating the Sebokeng issue only enquired about that incident.

CHAIRPERSON: No but who raised the Boipatong matter with you?

MR NOSENGA: It was Peens and them in Vereeniging. Please repeat the question?

CHAIRPERSON: What was said about Boipatong, what did the police say to you about Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: They said if I mentioned their names and implicated them in the Boipatong matter they would kill me.

CHAIRPERSON: Just repeat that again and speak loudly?

MR NOSENGA: They said if I ever tried to divulge information about Boipatong they would kill me, they said in Vereeniging.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes so they threatened to kill you if you mentioned what happened in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: How did the Boipatong issue come up?

MR NOSENGA: They knew that I was an IFP member staying at KwaMadala Hostel and they knew people like that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR LOWIES: So do I understand you correctly, you are being tortured to go and point places out. Whilst this is going on you are tortured by other police not to tell about the Boipatong Massacre or not?

CHAIRPERSON: I do not know what you want me to say because I already stated that I was tortured by police, Captain Havenga and I did not discuss the Boipatong issue with those people, I do not understand what you are asking me about.

MR LOWIES: No, everything you will recall started off by you saying you were tortured by Peens and Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they did torture me at Vereeniging Police Station. The people who tortured me before and who insisted that I take them to the spots where I had killed or shot at people were Captain Havenga and others.

MR LOWIES: Now did they torture you at the same place and the same time more or less, being Vereeniging and being the same time whilst you are held at Vereeniging, same period of time?

MR NOSENGA: Havenga and them would take me and torture me at Hoorkop Police Station. Chaka and Peens tortured me at Vereeniging Police Station.

MR LOWIES: But everything started off by my wanting to know why were you taken to Vereeniging Police Station and I thought it was to point places out as well, am I wrong in that perception?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know why I was transferred to these many police stations, I do not know why I was being taken to all these police stations.

MR LOWIES: Now Mr Nosenga, in the drive by shootings, I think those were the Boipatong matters, sorry my mistake, the Sebokeng matters, were there any policemen involved in those?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember the police being involved in that, we were the people who shot at the people. I do not remember the police being present on that occasion, it was us who went out and shot at these people in Sebokeng. You have asked me this question before.

MR LOWIES: Why did you go out shooting ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Why were the police not there, why did they go out shooting? I mean he says "we from the hostel went out to shoot, I don't recall seeing the police."? Now what is the question?

MR LOWIES: The part that he didn't see the police I didn't hear so I thought my question's clear. But I can rephrase it.

Now why did you go out to shoot the people at Sebokeng.

MR NOSENGA: The command was issued by Prince Zulu.

MR LOWIES: Why did he say so, do you know, what was his reason, what did he say?

MR NOSENGA: At that point we had been driven out of the township therefore we were residing at the hostel, that is why we had to go out and attack.

MR LOWIES: Did you at that stage know about police involvement in these drive by shootings or not?

MR NOSENGA: In every township there were police patrols and if there were gunshots being fired they would hear about it, they would know that people were being shot at.

MR LOWIES: Maybe I should rephrase then. Do you allege police complicity in the drive by shootings for which you were convicted?

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, I don't know if I'm not hearing him correctly, did he say that they would drive - which area are you referring to? Sebokeng?

MR LOWIES: Sebokeng.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, what is the answer Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: I understand his question. My response is in every township there would be police present but what I'm saying is that it was we as residents of the hostel who went out to attack.

CHAIRPERSON: I think his question was directed at establishing whether the police also took part in the shooting at Sebokeng. That's what you wanted to find out?

MR NOSENGA: No I do not remember that.

MR LOWIES: And if I talk about drive by shootings the cases on which you were convicted were drive by shootings, correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: So in all those cases where you were involved, to your knowledge there was no police involved, correct?

MR NOSENGA: I did state before that when we went out to shoot I did not see any policemen. We drove by the police station on the way back to the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Did they assist you in the drive by shootings in any manner, did they incite you to do so in any manner?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, with regards to the Sebokeng drive by shooting they were not involved but they were implicated in many instances in the Vaal Triangle.

CHAIRPERSON: We've heard that, what he wants to find out is, we know that they did not take part in the shooting in Sebokeng when you were there, but what he wants to find out is to your knowledge and if you don't know, you say so, to your knowledge did the police assist you in connection with the shooting in Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember.

MR LOWIES: But if they did you would have known because it's something extraordinary, not so?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I would have known if they had played a role.

MR LOWIES: So now we can deduct they did not?

MR NOSENGA: With regards to Sebokeng they did not take part.

MR LOWIES: Were you a friend of Mr Victor Kezwa?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Were you part of his gang?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Was Kezwa involved in the drive by shootings, the ones for which you were convicted?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: You did not tell the police he was involved, did you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I was afraid to say so because the way police who worked in collusion with Inkatha, Victor Kezwa was known and he never used to spend time in prison, he would be arrested and released later so I only mentioned the others about the ...(indistinct).

MR LOWIES: So despite, now let me ask you this, did the police torture you to say who were involved in the drive by shootings with you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they questioned me on who had been with me. It was Captain Havenga and others who were involved in torturing me.

MR LOWIES: And despite these acts of torture, you never conveyed to them that Mr Kezwa was involved?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not mention Kezwa, I only mentioned Bapi Mswake.

MR LOWIES: But what I don't understand is, did you say in your amnesty application that Kezwa was involved in the drive by shootings? That is now for Sebokeng matter?

MR NOSENGA: Yes in my amnesty application I did mention that he was present.

MR LOWIES: If you could just bear with me Chairman? I'll revert to that question later, to that aspect later.

Now what was Kezwa's involvement in the Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: I did not see him on the night of the attack, I last saw him during the day.

MR LOWIES: The day of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes during the day of the 17th June, I didn't see him thereafter.

MR LOWIES: Did you see him after the drive by shootings of the 15th June '92?

MR NOSENGA: I said I last saw him on the 17th, I was with him when he attacked in Sebokeng on the 15th June and I last saw him on the 17th June during the day of that date.

MR LOWIES: I see what you're getting at but the point is now on the 15th, once everything has now been finalised, you return back to KwaMadala, thereafter did you see him again and I'm not talking about the 17th, I'm talking the same day.

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did see him.

MR LOWIES: What was he doing, was he just around, was he walking, was he in his room where he stays or what was the situation? Driving around?

MR NOSENGA: He was at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: And on the 16th, did you see him the next day, in other words after the shooting?

MR NOSENGA: I did see him on the 16th.

MR LOWIES: And he was available the whole day?

MR NOSENGA: Sir I saw him on the 16th, he would sometimes leave so I don't know if he did leave on that day but I did see him at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: On more than one occasion on the 16th, or just on one occasion?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember but I did see him.

MR LOWIES: You see I must put it to you that I have instructions and endeavouring to lay this before the Committee and call necessary witnesses, but Mr Kezwa was at that stage in custody, 16/17 April he was in custody? June, my mistake, June.

MR NOSENGA: I said I last saw him on the 17th during the day.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes but Mr Lowies, are your instructions that Mr Kezwa was in custody as from the 15th June?

MR LOWIES: He was already in custody.

CHAIRPERSON: On the 15th June.

MR LOWIES: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: You see what Mr Lowies is saying that according to his instructions, Victor Kezwa was already in prison about the 15th June.

MR LOWIES: As a matter of fact I think he was already late April in custody and he was released after the 29th June. He was held in terms of the emergency regulations.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Do you understand what is being put to you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes ...(indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: No, what he says he was already in prison by the 15th.

MR NOSENGA: Yes but I last saw him on the 17th.

CHAIRPERSON: You saw him on the 15th?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did see him on the 15th.

CHAIRPERSON: With you with him at the drive by shooting?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. That vehicle was driven by Itswe.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see him on the 16th?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did see him.

CHAIRPERSON: And you saw him on the 17th?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, during the day.

MR LOWIES: So I must put it to you that you're a blatant liar and you don't care who you implicate in matters because ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I am not lying.

MR LOWIES: You never before mentioned before the fact that Kezwa was involved in the drive by shooting, you did not mention it during your hearing or during investigation?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before I was afraid to mention his name, that is how I came about to mention Babi Mswake.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say Mswake and who?

MR NOSENGA: Mswake and Babi.

CHAIRPERSON: Did they take part in the shooting?

MR NOSENGA: No they did not, I was just trying to get the police stop.

CHAIRPERSON: So in order to defend yourself, you simply pointed out to completely innocent people?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: So who were completely innocent, give us all the names of the people that you pointed out as being involved?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that it was Babi and Mswake.

MR LOWIES: Were they the only innocent ones falsely accused by yourself?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: So were they also convicted? What happened to them, were they tried?

MR NOSENGA: They were tortured and they were charged.

ADV SIGODI: And what was the outcome?

MR NOSENGA: No they were released in Sebokeng at the Sebokeng Court.

MR LOWIES: Did you ever speak to them afterwards, after their release?

MR NOSENGA: No I only spoke to Jabu.

MR LOWIES: So are you not implicating Peens and the others in a similar manner that you have implicated Mswake and Babi just because you don't care?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not implicate them. I have just explained what happened in Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: Now the one Peens and Chaka came to you in Vereeniging, the only thing what they said was that if you reveal what happened in Boipatong they will kill you?

MR NOSENGA: That is what they said.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the only thing that they said when they visited you in Vereeniging?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that's what I heard.

CHAIRPERSON: They were speaking to you Mr Nosenga, so don't tell me that that's the only thing you heard. Is that the only thing they said to you? They were speaking to you were they not?

MR NOSENGA: That is what they told me that if I divulge information about Boipatong they would kill me, they said I should not reveal that information.

CHAIRPERSON: That's all they said and thereafter they left?

MR NOSENGA: Yes after that they left.

MR LOWIES: And was that the end of their story, the end of their contact with you regarding Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I last saw them in Vereeniging.

MR LOWIES: And you only saw them in Vereeniging once or more than once?

MR NOSENGA: I recall them telling - arrived on one occasion and they informed me that if I divulged information about Boipatong they would kill me.

MR LOWIES: That's all they did?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is what they did.

MR LOWIES: But your evidence earlier on was that they tortured you, now they just threatened you, what is the truth now?

CHAIRPERSON: I think in fairness to the witness, she made a difference between Captain Havenga did to him and what Peens did and I think the Zulu word that he used insofar as Peens is concerned was "Ugshugumesa" as opposed to ...(indistinct) referring to what Havenga said, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Havenga and them tortured me with electric shocks.

MR LOWIES: And Peens?

MR NOSENGA: They threatened me that I should never divulge information about Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: To cut a long story short, you were never assaulted or tortured by Peens? Never ever in your life?

MR NOSENGA: That is what they said, they said if I ever mentioned Boipatong I'll be killed.

MR LOWIES: No but that's not the question, the question is, is it your version that you were never ever tortured or assaulted by Peens as opposed to threatened?

MR NOSENGA: They threatened me but they did not torture me. The people who tortured me were Havenga and the other police officers.

MR LOWIES: And then Chaka himself, he never tortured or assaulted you?

MR NOSENGA: No he just threatened me.

MR LOWIES: And Rooikop did he ever in his life - wait - did he ever in his life threaten you? I'm talking about threats?

MR NOSENGA: I said Rooikop did not speak to me. He did not say anything at Vereeniging, it was only Peens and Chaka who talked to me then.

MR LOWIES: Were you ever assaulted or tortured in any manner at any time by Rooikop or where he was present?

MR NOSENGA: I have responded to that question before, I just did before that Rooikop has never tortured me.

CHAIRPERSON: No, in his presence?

MR NOSENGA: No I do not remember, I remember him being at Boipatong only.

MR LOWIES: So you were never present or according to you he was never present when you were tortured?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember him being present.

MR LOWIES: When did you meet Chaka for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: I knew him from the Grambies, he was residing at Zone 6 at Sebokeng and from there he went to live in Vanderbijlpark.

MR LOWIES: Did he ever arrest you?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question?

MR LOWIES: Were you ever arrested by Mr Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember well, maybe he picked me up from Parys but I don't remember him arresting me.

MR LOWIES: So you know Chaka from before the Boipatong Massacre?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: It would seem to me then that at least pertaining to Chaka, that he was involved in the investigation of the drive by shooting?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know, what I know is that Havenga who was the person who handled the investigation, I did not see Chaka, I did not know about him. There were many incidents that occurred in Sebokeng but the person who handled my Sebokeng case was Havenga.

MR LOWIES: The reason why I'm asking is, in one of your affidavits you state the following and I would just like to check the correctness with you. Page 20 of Exhibit R paragraph 14, Mr Chairman. I quote:

"I knew Chaka because he once came to fetch from Parys Police Station where I had been arrested for car theft. Chaka took me to Vereeniging Police Station where I was kept for two weeks before taken to court and released."

MR NOSENGA: I did say that the one person who came to fetch me from Parys was Chaka, I was not seeing him for the first time, I knew him from Zone 6, Sebokeng not that he was seeing me for the first time in Parys.

MR LOWIES: You see the reason why I'm asking you this further is contradictory slightly to what you say because it appears from paragraph 14 that the first time that you met him or the reason why you met him was because he once came to fetch you from the police station and that was why you knew him, according to this statement. Nothing in this statement stating that I know him because I know also where he resides and I saw him there. Can you maybe explain this?

MR NOSENGA: Maybe it's the problems with the interpretation. I am saying I knew Chaka at the time when he was residing in Zone 6 where he was a Green Beans or a member of the Green Beans. Yes it is Chaka who fetched me from Parys. Green Beans are the Municipality Police who would later on graduate to become members of the South African Police.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, when did you meet Mr Peens for the first time? Very first time?

MR NOSENGA: He usually arrested me, I saw him around the hostel or at the hostel in the presence of ...(indistinct)

MR LOWIES: Now you have to explain ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I saw him in the presence of Gatese during the day at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: No but you said he usually arrested me, what do you mean by that?

MR NOSENGA: He would arrest me and I would be released but I used to see him, I saw him in the presence of Gadise in the hostel.

MR LOWIES: No but let's talk about these arrests of you. When were you first arrested by Peens and for what?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember well, it pertained to a vehicle.

MR LOWIES: And on how many occasions were you arrested by Peens?

MR NOSENGA: Could have been twice or once.

MR LOWIES: It must be more than once because you said he usually arrested me. Think again?

MR NOSENGA: I think I made a mistake. He arrested me for the first time and arrested me after some time, I cannot recall exactly when.

MR LOWIES: Now the first time that you were arrested you say you think it was in connection with a motor car. The second time? What was it in connection with?

MR NOSENGA: It was robbery.

MR LOWIES: And this all happened prior to Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I was still staying in the township at the time before I had actually went to the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Rooikop, when did you meet him for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: I started to know him when we attacked Boipatong in the evening on the 17th, I saw him at the veld near Serela.

MR LOWIES: Danie, when did you meet him for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him at an Inkatha meeting at the hostel. He had come with Themba Khosa.

MR LOWIES: When was that? In June 1992 or not?

MR NOSENGA: Yes it was in June, even though I cannot recall the month.

MR LOWIES: How many times after that did you see him? I'm talking about Danie?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him at the hostel meeting and saw him at the time when we were attacking Boipatong that evening of the 17th June.

MR LOWIES: Did Peens torture you in connection with the motor car theft case?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, one could not have escaped torture from Peens. Even though I cannot remember exactly as what happened in my case but one could not have escaped torture from these people.

MR LOWIES: I'm talking about Peens, you should not blame Peens for stuff, things that other people did, I'm talking about Peens, did Peens torture you in connection with the motor car theft, yes or no?

MR NOSENGA: Yes because he is the one who was in charge of the group, he was torturing me.

CHAIRPERSON: Peens, did he torture you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes he did pertaining to the stolen vehicle that's when they put a tube on me and applied some electric shock on me, they put something on my nails, on my fingers.

CHAIRPERSON: Who else was present when Peens tortured you?

MR NOSENGA: There were many other people with whom I was arrested, they too were being tortured.

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, you say Peens, you've described how Peens tortured you, who else was, you know?

MR NOSENGA: Other police who were present were Chaka. There's one other police called Abe.

CHAIRPERSON: Rooikop, was he there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes he was present but he did not lay his hand on me.

CHAIRPERSON: So when you told us a minute ago that Peens and Chaka had never tortured you before that wasn't correct was it?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I think I made a mistake because he did not ask me about Peens, he asked me as to when I started to know Peens and Chaka and I explained to him as to how I came to know them and where he resided. He did not explain it to me accordingly.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, you are telling lies. I specifically asked you did Peens ever torture you. You said no. Now we hear one could not have escaped torture by Peens. Those two statements cannot both be the truth. What is the truth?

MR NOSENGA: You did not ask me as to that, you asked me where I knew or met Peens for the first time. He did not torture me when we discussed or when I was being questioned about the Boipatong incident.

MR LOWIES: I beg to differ with you Sir, my colleagues all nod in confirmation that you said you were never in your life tortured and I like this expression "never in my life" and I used it in connection with Peens as well and you said never ever. You are telling lies.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying Peens tortured me before I actually went to the hostel at the time when I was still staying in the township. This pertained to a vehicle, nobody could not have known Peens or should I say people around the township knew Peens.

MR LOWIES: Another aspect, I also asked you were you ever in your life tortured where Rooikop was present and you said no. Now we hear that he was present during the arrest of the motor vehicle, of yourself of the motor vehicle theft?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying Rooikop was present, I did not say he tortured me, he did not torture me. This gentleman is trying to protect the image of the IFP.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, would you please listen to the question and just answer the question correctly? You will recall that a series of questions were asked of you in connection with being tortured by the police. Peens, Rooikop and Chaka, and I clarified the question to you saying the question is were you ever tortured at any stage in the presence of Rooikop, not that Rooikop tortured you, that question was put to you and your answer was no?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I said no.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: But then that was then a lie because we now hear that in the motor car theft case he was present, not so?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they were present, he was present but he did not torture me. He did not torture me, I was tortured by Peens. That was before I actually went to KwaMadala Hostel, I was still staying in the township. I am not telling lies, I cannot tell lies before the TRC.

MR LOWIES: Let's just check. Did Peens torture you in connection with the robbery case?

MR NOSENGA: I said it's a robbery and a vehicle.

MR LOWIES: The way I understood it ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, is the position this, Peens and Chaka have tortured you before?

MR NOSENGA: They threatened me at the Vereeniging Police Station.

CHAIRPERSON: No, we know that, we've dealt with that but they've tortured you at some stage?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You know, Peens using the tube?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: This was in connection with robbery is it, was this in connection with the robbery?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: But I thought and you can assist me in this regard, that you were arrested on two occasions by Peens, one for robbery and one for motor car theft? Is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that's what I said.

MR LOWIES: Right and the arrests were at different places, different times, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Correct.

MR LOWIES: And the first one for which you were arrested was the motor car theft, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: The second one for the robbery, you were also tortured by Peens, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Correct.

MR LOWIES: And the second occasion, that is now in connection with the robbery. What did he do to you?

MR NOSENGA: He applied some electric shocks on me using a tube to blind me or to cover my face.

MR LOWIES: Yes, anything else?

MR NOSENGA: He applied electric shocks on me and after that he put a tube over me. He could not - Peens would not arrest just simply arrest you without torturing you.

MR LOWIES: Now I understand if I'm not mistaken that Peens and Chaka used to work together? Is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, they were not working together. But the one person who tortured me who was Peens. Rooikop was working with them and others.

MR LOWIES: So is your evidence then that pertaining to the motor car theft case, Chaka was not involved, he was not present, he didn't do anything to you? Or did he also take part in the assault?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying Chaka was present but he did not torture me, the one person who was torturing me was Peens.

CHAIRPERSON: This thing is taking us to some point, let's get to the point now. I think we've canvassed this aspect sufficiently.

MR LOWIES: You see, the reason why I'm asking you all these questions, Sir, is I'm putting it to you herein lies your motive to implicate Peens falsely. He had been involved in arrests previously and on your version he assaulted you?

MR NOSENGA: I would not implicate him, what reason do I have to implicate him?

MR LOWIES: I've just put it to you.

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question I did not get the question.

MR LOWIES: The question is simple. Because Peens arrested you previously, because on your version he tortured you before, you are placing him at the scene of the attack in Boipatong and you make him play a leading role.

MR NOSENGA: No, I am not implicating him falsely, I was present but even my legal counsel was not there that evening. You see you are trying to protect the IFP or he was trying to protect the IFP and the police at the time.

MR LOWIES: Who was trying to protect the police at the time?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying the manner in which you are asking me questions, you present yourself as if you're trying to cover up for the wrong deeds or should I say protect the leadership of the IFP and the police for what roles they played. I cannot come here to tell a lie.

MR LOWIES: Do you want to answer the question as to whether you have a motive to implicate Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying that I cannot implicate Peens falsely, he was present when people were being massacred at Boipatong, I don't know him, I cannot implicate him wrongly or falsely. There are so many police that I know, why is it that I decided to pick Peens of all the police that I know.

MR LOWIES: Probably because you hate him the most?

MR NOSENGA: I do not hate any police. If the police are involved I will say so and if they are not involved I will also say so concerning the Boipatong Massacre. People are parentless today, people don't have families that are taking care of them today, they had lost their people or the members of the family who were taking care of them.

MR LOWIES: And they were killed by you?

MR NOSENGA: I was present, Inkatha and the police.

MR LOWIES: You killed people not so?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I am not the only one, I am saying Inkatha and the police were present when people were being killed. Do you think I can kill 45 people single handedly? Well please clarify your question.

MR LOWIES: Sir, I have news for you, I'm not going to be drawn into a debate with you, but I want to put the following to you. You have shown a tendency on your own version to falsely implicate people. You've implicated Mswake and Bapi on your own version falsely before and there you didn't even have a motive. Comments?

MR NOSENGA: There is no one who is falsely implicated. If there are leaders of the IFP that I know, how would I implicate them?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, listen properly to the question. What is being put to you is that you are falsely implicating Peens in the Boipatong attack, you've denied that and then what is being put to you further is that in the past you have falsely implicated persons, that is Mswake and Bapi who have done nothing and because of that what is being put to you is that you have a tendency of just doing that, falsely implicating people and that is why today you are again falsely implicating Peens. What is your comment to that?

MR NOSENGA: No Sir, I cannot falsely implicate Peens. Yes I do not deny that I implicated Mswake and Bapi because of the torture at the hands of the police but I was not tortured when it comes to Peens, I am the one who volunteered the information. See I was present on the evening of the attack at Boipatong. Now I am seeing a pattern here as if the police and IFP are being protected. The TRC is meant for the divulsion of the truth.

MR LOWIES: Let's examine Mr Chaka. So you say on the first occasion where Peens tortured you on a motor car theft case he was present, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying he tortured me at the time when I was still staying in the township. Chaka was present but he did not torture me. He tried to threaten me in Vereeniging but he did not torture me.

MR LOWIES: What was he doing being present at the time when you were arrested for motor car theft, I'm talking about Chaka, why was he there?

MR NOSENGA: He's a member of the murder and robbery unit. He did not torture me.

MR LOWIES: Was Peens also a member of the murder and robbery unit or was he at that stage?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: So Chaka and Peens belongs to the same unit?

Correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Now in the robbery case where you were tortured by Peens, what did Chaka do?

MR NOSENGA: He did not lay his hand on me I just saw him there, I cannot say he tortured me. The one person who was busy with me was Peens, not Chaka.

MR LOWIES: Rooikop, was he a member of the murder and robbery squad to your knowledge?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Danie, is he a member of the murder and robbery squad to your knowledge?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Rooikop, was he present when you were assaulted by Peens in the first instance, the motor car theft case?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying he was present but he did not torture me.

MR LOWIES: What was his role, what was he doing whilst you were being tortured? I talking about Rooikop now.

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say he participated in any way, I do not want to commit myself. The one person who tortured me is Peens.

MR LOWIES: Was Rooikop present when you were tortured in the armed robbery case?

MR NOSENGA: You asked me that question and I answered it and I said that Rooikop was present at the police station in Vanderbijl but he did not tortured me, only Peens tortured me.

MR LOWIES: Let's make it clear, did he observe the torturing of you, Mr Rooikop, when Peens was so busy torturing you?

MR NOSENGA: I did see Rooikop as I was being tortured, he did not participate in the torture. He was present but he did not participate.

MR LOWIES: And Danie, was he present?

MR NOSENGA: These people are working together, yes they were present.

MR LOWIES: Now I may not have canvassed this with you so bear with me. Please be patient. Danie was present during the torturing of you in regard to the motor car theft case as well?

MR NOSENGA: Yes they were all there.

MR LOWIES: And also in the armed robbery case or in the robbery case, he was also present? I'm talking about Danie.

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say I saw him. I saw him when I was arrested for robbery.

MR LOWIES: Do you know any other policemen but for Peens,

Chaka, Danie and Rooikop belonging to the or being attached to the murder and robbery squad at the time?

MR NOSENGA: Yes there were some others but I cannot - I do not know their names. One other person that I can recall is Abe.

MR LOWIES: So you can recall Abe?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Besides those you do not know anybody else from the murder and robbery squad by their names?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't want to tell a lie.

MR LOWIES: When did you meet Abe, before or after Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I only started to know Abe when I was arrested for the vehicle.

MR LOWIES: So that is before Boipatong? No, no, no, it's after Boipatong, sorry.

MR NOSENGA: It was before I went to stay at the hostel, I was still staying at the township, I only knew him at the police station after the vehicle offence.

MR LOWIES: Now Mr Nosenga, what I'd like to put to you regarding the role players that you have heavily implicated the night before the attack is the following. We will prove that Mr Kezwa who you have implicated was physically in jail, could not have been there. You say that's a lie?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that, I saw Gadise, I don't know that he was in jail.

MR LOWIES: No, you would agree if he was in jail he could not have been there?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I don't know, I saw him last on the 17th. I am saying that he was for example sentenced to four years he would not serve all the four years, he would just come and go.

MR LOWIES: You see the evidence of some of the other applicants were also at that time of Boipatong, Mr Kezwa was definitely in custody, at least three other applicants testified the same. So they're also lying?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying here yes Victor Kezwa was not present during the attack at Boipatong, I only saw him last during the day. We should not play house here.

MR LOWIES: I'm not sure what you're saying?

MR NOSENGA: We should not play house here, I am saying I saw Victor Kezwa last June the day of the 17th, I did not see him during the attack at Boipatong. You see, people died there. We should not waste people's time here at the TRC. Other legal counsel should be given a chance to ask questions.

MR LOWIES: I have to earn my money, Sir. No, be serious. I apologise too.

CHAIRPERSON: You still have approximately 35 minutes.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

Now Sir, the next question that I'd like to canvass with you pertains to your knowledge of the complicity of ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Have you finished putting what you wanted to put to the witness? The only aspect you've put so far relates to Kezwa, is that the only aspect?

MR LOWIES: Sorry, I was going to turn to the next one.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, yes.

MR LOWIES: Hunter Ndhlovu, who is he and did you know him before?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did, he stayed in Zone 7.

MR LOWIES: Was he part of Victor Kezwa's gang?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: You never implicated him when you were tortured by the police regarding the drive by shootings. Was he part of the drive by shootings?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct but I did not divulge their names.

MR LOWIES: But why did you give his name but chose to mention Mswake and Bapi?

MR NOSENGA: I was trying to avoid being tortured.

CHAIRPERSON: What was the answer?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I implicated, falsely implicated Bapi and Mswake because I was trying to avoid being tortured.

MR LAX: The question was, why didn't you implicate Hunter Ndhlovu?

MR NOSENGA: I would not have given those names onto the police because they were known, those people were known.

MR LOWIES: So what difference would that make?

MR NOSENGA: I already stated before that they worked with the police, they would not be arrested for long. I do not know how else to explain it to you.

MR LOWIES: But they were your friends so it would be in your favour if they are not in custody for long? What is the point you're trying to make?

MR NOSENGA: It would have put me at a disadvantage, telling the police those names would not have ...(indistinct) an advantage, it would have done the opposite. If I had mentioned Victor Kezwa's name and the other person's name they would have not have been arrested along with me, I would have been the only one who would have been arrested because Victor Kezwa never spent even six months in prison after killing people. He had been sentenced for four years but he only spent six months.

CHAIRPERSON: Who is that person?

MR NOSENGA: Victor Kezwa.

MR LOWIES: But the point I'm making is so that's good for you because they are your friends, you don't want to see them in jail. What is the point you're making, why were you not conveying their names to the police?

MR LAX: Maybe I could put it a different way for you, Mr Lowies, are you not trying to say to him, why didn't you say "I'm a friend of Victor Kezwa and Hunter Ndhlovu and therefore you would not be arrested the same as them?"

MR LOWIES: Yes, much better put, I agree with the Chair.

Could you just answer the question then?

MR NOSENGA: I did not mention that they were my friends. It was difficult to mention Victor Kezwa's name because even if he would be arrested he would be released later.

CHAIRPERSON: Wasn't it a good reason therefore to implicate him because he would have been released in any event?

MR NOSENGA: I was not in a position to mention their names because thereafter I would not have been on good terms.

CHAIRPERSON: But if he learns that you had implicated him, he might harm you? Isn't that the fact of the matter?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Why didn't you tell us?

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, I see you get angry when you talk about the IFP and my wanting to protect them. Why, why do you get angry?

MR NOSENGA: There is no truth within the IFP. An example is Ingandla, a person who was arrested and thereafter, after he had committed an offence the Chief Minister denied any knowledge of him or as he had been sent by him. That is what makes me angry because he unlike other leaders denies knowledge of his followers. The same goes for Themba Khosa as well.

MR LOWIES: So you're angry with Chief Minister and with Themba Khosa?

MR NOSENGA: That is so. They deny knowledge of something that they themselves said at the rally in Ulundi.

MR LOWIES: Do you hate them?

MR NOSENGA: I do not hate them, I hate their actions.

MR LOWIES: And you're still a member of the IFP you say? Are you serious?

MR NOSENGA: I said it before that I am still a member of the IFP because my presence here is because of the IFP, they ordered me to go kill people at Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: But you are here out of your own free will applying for amnesty, not so?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, no one coerced me.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, I would like to check certain aspects with you pertaining to statements that you made for amnesty and I'd like to turn to page 1 of your application. Your first application you state that your date of birth is October 1993, that is yesterday you - I'm sorry it says October 1973, page 1 paragraph 5. Yet your evidence is that you do not know which month you were born correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I said.

MR LOWIES: If one has a look at page 18 of your sworn statement, you give a date as follows in paragraph 1:

"I was born on the 12th October 1973."

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that, what I stated was I do not remember the month in which I was born.

MR LOWIES: Now this raises some interesting questions. The first aspect, do you deny that you told the person who took this statement that you born on the 12th October 1973?

MR NOSENGA: I said I was born in 1973 but I do not know the month. Maybe that person misunderstood me but that is not what I said.

MR LOWIES: But it's rather exact, it mentions two things. It mentions a day and a month, the 12th October. You say this person acted on a frolic of his own?

MR NOSENGA: Maybe that person did not hear me properly, I said that I did not know then, what would help to assist is to maybe get my birth certificate.

MR LOWIES: I see. Now in paragraph ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Well are you - just before you go on - is the position therefore that you don't know how the date 12th October 1973 came to be written there?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember, I gave the statement but I mentioned there that I do not remember the month that I was born.

CHAIRPERSON: You told the person who took the person who took the statement that you don't know when the month in which you were born?

MR NOSENGA: Yes but maybe we did not understand each other because there could have been a problem with the interpreter.

CHAIRPERSON: I see and similarly the date the 12th October, that you didn't give out either?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did not.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry Mr Nosenga, do you have an I.D. document?

MR NOSENGA: No I do not.

MR LOWIES: So he could no have even got this from your identity document because you don't have one, correct?

MR NOSENGA: As I stated before, maybe the interpreter did not understand me properly because I did not mention the month.

MR LOWIES: Chairman, my attention is drawn to the hour, if this is an appropriate time?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) about the statements?

MR LOWIES: Okay, in this statement I think I will be another four or five hours at least.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon.

MR LOWIES: I said I think I could still be another four or five hours.

CHAIRPERSON: You're not serious Mr Lowies? You're not serious?

MR LOWIES: I'm not lying, I would not do that.

CHAIRPERSON: No, you're not serious. You cannot tell me that you're going to spend five hours on the statement?

MR LOWIES: Well not only the statement, what I'm saying is the events regarding the statement as well, so in other words what is said must then be checked against the events and the statement of course would be ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Well in that event continue then.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Till what time to?

CHAIRPERSON: Well we'll adjourn at quarter past 4.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

Mr Nosenga, in paragraph 9 of your statement, page 2, you were requested to do the following. Page 2 of Exhibit R.

MR LAX: You mean the form 1, not his statement.

MR LOWIES: Ja sorry.

MS CAMBANIS: Sorry to interrupt Mr Chair, may I please be excused just to make phone calls just to reschedule? Thank you.

MR LOWIES: And ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Cambanis, we will rise at quarter past 4 so if it's quarter past 4, you don't have to come back. Okay.

MR LOWIES: Now first of all, it appears to me that this was the very first application for amnesty and that was whilst you were in Leeukop according to the date stamp at page 7 thereof.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, do you know whether this was the first statement you made or not? Do you know whether this was the first application you made or not?

MR NOSENGA: I think the first person who took the first statement was Mongese at Leeukop.

MR LOWIES: Then let's get the following clear, Mongese only took one statement for one form on your behalf, correct? Ever?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: He just took a statement?

MR LOWIES: I brought in the question to include filling the forms yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Well don't bother if that's not what the witness said.

MR LOWIES: No, that was a question. Sir, I don't want to take it further.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: What I'm trying to find out from you, to break it up in two sections then, it is correct that the only person who took statements from you - sorry - is it correct that Mongese only took one statement from you ever or not?

MR NOSENGA: If I remember correctly, Mongese came to Medium C and that is where I made my statement.

MR LOWIES: And you never thereafter saw him again, did you? In your whole life?

MR NOSENGA: No I never saw him thereafter.

MR LOWIES: Now would you be able to tell us whether you know whether Mongese filled in any application on your behalf?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, do you know what an application is?

MR NOSENGA: Yes I did say that I did not know it.

MR LOWIES: Now did he say to you listen I'm going to file an application on your behalf for amnesty?

MR NOSENGA: No, he said he had come to take a statement with regards to Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: So where does he come from, did he say to you I'm from such and such an institution or what?

MR NOSENGA: No, he did not explain that to me.

MR LOWIES: And right at the outset he said to you I'm here for Boipatong, is that your evidence?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. I did not question him where he came from.

CHAIRPERSON: Did Mongese come and see you of his own accord?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: You had no idea who sent him?

MR NOSENGA: I do not have knowledge thereof.

MR LOWIES: Sorry I may have interrupted you, may I proceed. I'm sorry I must apologise.

CHAIRPERSON: Bearing at mind at quarter past we have to wrap it up, we have to finish by quarter past 4.

MR LOWIES: I will do so Chair.

But surely, when a man just arrives there out of the blue you would ask him what are you there for but he himself tendered the fact that he is here regarding events of Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes when he arrived in prison he enquired about me, he called for me and told me that he was from Johannesburg and he said I should provide him with information about what took place at Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: And you're quite sure that he introduced Boipatong, you didn't speak of Boipatong first?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I told you that Mongese arrived and he said that he was from Johannesburg and he wished to know about what happened at Boipatong at which time I told him.

MR LOWIES: Did you also talk to him regarding the drive by shootings at Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Which came up first, Sebokeng or Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: If I remember correctly, I think it was Sebokeng. He questioned me about the Sebokeng incident first and then later on about the Boipatong incident.

MR LOWIES: And the impression that you got is he already knew that you were part of an attack in Boipatong, correct?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say that he knew about it beforehand. ...(inaudible) for me, I'm just Nosenga, I cannot be in a position to claim that.

MR LOWIES: But you see the reason why I'm asking this is in paragraph 9 the date on which these incidents occurred is stated by you to be 1993. That is page 2 Chairman, paragraph 9(ii). How is this possible?

MR NOSENGA: As I stated before there may have been a problem with the interpretation. I mentioned that these incidents happened in 1992, not 1993.

MR LOWIES: Now what interpretation, what language did he speak?

MR NOSENGA: He spoke in English and there was an interpreter and the interpreter was a police officer.

MR LOWIES: So Mongese is not a Zulu.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know but I think the language is Xhosa.

CHAIRPERSON: What language did you speak to him?

MR NOSENGA: I spoke in Zulu.

CHAIRPERSON: And Mr Mongese?

MR NOSENGA: He spoke in English and there was an interpreter through whom we communicated.

MR LOWIES: But are you not Xhosa?

MR NOSENGA: No I'm not.

MR LOWIES: Whilst we're on this aspect pertaining to languages, I have a document here which I obtained from the police which states that when you did pointings out of the places where people were shot in the drive by shootings, spoke in Sotho and interpreter in the confession also interpreted from Sotho to Afrikaans?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. I speak Zulu because my father is Zulu and my mother is Xhosa.

CHAIRPERSON: What is being put to you is that there are police documents amongst which there is a confession which indicates that you spoke through a Sotho speaking interpreter, you denied that?

MR NOSENGA: I spoke isiZulu. I am Zulu and I speak isiZulu and my mother is Xhosa.

MR LOWIES: Can you speak Sesotho?

MR NOSENGA: Not well, I understand it here and there.

CHAIRPERSON: They did not use a sort of Sesotho interpreter when you made a confession?

MR NOSENGA: No, wherever I've been in prison, the prison authorities would inform me that I speak isiZulu.

MR LOWIES: Chair it's quarter past now, it's an appropriate time.

CHAIRPERSON: Where are those documents, are we going to see those documents?

MR LOWIES: It's deep inside some of the others, millions of documents here.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay I'll see counsel now or tomorrow before we start?

MR BERGER: Could we ask that it's tomorrow morning, we have a consultation in Johannesburg at quarter past five.

MR LOWIES: I have a similar problem I would also appreciate it.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Alright, what time shall we see you, shortly just before we start round about, you know, around about ten to or five to.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: We will rise now, we will start tomorrow at 9 o'clock.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

05-05-1999: Day 3

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, may I remind you that you're still under oath.

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Lowies?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LOWIES: (Cont)

Mr Nosenga, why did you say in your first application - Chair, to refer you to page 2, Exhibit R, paragraph 92, that the date of the commission of the offence for which you're applying for amnesty occurred in 1993?

MR NOSENGA: No, that's not what happened, the incident occurred in 1992, not in '93.

MR LOWIES: But it appears to me that you are quite sure that the application that you have lodged for amnesty regarding the Boipatong massacre happened on a specific date and you know that date as being the 17th of June 1993, how could you have made a mistake like that?

CHAIRPERSON: But Mr Lowies, I think what he is saying is that as far as he's concerned, the incident occurred in 1992.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Nosenga, the application for amnesty which bears your signature, which occurs at page R1 through to R6, and I think the signature is at page 6, you say that you signed that application.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's what I said.

CHAIRPERSON: You see, what Mr Lowies wants to find out is, in that application which you signed, the dates of the incidents in Sebokeng is given as 1993.

MR NOSENGA: I think the interpreter did not hear me properly, the incident occurred on the 15th of June 1992.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: I'll tell you why this is relevant, Sir, it's because my attorney is busy preparing a bundle, but I'm going to put to you so long what is in the bundle, and that is in the police docket pertaining to the drive-by shootings in Sebokeng, it appears that you voluntarily handed yourself over to the police in that matter. What are your comments regarding this?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. I ...(indistinct) explain yesterday how my arrest came about.

MR LOWIES: But it goes further. You confessed to various offences of drive-by shootings and paragraph 6 of the statement, A23, reads as follows: - Chair, sorry, may I just get a ruling here? The statement is in Afrikaans, can I proceed in Afrikaans and it will be interpreted? Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Whose statement is that, just ...(indistinct) tell us.

MR LOWIES: The statement is a statement of one, Jan Theodorus Ferreira.

INTERPRETER: Excuse me, Chairperson, if the statement is read in Afrikaans, I don't think we'd be in a position to interpret it in IsiZulu.

MR LOWIES: I'll translate if it's okay with the Committee. As you please, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have an actual copy of that statement?

MR LOWIES: They are in the process of being photocopied, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: At this stage?

MR LOWIES: At this stage. But there is an extra copy with one of my colleagues here. Could you just bear with me for a minute please, Chair. There is an extra copy available, Chair. I'm sorry, but this becomes relevant at this stage.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm going to give this statement to the legal representative of the victims.

MR LOWIES: As you please, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: And then in due course we will have those further copies made.

MR LOWIES: We're in the process, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: You will translate it as we go along?

MR LOWIES: As you please, Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MR LOWIES: Mr Ferreira will state that he is a Constable, or he was a Constable in the South African Police in 1992 and in 1993, I think, he took or he deposed to this statement. In the statement, paragraph 6 he states as follows:

"I had an interview with a black man who was a suspect. This suspect, Andries Nosenga, informed me that he would like to hand himself over. The suspect further highlighted certain occurrences wherein he alleges that he was involved. These apparently happened in June 1992."

Then he goes on to state he listened to your statements or your explanations and he knows the Everton vicinity quite well, and he was able to connect the events that you described to him with a specific police docket, which is the one in this matter. Now what are your comments so far, do you recall anything about this?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember that. I was assaulted, that is why I confessed to that offence. I don't know what else can I say now because I explained it all yesterday.

MR LOWIES: In paragraph 13 he makes the following statement, well he states the following: The suspect, being you, described various scenes to him and he was not able to trace those scenes. This is the way he put it.

"Certain places were pointed out but it could not be linked with specific cases."

The contents of the docket is further to the effect that you confessed to various crimes and it was not possible for the police to link you with all those crimes that you confessed to. What do you say about this?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know what they are talking about. What I want to say is that they assaulted me with regards to the offence in Sebokeng. I don't know what they are talking about there.

CHAIRPERSON: As I understand your evidence, it is correct that ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I do not know what they are talking about.

CHAIRPERSON: Well Mr Nosenga, listen to the question. It is correct that you confessed to some shooting after you had been tortured, isn't that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR LOWIES: But didn't you confess, even if you were tortured, to other offences except the drive-by shooting for Everton, Sebokeng.

MS TANZER: Objection. He's being asked to give evidence about matters which are not before this court, ...(indistinct) asked to incriminate himself, which is against the Act in fact, the Criminal Procedure Act, or any other, his Constitutional Act I don't think ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Pardon?

MS TANZER: It's against the Constitutional Act. He's asked to incriminate himself in regard to other events and I think that question should be disallowed, with respect.

MR LOWIES: Chairman, I would submit the question is admissible. There is a specific section which I can't lay my fingers on, but I'm sure there is a section in the act that says that he can be compelled to answer any questions put to him in an inquiry such as this and therefore there's a rider in this ...(indistinct). I would submit it makes it relevant.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga told us yesterday that he was tortured and then he confessed to some of the things, what happens if he denies that he confessed to any other than what he admitted to having confessed to yesterday?

MR LOWIES: Yes, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Because it was a result of the torture.

MR LOWIES: I will rephrase the question.

Mr Nosenga, I would like to put the following to you, you were never sure when you were involved in any acts pertaining to the violation of human rights.

MR LAX: What do you mean by that: "you were never sure"? What are you referring to, about the incident, about the dates, about the places?

MR LOWIES: About the dates, inter alia. But let's start with the dates. Can I make it more concise. Firstly, you were never sure of any dates when you committed offences, and this is clear from the statement by Ferreira and it's borne out by your reply here in paragraph 9 on page 2. That's the point I'm trying to make, do you agree?

MR NOSENGA: I would like you to explain to me to which incidents you are referring to, whether the Sebokeng incidents or any other.

CHAIRPERSON: What he - he is putting a very broad question to you and he is saying that it is clear that you do not know the exact dates when you committed the offence, the various offences, including the Sebokeng shooting, and he relies on that from what appears in the application for amnesty which described the date of the Sebokeng incident as 1993 and what appears in the statement of the police officer that he's been reading, do you agree with that or don't you agree with that?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, the incident happened in 1992. I do not know whether he wants me to admit to 1993 or not.

CHAIRPERSON: He is not suggesting that this thing occurred in 1993, he's merely putting to you that you're not too sure of the date. That's all that he's putting to you.

MR NOSENGA: It happened in 1992, I'm sure of that.

MR LOWIES: Now the next aspect which I'm putting to you pertaining to the above is the following and that is, you were not even sure where the offences were committed.

MR NOSENGA: That is not true. These people tortured me and ordered me to go point out the spots and I did that.

MR LOWIES: I think you will agree with one thing though, when you had this, or when Ferreira had this interview with you, you did not tell him about the Boipatong massacre, not so?

MR NOSENGA: I stated before that I do not know this Ferreira. I do not know how come you ask me that question because I did say I was never questioned on Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: And therefore you never tendered anything regarding Boipatong, out of your own free will either, or even under torture.

MR NOSENGA: The people who handled my case did not refer to Boipatong, they only questioned me on Sebokeng. I do not understand how the Boipatong issue comes into play, because as I've already stated, I applied for amnesty with regards to the Boipatong incident.

MR LOWIES: And my instructions are further, Mr Nosenga, that you are trying to implicate people in this hearing which had nothing to do with the Boipatong massacre.

MR NOSENGA: I am not trying to implicate anyone. I was involved in the Boipatong incident. I don't know what you're trying to say. You mentioned this even yesterday and I do not understand what you are getting at.

MR LOWIES: Do you know Sipho Lukhozi?

MR NOSENGA: I know a certain Sipho. I know a tall Sipho, I don't know whether he is the same Lukhozi.

MR LOWIES: This Sipho is also a tall guy and he was a friend of Victor Kheswa. Are we talking about the same Sipho now?

MR NOSENGA: The one I'm referring to was there in Sun City and he's tall.

MR LOWIES: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I think it's the same one.

MR LOWIES: Just to put the record straight, he has been transferred to Zonderwater, but he used to be there. Now that we know that you know this chap, were you, on your version, in a gang of which he was a member?

MR NOSENGA: Please explain that question, I do not quite understand it.

MR LOWIES: Well did you two belong to the same gang?

MR NOSENGA: I know him to be a member of the IFP and I was also one. I knew him as a member of the IFP.

MR LOWIES: I understand that. Were you in the same gang?

MR NOSENGA: We were in one organisation, the IFP.

MR LOWIES: He never took part in any drive-by shooting with you?

MR NOSENGA: I did explain yesterday that I was questioned on who was present when we launched that drive-by attack. Where did you come about Sipho's name?

MR LOWIES: Sir, just answer the question please, the question is simple.

MR NOSENGA: I did state yesterday who was with me when I went on that attack.

CHAIRPERSON: You will answer the questions put to you. If the question is unfair we will stop counsel from doing that. You're simply being asked, did Sipho Lukhozi take part? If he did, say yes and if he didn't, say no.

MR NOSENGA: No, he did not take part.

MR LOWIES: Now the reason why this is relevant, I have instructions that although Sipho took part in drive-by shootings and was a friend of Kheswa, he was not an inhabitant of the KwaMadala Hostel. Your comment?

MR NOSENGA: Are you referring to Sipho?

MR LOWIES: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that he did not reside at the hostel, but I used to see him.

MR LOWIES: When did you see him for the first time, before or after the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say whether I did see him or not during the Boipatong massacre.

MR LOWIES: Well I have instructions that - and I have to qualify what I've put to you earlier, that for a short period of time he stayed in KwaMadala, but when most of the acts, drive-by shootings were committed by Kheswa, on versions put to other people, he, Sipho, was not an inhabitant of the KwaMadala Hostel. And I would like to put the following to you, and so were you not.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know where you get that from. As I stated before, I arrived at the hostel in 1991.

MR LOWIES: Who allocated your room to you?

MR NOSENGA: I stated before that the person I remember giving me a room was Prince Zulu, Gatchene(?), Damarra Chonco and Darkie Chonco.

MR LOWIES: And not Mthembu?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not mention Mthembu. I said the person who issued me with a room was Prince Zulu.

MR LOWIES: Are you sure that Mthembu had no role in this?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I am saying that Mthembu did not issue me with a room, it was Prince Zulu, Damarra Chonco, Darkie Chonco and Gatchene.

MR LOWIES: Because so far the evidence is, and this is also my instructions, the person responsible for allocating rooms was definitely Mthembu and not Vanana Zulu.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. What I am saying is that Prince Zulu issued me with a room.

MR LOWIES: According to you, who was the leader of the IFP Youth Brigade?

CHAIRPERSON: Where?

MR LOWIES: In the Vaal, sorry.

MR NOSENGA: I stated that it was Themba Khosa who was the Chairperson of the IFP Youth Brigade in the Vaal.

MR LOWIES: And who was the leader of the IFP Youth Brigade at KwaMadala, the most senior person in the Youth Brigade?

MR NOSENGA: It was Buthelezi.

MR LOWIES: When did you meet Buthelezi for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: Although I do not remember the date I think it was in 1991.

MR LOWIES: And that stage, what was his position?

MR NOSENGA: I know that he was an IFP Youth member.

MR LOWIES: Was he a leader, according to you?

MR NOSENGA: He was the leader of the IFP Youth Brigade.

MR LOWIES: Did you hear his evidence, were you here when he gave evidence?

MR NOSENGA: That is so.

MR LOWIES: Wasn't that the first time that you saw him?

MR NOSENGA: No, I was not seeing him for the first time.

MR LOWIES: What's his fist name?

MR NOSENGA: I know him as a Buthelezi. Some people I know by their first names, some by their surnames.

MR LOWIES: So you know him from '91, but you only know him as Buthelezi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I knew as that Buthelezi, because some of them they know even my surname.

MR LOWIES: Lastly on this aspect regarding your surname, how are you known? Are you known as Andries?

MR NOSENGA: They know me by the name of Matanzima. My surname is Nosenga.

MR LOWIES: And when you put your names on a document, signature on a document, which names do you put on a document?

MR NOSENGA: I use my surname Nosenga when I sign.

MR LOWIES: Yes, only Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: I use Andries Nosenga Matanzima. - Andries being my English name and Matanzima is my African name.

MR LOWIES: So do you use it in that order, Andries Nosenga Matanzima?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it happens that I sometimes write Andries Nosenga Matanzima or sometimes I just write Andries Nosenga or sometimes just the surname, Nosenga.

MR LOWIES: But never Matanzima, or do you do that as well?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that I do write that because that is my name.

MR LOWIES: But why would you only write your name and not your surname, when you have to sign a document? That is what we're talking about.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, where is this going to take us to?

MR LOWIES: Well he denies his signature on certain documents.

CHAIRPERSON: If the man says: "This is how I sign my signature", I mean isn't that answer final?

MR LOWIES: I'll leave it at that.

MR LOWIES: Now the reason why I started off with the 1993 issue, paragraph 9, page 2, is (3) where you apply for amnesty, you mention the places Sebokeng and Everton, nothing is said in this application regarding Boipatong, why?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know. They questioned me on Sebokeng and I told them. I do not know what happened, there must have been a problem with the person who wrote that statement because I did put in an application for amnesty in regard to Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: So what we have is, Sebokeng is not the same place as Boipatong and you know that.

MR NOSENGA: These are two separate distant townships. Sebokeng and Everton, Sharpeville and Boipatong are all different townships. They are different.

MR LOWIES: So now that being the case and you knew this quite well, I put it to you that you did not when you were requested, or when you requested assistance to complete your application, mentioned Boipatong at all.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that. I was questioned yesterday, I even mentioned Mr Brian and I explained that I did mention the issue of Boipatong and sought amnesty for that.

MR LOWIES: Now if you turn to the next sub-paragraph of paragraph 9, you state the following:

"The first incident was in a shack which was next to a road. ANC supporters were known to frequent that place. We shot at people outside a shack in Everton."

Page 2 up until page 3, Chairman.

MR NOSENGA: I think you didn't get me well, these things started at Sebokeng. We started attacking from Zone 12, Sebokeng and we did not start from Everton. Everton actually is the last township if you have travelled from Sebokeng. So I would like you to please explain to me what are you trying to say when you say we started at Everton.

MR LOWIES: The problem is, Sir, this is what you said. I want to know what you meant by this.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that. I started attacking from Sebokeng, Zone 12 and proceeded to Everton.

MR LOWIES: You see the relevant portion reads as follows:

"The second incident was in Sebokeng, Zone 12, where we shot at people who were waiting for buses and taxis."

CHAIRPERSON: Where are you reading from?

MR LOWIES: Page 3, paragraph 9(4), Chairman, at the top, the third line from the top.

Is this correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, we started at Sebokeng.

MR LOWIES: No, but this, what's stated here is that "the second" and I repeat:

"... second incident was in Sebokeng, Zone 12, where we shot at people who were waiting for buses, taxis."

MR NOSENGA: No, it's the first incident where we shot people who were waiting for taxis and buses. It is the area just off Small Farm.

MR LOWIES: Now do you admit to shooting at people in Everton under the following circumstances, and I quote from your statement - Page 2, Chairman, the last sentence.

"The first incident was in a shack which was next to a road. ANC supporters were known to frequent that place. We shot at people outside the shack in Everton."

Did this incident occur? It doesn't matter when, the question is only, did something like this occur?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it happened at a shebeen. People used to frequent that place, Djomo's place at Everton.

MR LOWIES: And was this on the same day as the shooting incident in Sebokeng or not, Sebokeng, Zone 12?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, the same day.

MR LOWIES: Then there's a statement:

"Details of other incidents attached herewith"

... annexed to this, forming part of this statement. What were you referring to?

MR NOSENGA: I'm not educated, I don't know what you're talking about. May somebody please read that to me.

MR LOWIES: In the statement that you made to whoever completed this form, we'll get to it now, wherein you mentioned the Sebokeng and Everton shootings, you say:

"Details of other incidents are attached herewith"

What did you mean - sorry, what I'm asking is, did you talk about other incidents?

MR NOSENGA: I spoke about the Sebokeng as well as the Small Farm incident and Everton, these are the only places. That is where a taxi was shot.

MR LOWIES: Now is Small Farm in the - sorry, I do not know the area, is Small Farm in the vicinity of Everton or Sebokeng or not?

MR NOSENGA: It is in Everton. It is actually a squatter camp called Small Farm. It is something similar to Central. It is a shack area of Sebokeng.

MR LOWIES: It's not Zone 12?

MR NOSENGA: When you leave Sebokeng from Zone 12, there is a tarred road that you have to take to lead you to, to get to Small Farm.

MR LOWIES: No, in your mind, is Zone 12 the same as this Small Farm place or is it not, in your mind?

MR NOSENGA: No, Zone 12 is a zone and Everton is something different. It is a shack area that I'm talking about in Everton and the other area is the township with four-roomed houses.

MR LOWIES: Did you speak about any other place?

MR NOSENGA: No, those are the only places that I spoke about, Sebokeng, Small Farm and Everton.

MR LOWIES: On this point I'm going to return to what you've said to Ferreira. Is it not so that the places where you took Ferreira to were not only Sebokeng, Zone 12 and the shack in Everton, but you took Ferreira to various other places as well?

MR NOSENGA: I don't recall, maybe that happened because I was being tortured, but I pointed out Zone 12, at a stop sign. That's where people actually caught their taxis. I don't know what he is talking about. I think he is talking about something else.

MR LOWIES: Did you take them to Small Farm?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I took him to Small Farm, where the taxis were shot at. That's the white person you're talking about?

MR LOWIES: Now you would surely be able to know whether you just took them to two or three places or more than those, in other words more than three places. Can you assist us in this regard? - as a result of the assault.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I cannot recall, but I know I took them to Sebokeng, Zone 12. I was in a Casspir and they were travelling in private vehicles. I also went to Djomo's place, the place that I said was a shebeen. I don't know what other places he is talking about.

MR LOWIES: On your version, who instructed you to attack Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying we were told at a meeting that was held two weeks prior. It was indicated that we should attack Boipatong. Themba Khosa was present. So I really don't know where this question is leading us. I did mention this even earlier, that we had this meeting two weeks prior and then later on the one on the 14th.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, please, you're wasting time. The question is simple, who, on your version, in other words in your mind, instructed to attack Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: The instruction came from the headmen or Indunas on the 17th. That was on the 17th. But I can say that Themba Khosa knew that as well because he too was present when this was mentioned. I don't know what else to say.

MR LOWIES: Can you mention other names in your mind, who were part and parcel of the instruction? I want names please.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying they said: "The day has come, we should go and attack Boipatong". - people like Gatchene. A siren or alarm was sounded on that day.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, why don't you describe in your words what happened on the 17th. You say there was a siren, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's the one that's used by the police. On the 17th, that evening people were called to a meeting. When we arrived at the meeting they said: "The day has arrived". Darkie Chonco is one person who went to fetch the firearms from the ceiling.

MR LAX: You said they said:

"The day has arrived"

Who is "they"? - if you can remember. If you can't remember, just say you can't remember.

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall well, there were several people who were talking, but the did say that: "The day has arrived".

MR LAX: Carry on.

MR NOSENGA: And Ntelesi was brought and placed there and they said that people should come forward and choose weapons, spears and arms, firearms. After that we went out through the main gate of the hostel. We proceeded and went under the bridge towards Boipatong and we crossed the robot. That is where we came across police Casspirs at the veld near Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Lowies.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chair. I'd just like to place on record, I'm not going to go into the detail as to how, which routes were taken, but Sir, there is one important thing here that I would like you to comment on. Damarra Chonco and Darkie Chonco is not the same person, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: They are siblings.

MR LOWIES: And it was Darkie that went to fetch the guns from the ceiling?

MR LAX: Sorry, the name is Darkie.

MR NOSENGA: Darkie.

MR LOWIES: I apologise. So Darkie was the chap who fetched the guns from the ceiling?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's correct.

MR LOWIES: And you talk about:

"... the people had to choose weapons, spears and firearms"

Were these spears also fetched by Darkie?

MR NOSENGA: Everyone of us brought his own spear, Darkie only brought along the firearms.

MR LOWIES: Did he carry it all by himself?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot tell a lie, I did not see any other person except for Darkie, who came into the stadium carrying weapons.

MR LOWIES: No, but he was carrying it in his arms?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he was carrying them. (as the applicant demonstrates)

MR LOWIES: Demonstrates like you would carry a baby who is sleeping, not against the chest, but with his arms forward?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he was firearms like AK's and pump-guns.

MR LOWIES: So you deny two things here. Firstly, you deny the fact that it was taken from a Nissan Skyline.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know that Skyline. It is true that Damarra Chonco owns a Skyline, but I did not see it, I did not see weapons being taken out from the Skyline. I did not know - I am not aware that these weapons were removed from the Skyline.

MR LOWIES: And there's a second thing that you deny and that is that the person responsible for the firearms was Damarra and not Darkie.

MR NOSENGA: That is not true, Damarra is being implicated falsely, but the person who was in charge of those weapons was Darkie, his brother.

MR LOWIES: Now where was this meeting held?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, it was held at a stadium, it was an open ground inside the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Who chaired the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: The meeting was called by the Induna, and I do not know, I cannot be in a position to say who was chairing that meeting. I cannot put a name and say it was Damarra or somebody else.

MR LOWIES: Who said you must choose weapons?

MR NOSENGA: It was Darkie Chonco.

MR LOWIES: Not Damarra?

MR NOSENGA: No, Darkie. Because he is the one who brought the firearms.

MR LOWIES: And did you choose a weapon?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's correct.

MR LOWIES: What was your age at that stage?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember. I would be lying if I said I knew.

MR LOWIES: Well from the charge sheet in your hearing, we know that when you were tried you were 17 years of age, according to the charge sheet. So you would agree with me you were very young at that stage?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know. The only thing that can approve my age is the birth certificate.

MR LOWIES: And is it not so, Sir, that Zulu custom is as follows; senior people get preference and the junior people must stand at the back, how come is it possible that you could get a firearm and the senior people not?

MR NOSENGA: We were told that a person should choose his own weapon. If you are 16/17, you are not a child anymore. I don't know what you're trying to get at. At the hostel it did not matter, those cultural rules did not apply. Any person who was old enough went out on the attack.

MR LOWIES: That's not the question, the question is; senior people would get preference to the AK47's, in terms of custom, do you agree?

MR NOSENGA: What I am saying is that we were told that any person can choose a weapon of his choice. I cannot agree with you on that. As I stated before, we were all called, it was only women and children who remained behind. I don't know what you are trying to get at.

MR LOWIES: What I'm getting at is, your version is improbable, Mr Nosenga, you are telling lies.

MR LAX: With the greatest of respect, Mr Lowies, there's no evidence so far to say that people patiently queued and waited and the more senior people chose weapons first, the evidence before us so far is that it was a free-for-all. Some people, who are the applicants, have testified that they wanted firearms, but they couldn't get in, it was a free-for-all. So with the greatest of respect, it's not fair to call this man a liar because you're putting something to him that doesn't accord with the evidence so far.

MR LOWIES: I retract the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you going to place evidence before this Committee to substantiate what you've put to the witness?

MR LOWIES: Chair, my instructions were the following, and let me get this clear, it is normally custom, even if there's a free-for-all, that the eldest people have access to the weapons first, and in that regard the juniors should respect the elders.

CHAIRPERSON: Forget for one moment about what your instructions are, what your instructions in regard to what happened there? - because that is the crux of what you are putting to this witness.

MR LOWIES: My instructions are that it is very unlikely that the events occurred as he describes them and on the probabilities he was not there.

CHAIRPERSON: That is was a free-for-all?

MR LOWIES: No, I would not disagree with that, there's no instruction to that effect. The instruction is however, that culture would not even allow him to take part in a free-for-all.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: That's the way I understood my instructions.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. It is one thing to be instructed as to what the culture is, it is another matter what happened on the day in question. Now if you're putting to this witness that what he's saying in regard to the selection of weapons is improbable, unless you know you're going to put evidence to the ...(indistinct), do you understand that?

MR LOWIES: I hear what you say, Chairman. My argument is the following; I have no witness to say that he took a firearm, he didn't take one, but on the probabilities he's not telling the truth. Those are my instructions. And I'm canvassing the probabilities with him.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chair.

I still want to know from you in your mind, besides Khosa, who gave the instruction? - the name of a person, if you could supply us with that name.

MR NOSENGA: I have stated before that I do not remember.

MR LOWIES: It was not Mr Vanana Zulu, correct?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, as the siren sounded and we were informed when we arrived at the stadium that we were going to attack, I cannot commit myself and say it was Prince Vanana Zulu.

MR LOWIES: So if I put it to you that Prince Vanana Zulu did not give the instruction, you will not argue with me because you can't remember?

MR NOSENGA: What I'm saying is I cannot say who gave the instruction because there were several Induna there. I cannot name one person.

MR LOWIES: You can't even recall whether Vanana Zulu was there.

MR NOSENGA: There were several Indunas there, I was not in a position to check whether Prince Zulu was present.

MR LOWIES: Thank you. So if I put it to you as a fact that he was not present, you cannot dispute it?

MR NOSENGA: What I'm saying is that I do not know.

MR LOWIES: You see again, at page 3, paragraph 10 of Exhibit A, you mention the following: State political object sought to be achieved:

"We were instructed by Mr Zulu, who was the head of the IFP at Madala Hostel, Vanderbijlpark, to destroy ANC comrades. He armed us with AK47's and pump-guns. Details attached herein."

Is this correct?

MR NOSENGA: Will you please explain which incident you are referring to, the Sebokeng or Boipatong incident.

MR LOWIES: Well let's hear, let's break them up. In the Sebokeng, were you instructed by Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: But definitely not in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: As I've stated before, with reference to Boipatong, I cannot name Prince Zulu as the person who instructed us because there were several Indunas.

MR LOWIES: And you entered Boipatong, not with an arm that Vanana Zulu supplied to you on a prior occasion or at any stage, but with one that you picked up there in the stadium, correct?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying the firearms were brought by Darkie Chonco. I took a firearm that was brought to us by Darkie Chonco. I took a firearm from the ground.

MR LOWIES: And again, Sir, I want to put it to you that in your first application you never mentioned Darkie Chonco.

MR NOSENGA: I did - I don't know about that, but I did mention that it was Darkie Chonco who brought the firearms along.

MR LOWIES: Is it correct, Sir, that the ANC viewed the police as the enemy in those days?

INTERPRETER: May the question please be repeated.

MR LOWIES: Is it correct that the ANC views the police as the enemy in those days?

MS TANZER: Objection. How would he know what the ANC viewed, he said he was a member of the IFP and before that he was apolitical.

CHAIRPERSON: Let the witness tell us. Do you know or don't you know?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know.

MR LOWIES: Are you sure?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I don't know because I was not a member of the ANC, how am I supposed to know?

MR LOWIES: Because in your statement, page 4, the second last sentence reads as follows:

"The IFP was also assisted by senior South African Police officers, therefore I considered this as a political conflict because the ANC viewed the SAP as the enemy."

Now how can you say this?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I don't know about that. It is true that Inkatha was being assisted by the police. I don't know about the ANC, I was not a member of the ANC, therefore I cannot respond to that.

CHAIRPERSON: What counsel is doing, he's asking you about a statement which appears in the application for amnesty in which you state that, you state amongst other things, that the ANC viewed the SAP as an enemy.

MR NOSENGA: No. That the ANC viewed the police as an enemy I dispute, because I was not a member of the ANC. I cannot therefore say that the ANC viewed them as an enemy. No, I don't know. The person who was interpreting for me is Sesotho-speaking, I therefore cannot say how this came into being part of the statement.

MR LOWIES: So your version is you deny the correctness of this portion of your statement?

MR NOSENGA: I have just indicated that I don't know anything about this ANC statement or ANC thing. I've just indicated that it was difficult to communicate because the person who was interpreting was Sesotho-speaking.

CHAIRPERSON: Interpreting for you? What language were you speaking to this person?

MR NOSENGA: I was speaking IsiZulu and IsiZulu was not quite clear, so I'm therefore saying that is not true that I said the ANC saw the police as the enemy.

CHAIRPERSON: So is the position that the person who was interpreting for you was not fluent in Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he was not fluent in IsiZulu.

MR LOWIES: Who was this person?

MR NOSENGA: It's a police, I don't know his name.

MR LOWIES: Now you have to supply particulars when making an application for amnesty, in terms of the documentation, whether you benefited in any way financially or otherwise. No, I would not like my learned friend to show him the specific place at this stage, Chairman, could I just request through you that it does not happen?

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR LOWIES: My learned friend, Ms Tanzer, indicates to him certain places on the document. I would request that it's not done. Not that I'm accusing her of anything, but it would not be practical.

CHAIRPERSON: But it's, I mean whenever you refer to the document, Ms Tanzer has been helping to point out the specific place.

MR LOWIES: I hear what you say, but at this stage I would prefer her not to do so, I will indicate when it's necessary. I'm not trying to get into an argument with her, I think it was bona fides, but I would prefer not at this stage.

Mr Nosenga, did you benefit in any way financially or otherwise from the acts that you committed, on your version, with a political objective?

MR NOSENGA: I did not benefit financially, I did this in the name of the IFP. I did not receive any money.

MR LOWIES: Goods, gifts, rewards?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I did not benefit in any way, I did this in the name of the IFP and I did not gain financially or in any way myself as a person.

MR SIBANYONI: Mr Lowies, may I ask the question, did the IFP benefit?

MR NOSENGA: I wouldn't tell a lie, I don't know.

MR SIBANYONI: From out of your actions, out of your conduct - you said you were doing this in the name of the IFP, my question was, out of your conduct did the IFP benefit either financially or in goods or property?

MR NOSENGA: I don't want to tell a lie, Sir, I don't know.

MR LOWIES: Have you ever met - did you ever meet Mr Eugene Terre'blanche?

MR NOSENGA: I only see him on television.

MR LOWIES: Did you have anything to do with the AWB?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: Have you ever had contact with members of the AWB, you personally?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I personally have no connection with the AWB.

MR LOWIES: Have you ever seen members of the AWB in person?

MR NOSENGA: No, I wouldn't say I did see them.

MR LOWIES: You see, because, why I'm asking is on page 5 of Exhibit R, you state on a question:

"Did you benefit in any way financially or otherwise from the acts committed with a political objective?"

You say:

"Yes, we were provided with groceries by the AWB, Terre'blanche, for support in the hostel."

Now how is this possible?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not say that. I don't know about that. I cannot agree to somebody being pointed out to me as being Terre'blanche. I am saying something, I'm talking about things that I know.

MR LOWIES: There's a next question, paragraph (d) of paragraph 10:

"If so, explain the nature and extent of such benefits."

And you proceeded to state:

"Groceries. These were provided by the AWB, Eugene Terre'blanche, for support in the hostel."

You say this is utter nonsense?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that. Yes, whites did come to give the hostel groceries, but I don't know how, I cannot comment much.

MR LOWIES: Well let me put it this way, Eugene Terre'blanche in Zulu and Eugene Terre'blanche in Sotho is one and the same person, you don't have a different name for him, not so?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know, I'm not an educated person.

MR LOWIES: AWB in Zulu and AWB organisation in Sotho is the same organisation, it's the same name, not so?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know. I did say before that I am not educated.

MR LOWIES: So how on earth could this happen then, that somebody wrote ridiculous comments such as this on your application? Have you got any reasonable explanation, Sir?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying that maybe that person misunderstood me. I was questioned on what we gained from it and I did not say that the groceries were brought specifically for me, but there were people who used to come to the hostel and bring groceries. That person must have misunderstood me.

MR LOWIES: But that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Did you ever mention to anyone that the hostel residents would get support by way of food from other individuals?

MR NOSENGA: I might have, but I did not mention Terre'blanche's name because white people used to come to the hostel to bring food, but I cannot say it was Mr Terre'blanche.

MR LOWIES: But in this regard, Sir, it could be charity workers, it could be the red cross, it could be anybody, not so?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, I cannot dispute that. That is possible, but I don't know.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, Mr Lowies.

Just on this aspect, when these people who brought groceries came to the hostel, did you see them?

MR NOSENGA: I saw them, but I cannot say who they are. Yes, I saw them bringing food to the hostel.

ADV SIGODI: Did they - where would they put the food? Where would they put these food parcels?

MR NOSENGA: They used to put it in a room, I cannot remember very well. That's where the Indunas would meet and divide the food accordingly. They would divide the food and distribute it into room in the hostels.

ADV SIGODI: Did they come in private motor vehicles or what, or did they come in motor vehicles or how did they come to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I used to see private vehicles.

ADV SIGODI: Were they wearing uniform or were they wearing private clothes?

MR NOSENGA: Private clothes.

ADV SIGODI: Thanks.

MR LOWIES: Sir, I want to put it to you that such groceries or other items that were supplied were supplied as a result of charity work, not as a result of any political objective. Can you dispute this?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't know. I cannot explain, I don't know.

MR LOWIES: Well we can also deduct from that answer then that it is not your contention that groceries that were supplied were supplied as a result of the political objectives of the suppliers, correct?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know.

MR LOWIES: Again in paragraph 11, when you had to supply particulars regarding the orders that were given to commit the offences, or the people whose approval had to be met in the organisation, you only mentioned Prince Vanana Zulu or Mtwana Zulu, as it is referred to here, and no mention is made of Darkie Chonco or Gatchene.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, Sir. I did say that Darkie Chonco is the one who brought the firearms along. There are instances where I was asked as to who commanded me to go and shoot at Sebokeng, I did say that it was Vanana Zulu. Darkie was not present at Sebokeng, he did not instruct me to go and kill people there.

MR LOWIES: I also do not see the name of Themba Khosa here in this paragraph.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know what happened, but I did mention that Themba Khosa came and held a meeting at KwaMadala Hostel. Themba Khosa participated in the Madala affairs.

MR LOWIES: And in your mind, was he part of the instruction to attack Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: As I stated before, the date was initially not mentioned, but it was mentioned that Boipatong should be attacked and he was also pleased about that. They did not specify the date at that time, but Boipatong was mentioned as the place that we should attack.

MR LOWIES: But that's not the question. You must listen to the questions please. In your mind, was Themba Khosa part of the instruction to, did he have, did he participate in the decision to attack Boipatong? - in your mind.

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, he was present when Boipatong was discussed. We as the supporters did not go out to attack Boipatong on our own volition, it was the leaders who had decided.

MR LOWIES: Gatchene, did he give an instruction in your mind to attack Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: He was present, but I'm not in a position to say whether he did issue an order, because a meeting of Indunas was held and they discussed this issue.

MR LOWIES: Do you know whether Prince Vanana Zulu or Mtwana Zulu's house was burnt down by the ANC comrades ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Where was this house, Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: I'm not sure.

Do you know of any house of the Prince that was burnt?

MR NOSENGA: I heard him saying that his house had been burnt down in Serela. That is in Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: And did he say who burnt it down?

MR NOSENGA: No, he just said it have been burnt down, but he never explained who burnt it down.

MR LOWIES: He didn't say it was the ANC comrades?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, he said his house was burnt down. Do you want me to admit that it was burnt down by the ANC? He did not tell me that.

MR LOWIES: Are you trying to protect anybody in the ANC?

MR NOSENGA: I'm not protecting anyone from the ANC, I'm not an ANC member, I belong to the IFP. If he's told me that his house was burnt down, do I have to mention that it was the ANC?

MR LOWIES: The reason why I'm asking this is, you stated, and I quote from page 5 of Exhibit R:

"He was previously residing at Boipatong, but his house was since burnt down by the ANC comrades."

So this is in your statement. What is your answer now?

MR NOSENGA: I must have been misunderstood. I was asked if Prince Zulu's house had been burnt down and I said yes, it was and I was questioned on who had burnt it down and I said I do not know. I do not know why that person wrote down that it was the ANC. There must have been a misunderstanding.

MR LOWIES: You see it's the second point. I just want to make this to you, previously I canvassed this with you, I canvassed with you whether you had knowledge of the ANC viewing the SAP as the enemy, and you denied it, yet it is in your statement.

Second point, again there is a bad reflection in your statement to ANC comrades and to deny that you said it. It appears to me that you are trying to protect somebody here, not so?

MR NOSENGA: I am not protecting anyone, not the ANC or anybody else, but I maintain that I do not know anything about what you are saying. I was not an ANC member. You would get better clarification from an ANC member.

MR LOWIES: We're talking about you, Sir. You on your own version are not happy with the IFP leadership, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's what I said.

MR LOWIES: And yet you say you are a member of the IFP, still today, here.

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, I did say so even yesterday, that I'm still a member of the IFP.

MR LOWIES: My instructions are, and I have to put this to you because it's my instructions, you were planted in this application, you are not a bona fide applicant.

MR NOSENGA: I did not know anything about that. I am seeking amnesty for the incident that I was involved in. I do not understand if you say I was planted, by whom?

MR LOWIES: Well it appears to me that two things happened in this statement, and that is that you deny anything which is detrimental to the ANC, and it may have been them. I'm asking you ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I have not been planted by the ANC. They would also be surprised to hear their name being mentioned here. I have come to the TRC to seek amnesty for those acts that I was involved in.

MR LOWIES: Similarly, is it not so Sir that the AWB, perhaps rightly so, is not very popular as an organisation with black people, in general, correct?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about the AWB.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you want seriously this witness to express an opinion as to what the attitude of black people generally is?

MR LOWIES: I would submit it's relevant to the cross-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: But how can - has this man ever taken a ...(indistinct) with the attitude of black people is towards the AWB?

MR LOWIES: I'll rephrase the question.

MR LAX: Just before you do, you will of course recall that it's historical fact that the IFP and the AWB at certain points had a co-operation, as part of an alliance prior to the previous election?

MR LOWIES: I am apolitical, I have no idea, but if you say so, it could be.

The reason why I want to put this to you, Sir, is ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: Ask the question.

MR LOWIES: The mention that you made of the AWB in your application, was to discredit the IFP.

MR NOSENGA: I mentioned before that I do not know anything about the AWB. You questioned me on whether the AWB brought groceries to the hostel and I responded that there were white people who brought food and I do not know whether they were AWB or not. Please go onto another question.

MR LOWIES: And your discrediting of the IFP goes further in your application, you are trying to tarnish the image of the President of the IFP, in this very application, in that you say he congratulated people in public for the Boipatong massacre, which is a lie.

MS TANZER: If I may, it was the evidence of one of the co-applicants in fact that there was a meeting at Ulundi and he was put on the stage and he was congratulated. So that was in evidence previously by one of the co-applicants.

MR LOWIES: No.

CHAIRPERSON: There was no evidence that he was congratulated, he was taken to Ulundi.

MS TANZER: And put on the stage.

CHAIRPERSON: But was he congratulated, was that the evidence?

MS TANZER: That was the evidence, that he shook his hand.

CHAIRPERSON: There was no such evidence, Ma'am.

MS TANZER: I withdraw that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Could you answer the question please?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you agree with what is put to you or do you disagree?

MR NOSENGA: Please explain it to me.

MR LOWIES: I say you are trying to discredit the President of the IFP, by stating that he publicly congratulated members of his party for the Boipatong massacre.

MR NOSENGA: No, I'm not trying to discredit Mr Buthelezi, I am stating what he said at Ulundi. You are trying to protect him. It is not the first time that he denies knowledge of events, he does this regularly. I do not understand what you mean when you say I'm trying to discredit him. Where do you get that?

MR LOWIES: Sir, if we're talking about a person denying aspects, then we're talking about you and I've already indicated to you during my course of cross-examination, that you are denying certain aspects in your own statement. So you are the one who is telling the lies.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, I don't believe ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I'm not telling lies.

CHAIRPERSON: ... to get into the argument with the witness. You've made the point, let's go onto the next point.

MR LOWIES: And I would like to put it to you, Sir, that we are in the process of obtaining a statement from a person in the IFP, who will the version that you have given to us regarding what happened at Ulundi.

MR NOSENGA: You can go ahead and do that, but I know what I am talking about, I'm not imagining things.

MR LOWIES: Chair, is this an appropriate time to take the tea adjournment?

MR LAX: Just before you do, Mr Lowies, I've just thought about what I've said earlier and I'm actually wrong, the alliance did not include the AWB at all, it included the Conservative Party and other parties, it definitely wasn't the AWB. I withdraw that statement, I'm absolutely wrong on that.

MR LOWIES: I would not be able to dispute it, I have no knowledge.

CHAIRPERSON: We will rise, we'll come back at half past eleven.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma, would you place on record what you mentioned to me outside?

MR MAPOMA: Thank you, Chairperson. Mr Chairman, it has come to my notice that emotions are running high between the applicants and the victims. I have been approached by one of the briefers for the victims, he advised me that he has been approached by Prince Vanana Zulu, from the section of the applicants, where they are complaining that there have been abusive remarks coming from the side of the victims and they want some intervention from the Committee. That is the situation, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Representative for the applicants, do you have any instructions in this regard?

MR STRYDOM: I heard yesterday that there were abusive remarks, but I did not take it seriously, I said to my guys they must just ignore it, Chair, and I thought the matter was over. What happened now, I am totally uninformed about.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. On the side of the victims, do you have any instructions?

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, thank you, Chair. I was present with Mr Mapoma when these remarks, when the allegations were made and we have undertaken to the Evidence Leader, to speak to our clients during the lunch break, to intervene, to sort out. Apparently there's a misunderstanding, but we have undertaken to deal with it during the lunch break.

CHAIRPERSON: Do we know whether these remarks were made inside or outside of this hearing room?

MR MAPOMA: Unfortunately, Chairperson, I am not in a position to say.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma, would you discuss the matter with the senior police officer present at these hearings and ask that police officer to investigate these allegations and thereafter to provide the Committee with a report? It is in the interest of both the applicants and the victims, that these hearings proceed to finality.

I regard it as a very grave and serious matter if there are allegations of abuse against anyone. So I urge everyone to refrain from such conduct. May I also urge the legal representatives to raise these issues with their respective clients, so that we do not have a repeat of this.

Mr Nosenga, you're still under oath.

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Lowies?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LOWIES: (Cont)

Mr Nosenga, it may be of importance to know your version, what happened to you at Ulundi? Can you give us the details regarding yourself at Ulundi, once you were inside the stadium, what happened then?

MR NOSENGA: As I explained yesterday, I just went to Ulundi and when I arrived I went to the conference. I don't know what else you'd like me to explain. Nothing happened to me.

MR LOWIES: Were you on a stage, were you on a podium or something similar to that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I was among the members of the IFP, I was not put on stage.

MR LOWIES: Were you mentioned by anybody of the leadership of the IFP?

MR NOSENGA: No, no.

MR LOWIES: You were not on the same stage as Chief Buthelezi?

MR NOSENGA: I was among the followers of the IFP and Chief Buthelezi was on the stage. I was not among the leaders, I was among the followers or members of the IFP. I'm not a leader of the IFP, I'm just a member.

MR LOWIES: You were not introduced to the chief?

MR NOSENGA: No, I was not introduced to him.

MR LOWIES: You were not mentioned by anybody, as a spy?

MR NOSENGA: No, nobody said I'm a spy. My apologies, Sir, I would like to know where you get that from because you did refer to the spy thing yesterday as well. I don't know where you're getting this from.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, you are here to answer questions, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: If there are any questions that you would like to ask, you will do that through your attorney. If there is any matter that you'd like to canvass or have clarity on, your attorney will do that on your behalf.

MR NOSENGA: I understand.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chair.

So Mr Nosenga, to sum it up, you were just there as a normal supporter, listening and observing what is happening, nothing extraordinary happened to you.

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't recall. I just went there as a member of the IFP.

MR LOWIES: And when the Chief Minister made his speech congratulating people on the Boipatong massacre, was he on a podium or on a stage?

MR NOSENGA: He was standing on something that looked like a stage, something that was a position that was, or a platform, an elevated platform should I say.

MR LOWIES: In other words simply put, he was making a speech and everybody could listen to him and could hear him?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Yes, there was a system that was put in place so that everybody could hear.

MR LOWIES: So he was even speaking on the sound system.

MR NOSENGA: I don't what it is, it is something that he was using, through which he was speaking.

MR LOWIES: Which amplifies the sound.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes, maybe something like that.

MR LOWIES: What language did he speak?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember. I cannot remember whether it was IsiZulu or English. I cannot remember.

MR LOWIES: Because I want to put it to you that the evidence will be that there were dignitaries from other states who were invited, members of the press and so forth, and what is amazing is that nobody picked the speech up, the one that you are talking about. Any comments?

MR NOSENGA: I said Buthelezi delivered a speech. Sometimes these media people write things not as they happened, but I heard Buthelezi delivering a speech.

CHAIRPERSON: What counsel wants you to comment on is that the speech was made in public, in the presence of the media and other persons, but in the reports following the conference, there was nothing which indicated he had made the statement attributed to him by you.

Is that what you're putting to this witness?

MR LOWIES: Correct, Chairman.

MR NOSENGA: I just know that he spoke. I heard him. I still maintain that he delivered this speech in the presence of many other IFP members.

MR LOWIES: And Sir, I put it to you that this is another reason why, on the evidence of my clients, my instruction from them, that they say you are telling a lie, you are just trying to defame the image of the IFP.

MR NOSENGA: I am not telling a lie, they are the ones who are telling a lie. They are the ones who are discrediting the IFP.

MR LOWIES: Now Mr Nosenga, now that we've dealt with the contents of the statements that you made and contained in Form 1 - and with your permission, Chair, may my learned friend at this stage just indicate to him which Form 1 I'm talking about, because that is on page 1 of Exhibit R up until page 7, if he does not mind. Now that the contents of this statement has been put to you, are you able to tell us who took this statement from you, or who completed this form containing these statements? Also the one that you've signed, just to refer you to page 6, your signature thereon. If my learned friend could assist me in that regard?

MR NOSENGA: May my legal counsel please point it out to me?

MR LOWIES: From page 126, ...(indistinct). And to assist you further, Sir, it is dated, it bears a date stamp of the Leeukop Prison, dated 25 September '96.

MR NOSENGA: I did explain that this statement was taken by Mongezi at Leeukop. That is if I still remember very well.

MR LOWIES: Did you make any other statements to Mongezi or did you have any other contact with Mongezi after this?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not get into any contact with him thereafter.

MR LOWIES: And before this?

MR NOSENGA: I said I did not get into any contact with him. I did not get into contact with him anymore, I only contacted or got into contact with Mr Brian thereafter, when I was in Stoffberg.

MR LOWIES: So Mongezi you only saw once then in your life?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I saw him once. That is if I'm not mistaken.

MR LAX: If I could just ask him here?

MR LOWIES: Sure.

MR LAX: I think you asked him; did he have any other contact with this chap after this, he said: "No", did he have any contact with him before this, and I can't catch his answer in that regard, I don't know if he answered that at all.

MR LOWIES: I thought that the implication was no, but maybe we should canvass this, with respect, Chairman.

MR LAX: Please.

MR LOWIES: Maybe Mr Nosenga you could just assist us in this. Did you see him before this incident where he spoke to you and you made these statements?

MR NOSENGA: No. I am saying he came to Leeukop Prison looking for Andries Nosenga and we went to Maximum C in Leeukop. That is where the statement was taken, not at the Maximum section.

MR LOWIES: Who was your lawyer in the criminal charges where you were convicted?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall. Which criminal offences? Are you referring to the ones for which I was convicted, the Sebokeng incidents?

MR LOWIES: Yes, the murders.

MR NOSENGA: No, Mongezi was not my legal counsel.

MR LOWIES: Did you have a pro deo counsel? In other words, one paid by the state, to defend you?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I don't know. I said I don't know whether the counsel was pro deo or not. I said I don't know. You're putting it as if it was Mongezi who appointed counsel for me. I don't know really.

MR LOWIES: Well somebody had to pay him, you didn't, your family didn't.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know. I just saw a legal counsel coming to represent me. I am saying I don't know who paid that legal counsel because he was going to represent me here at the hearing.

MR LAX: Sorry, Mr Nosenga, we're not talking about this hearing, we're talking about your trial where you were convicted. Do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: I did not get him very well. I want to know whether he's asking whether the legal counsel was appointed or paid for by my family.

MR LAX: I'm trying to explain to you what he's asking you, so if you'd just listen carefully. What counsel is asking you is, who represented you in your trial which led to your conviction for which you are now in jail?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall, I do not recall his or her name.

MR LAX: And the other question he was asking you was, did you pay for that counsel yourself or that lawyer yourself or was that lawyer provided for you by the state?

MR NOSENGA: I did not pay for my legal representation.

MR LOWIES: Just to turn to page 6, paragraph (f) of Exhibit R, there's reference to:

"Date of sentence if applicable"

And it was completed, stating that it was the 1/3/1996, would you agree with the correctness of this?

MR NOSENGA: No, I was not sentenced on that day, I was sentenced on the 14th of February 1995.

MR LOWIES: Definitely not on the 1st of March 1996?

MR NOSENGA: No, I was sentenced in 1995.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, then I would like you to explain to us how was this possible ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Just a minute.

Mr Nosenga, before signing the document that, before placing your signature at page 6, did you take an oath? - if you can recall.

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not recall.

CHAIRPERSON: Was this document read back to you before you signed it?

MR NOSENGA: No, Mongezi just took the statement and left.

CHAIRPERSON: When you signed, who was present?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall who was present.

CHAIRPERSON: It was yourself, Mongezi, was there any other person?

MR NOSENGA: It was - there were other police if I still remember.

CHAIRPERSON: But you don't know whether you took an oath before putting your signature?

MR NOSENGA: No, I'm saying I cannot recall.

MR LOWIES: Now you gave him your prison number, being 95244676 at that stage, does that ring a bell, was that indeed your prison number?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: You told this person that you were actually imprisoned for 14(sic) years, that is correct?

MR NOSENGA: Are you saying 14 years?

MR LOWIES: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: Yes 14, not 40.

MR LOWIES: Sorry, my mistake, 14. Now if you then turn to page 7, from this document it appears that you were requested by one, Nobewe, an Assistant Director in the Department of Correctional Services, Leeukop, to state whether you acknowledge that you know and understand the contents of the declaration, whereafter you confirm this to him and he signed it as well. Is this a lie?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall. One person who came to me was Mongezi. Mongezi is the one who came to me to take a statement.

MR LOWIES: No, but that's not the question. You said that there was a police officer present, was there anybody from the prison present who requested you to acknowledge that you understand and that you know the contents of the declaration?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it's possible, but the one person who came to me was Mongezi and I spoke to him through an interpreter.

MR LAX: Can I just clarify something, Mr Lowies?

You keep referring to a police officer being present during all of this and someone interpreting, it was a police officer. How come there was a police officer in the prison? Was this - I'm just interested.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying there were these prison warders, one of whom was interpreting for me and they were based in Leeukop.

MR LAX: So just to confirm, these are not police officers, you're just using that word, but in fact you're referring to prison warders.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it is the prison security or prison warders who were interpreting for me, not the SAP.

MR LAX: Thank you.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chairman.

Mr Nosenga, then I'd like you to turn to the document which you've been referred to and which has been referred to as the unsigned affidavit, or the unsigned statement, on page 8. I'm going to request with the permission of the Chairman, your legal assistant just to point that document out to you, all the pages, so as to bring you in the picture. Are you now in the picture?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can see that.

MR LOWIES: Now according to this statement you received a 16 year prison sentence.

MR NOSENGA: No, that's a mistake, I was not sentenced to 16 years.

MR LOWIES: According to this statement you are now, when this statement was made, you are in the Leeuhof Prison, whereas the previous statement reads that you were in the Leeukop Prison, from the date-stamp we can see there. On page 7, Chair. Were you ever at Leeuhof?

MR NOSENGA: May the question please be repeated.

MR LOWIES: If one looks at page 8 of the unsigned affidavit, it states that you are at the Maximum B in Leeuhof, whereas it is clear to us that Mongezi visited you at Leeukop, not so?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LOWIES: But there's another mistake here, because if we look at page 7 of Exhibit R, you were in Medium C, do you agree that you were in Medium C first of all?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about Medium C. Maybe that is where the statement was taken. I was locked up at a maximum section.

MR LOWIES: What section?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying Mongezi visited me and I was sent to Medium C, where I met him. I was locked up at a maximum section and I was sent to Medium C, or Maximum C, where I met Mongezi.

MR LOWIES: Were you held at Maximum B Prison?

MR NOSENGA: There is no Maximum B, there is just, it's just a maximum section prison in Leeukop.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there a Maximum B in Leeuhof Prison?

MR NOSENGA: It is a regional prison, that is Leeuhof. I was transferred from Leeuhof to Leeukop.

CHAIRPERSON: Answer the question. In Leeuhof Prison, is there a Maximum B?

MR NOSENGA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: It's just one small prison?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Where did you start to serve your sentence?

MR NOSENGA: I started serving the sentence in Leeukop Maximum Prison.

MR LOWIES: Were you ever in Leeuhof?

MR NOSENGA: When I was arrested I was placed in Leeuhof and after sentencing I was sent to Leeukop.

MR LOWIES: So you never served any sentence in Leeuhof, you only were detained there pending the outcome of your trial?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's were I was detained during the trial.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) your conviction ...(intervention)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

MR NOSENGA: After everything had been done, I was sent to Leeukop.

CHAIRPERSON: And for how long did you remain in Leeuhof Prison?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember, it was quite a while.

CHAIRPERSON: But did you remain in your prison after your conviction?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, but it could not have been more than three days. Thereafter I was transferred to Leeukop.

CHAIRPERSON: So whilst you were an awaiting-trial prisoner, you were at Leeuhof?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's where I was.

CHAIRPERSON: And then after your conviction you remained there for a few days.

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And thereafter you were transferred to Leeukop.

MR NOSENGA: Leeukop Maximum.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: And nobody visited you for the purposes of amnesty at Leeuhof?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not recall anyone visiting me. No-one came to visit me.

MR LOWIES: Now you say nobody came, so that's a fact?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, no-one came. People started visiting me at Leeukop.

MR LOWIES: The reason why I'm asking is, this statement reads that you are, when this was taken, that you are presently serving 16 years for murder at Maximum B Prison, Leeuhof. That is completely wrong in three regards. Firstly, nobody took a statement from you in Leeuhof, correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Secondly, there is no Maximum B Prison in Leeuhof?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: And thirdly, you did not get, you were not sentenced to 16 years, you were sentenced to an effective 4 years imprisonment, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's correct.

MR LOWIES: Then if we look at this statement again and compare it to page 6 of Exhibit R, we see that the one statement refers to a conviction and sentence on the 1st of March '96, whereas the other one, on page 8, refers to the following:

"I was convicted in February 1995"

Do you see that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can see it, but the fact is that I was convicted on the 14th of February 1995.

MR LOWIES: So page 8 in this case is correct, but page 6 is incorrect.

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Now it appears to me, Mr Nosenga, that it could not have been the same person - if you just look at these mistakes in the first paragraph, who took the unsigned affidavit from you, because of these mistakes that I've indicated to you. Do you agree?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. What I'm saying is I do not recall. It is possible that that is what happened.

MR LOWIES: However, is it correct that you have a standard one education?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Is it correct that you reside at - or you resided at 671 Newman Road, Everton, until 1990?

MR NOSENGA: That is incorrect. I was born in Everton at that address. I left in 1991 to go and reside at the Madala Hostel.

MR LOWIES: So you were actually born and raised here in Everton?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was born and raised there.

MR LOWIES: Where did you go to school, also Everton?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I started school in Everton.

MR LOWIES: Now isn't the language that is predominantly spoken in Everton, Sotho?

MR NOSENGA: It is Sesotho, but there are AmaZulu and AmaXhosa living there as well.

MR LOWIES: No, but I'm talking about the language that's predominantly spoken in this area, in the Vaal area.

MR NOSENGA: Just because the majority speaks Sesotho, I would not do the same. I am UmZulu and my mother is Xhosa and therefore I cannot speak other people's language.

MR LOWIES: But I haven't asked you that, I asked you whether the language predominantly spoken in this area is Sotho or not, what do you say?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Right. Yet you say you can't speak the language.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know that language. I can hear a word or two here and there, therefore I cannot claim to know Sesotho.

MR LOWIES: If you can here it, can you speak it here and there?

MR NOSENGA: No, I speak my father's language, which is IsiZulu. I cannot speak a language that is not my mother tongue.

MR LOWIES: Okay, then we know that there's another aspect which you disagree with, and that is the fact that you left the township in 1990, you say no, it was 1991, correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: You then say in this statement:

"Themba Khosa was the Chairperson of the IFP in the Vaal Triangle"

Do you regard this as being correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, I said he was the Chairperson of the IFP Youth Brigade.

MR LOWIES: When did you say this?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that?

MR LOWIES: To whom did you say this?

MR NOSENGA: No, I said he was the Chairperson of the IFP Youth Brigade in the Vaal or in the Johannesburg area.

MR LOWIES: So you would never say that he would be the Chairperson of the IFP in the Vaal Triangle because you know it's not correct, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Ja. I knew him to be the Chairperson of the IFP Youth.

MR LOWIES: Where?

MR NOSENGA: In the Vaal region.

MR LOWIES: You say in this statement that:

"Before we left the township we performed ..."

Sorry, may I rephrase with your permission, Chairman? The question that I would like to put to you is the following; in the statement you make mention of the fact that you were part of a group from the hostel, that is now KwaMadala, who went on the rampage in Boipatong in June 1992. You go on to state:

"Before we left the township we performed various rituals"

And then you continue to say:

"Just before we were about to leave, Sergeant Peens of the SAP came and gave Katisi, Victor Kheswa some money"

My question relates to the last aspect, and that is that shortly before you were about to leave Peens arrived and that he gave money to Kheswa. Is this correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. But I just want to state that before we went to attack Boipatong, he did come to the hostel during the day. I don't know how much it was. I did say that, that is true.

MR LOWIES: Who came to the hostel earlier today, Kheswa or Peens?

MR NOSENGA: Peens.

MR LOWIES: Now, what was the money for?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, I did not ask him.

MR LOWIES: Where was the money handed over to Kheswa?

MR NOSENGA: May the question please be repeated.

MR LOWIES: Where did this incident take place, the handing over of the money by Peens to Kheswa?

MR NOSENGA: They were outside the hostel at the Iscor parking area.

MR LOWIES: Now how long before the incident did this happen? The incident I'm referring to is the attack on Boipatong.

MR NOSENGA: It was during the day. The attack on Boipatong happened during the evening and the handing over of the money to Kheswa happened during the day.

MR LOWIES: I see. Now did you see whether any weapons were handed over to anybody at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I did not see who Peens gave firearms or weapons to.

MR LOWIES: Are you sure?

MR NOSENGA: I would not say I am sure. I only heard, I did not see him.

MR LOWIES: What did you hear?

MR NOSENGA: I heard that Peens gives firearms to Rooikop and Rooikop in turn gives these firearms to Themba Khosa. So I'm not in the position to say, really.

MR LOWIES: So you didn't see that firearms were actually handed to Themba Khosa?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not see Themba Khosa taking receipt of the firearms.

MR LOWIES: As a matter of fact, on this specific day, the only thing that you observed was the handing over of the money?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I saw Katisi receiving the money.

MR LOWIES: And thereafter Peens left?

MR NOSENGA: May the question please be repeated?

MR LOWIES: Do you that Peens left the premises thereafter?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did because we were standing together with Katisi at the gate.

MR LOWIES: So if there was a handing over of firearms to Themba Khosa at that stage, you would have seen it? Is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Yes, that is something I could have seen.

MR LOWIES: Did you see Themba Khosa at all that day?

MR NOSENGA: I saw Themba Khosa at the meeting two weeks prior to the attack.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, please, we're wasting time. My question is simple, did you see him on that day, not any other day? What is your answer?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not see him on that day.

MR LOWIES: So if one gets the impression on that day that the money, that Peens handed guns over to Khosa, that would be wrong, it did not happen on that specific day to your knowledge?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I only heard about that at a meeting at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Now did you tell Mongezi, to your knowledge, about Ntelesi?

CHAIRPERSON: Are you still on the affidavit?

MR LOWIES: That's correct.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did tell Mongezi about the Ntelesi.

MR LOWIES: What did you say to him?

MR NOSENGA: Mongezi asked me as to what we drank when we left the hostel to go and attack the people at Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Yes and then?

MR NOSENGA: We proceeded to Boipatong where we met the police. That is where we attacked people. That is what I told him.

MR LOWIES: Did you tell anybody else but Ngedezi about the Ntelezi? - Mongezi.

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall. I am not sure whether I did mention this to other people.

MR LOWIES: Do you know the difference between a Hippo and a police Casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I know the difference. I know the difference.

MR LOWIES: What is a Hippo?

MR NOSENGA: Hippo is the one with four wheels, the one that looks like a pig, that is what we call it, and the occupants can actually be seen through the roof and the sides.

MR LOWIES: And the Casspir?

MR NOSENGA: A Casspir is something that looks like a bus, but it's a little wider and it has a door on the side.

MR LOWIES: Now to your knowledge, do the police use Hippos and Casspirs or only one of the two?

MR NOSENGA: They used Casspirs, not Hippos.

MR LOWIES: So who used the Hippos?

MR NOSENGA: I said I did not see Hippos. The one thing that I saw personally were the Casspirs. Those are the ones that we used on entering Boipatong. They were actually leading the IFP followers on entering Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: There was evidence regarding a suitcase and the suitcase was described as a specific army vehicle, do you know what a suitcase is?

MR NOSENGA: The suitcase one I think is the one that is so high and such that you can actually see the soldiers appearing or soldiers' heads appearing through the roof.

MR LOWIES: It's not the same as a Hippo?

MR NOSENGA: No. No, the Hippo is something wide.

MR LOWIES: On the night of the attack, at any time, and I repeat, at any time, did you see a suitcase?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not see that. I did not see soldiers at all because soldiers would not have allowed us to continue attacking people and killing people at Boipatong. I don't want to tell a lie, I did not see soldiers.

MR LOWIES: No, but I'm talking about vehicles. Did you see a suitcase, yes or no?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not see that.

MR LOWIES: Did you see a Hippo on the night of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, the one thing that I saw were the Casspirs, the ones that we were using.

MR LOWIES: So you never saw Hippos or suitcases?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: You see, in your statement you stated that Shaka of the Security Branch was in a Hippo on the night of the attack. This is then obviously a lie.

MR NOSENGA: That's a mistake, I spoke about Casspirs.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, in fairness to the witness, the first sentence does talk about a police Casspir. It's not my witness, but I think in fairness to him.

MR LOWIES: I thought I asked the question whether Shaka was in a Hippo.

MR LAX: What Mr Berger is pointing out to you is that if you read the first sentence he says:

"We were picked up by a police Casspir driven by a white man"

And then he goes on. The next sentence referring to Shaka includes that.

MR LOWIES: I thought there was nothing wrong with my question. I thought maybe there was a slip of the tongue, that's why I'm confused. Sorry, Chair. Let me rephrase the question because I am now confused as to precisely what I asked, in the sense that I may have had a slip of the tongue.

I want to quote the following to you:

"In the Hippo there was Shaka of the Security Branch"

Now here you're talking about a Hippo and you're talking about two things, Shaka is a member of the Security Branch and he's inside a Hippo. This is not true.

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not true. I did not talk about a Hippo, Shaka was inside a Casspir, not a Hippo. There was no Hippo, there were Casspirs used there.

MR LOWIES: Now were you ever a passenger in the Casspir on the night of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did say that. There were four of these Casspirs. There was not one Casspir, we had four of them.

MR LOWIES: You see you also go on to say that:

"There were 14 or 15 IFP members inside a Hippo"

That is totally wrong.

MR NOSENGA: No, that's a mistake. A Hippo is small, it can only accommodate about 10 people, not 15, because you see it has a very big engine. I think it could have accommodated 10 people.

MR LOWIES: You see then it goes on:

"Those that I remember who were in the Hippo were Gatchene ..."

And you mentioned others, I will get to that later. That is a total lie, according to you.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) the opening sentence here clearly says:

"When we got out of the hostel we were picked up by a police Casspir driven by a white man"

And then it goes on to say:

"... in the Hippo"

And thereafter he uses the word "Hippo".

MR LOWIES: I don't follow, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Well if you follow it, in the context appears that he's referring to the police Casspir in which ...(inaudible)

MR LAX: If I could help you. What he is saying ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: In the context. Do you see that?

MR LOWIES: No. Maybe ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: It begins by saying:

"When we got out onto the road we were picked up by a police Casspir ..."

I'm reading at paragraph four:

"... driven by a white man whose name I don't know."

Then it goes on to say:

"In the Hippo there was Shaka of the Security Branch, the white man known to me as Rooikop, who had red hair, Peens and our driver"

Okay?

"There were 14 or 15 ... inside the Hippo"

So what I'm saying is that in the context it appears that the word "Casspir" and "Hippo" were used ...(indistinct).

MR LOWIES: I see, I missed that.

MS TANZER: Mr Chair, also in fairness to the witness, when he talks about the statement can he say: "the unsigned statement", so that it's clear that it's ...

CHAIRPERSON: As far as you are concerned, Mr Nosenga, you got into a police car.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now was Mongezi part of your group of not?

MR NOSENGA: No, Mongezi was not part of it, he doesn't know anything about this. You asked me who took the statement, I told you it was Mongezi. Mongezi was not part of this attack.

MR LOWIES: Now who were passengers in your vehicle?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that it was, the first one was Induna Gatchene and Dondo, Stikenauw and Themba. I've forgotten the name of the other one.

MR LOWIES: Now you state here that you killed eight to nine people on that night and probably injured many more. Page 9, Chairman.

MR NOSENGA: No, I am not sure how many people I shot. I said there could have been five houses or so that we attacked, but as to the number of people that I shot, no, I cannot say.

MR LOWIES: It would not be correct to say that you killed eight to nine and probably injured many more, that would be completely wrong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am not sure of that. I know people died.

MR LOWIES: You know people died from being shot by you? The operative words are; shot by yourself.

MR NOSENGA: I did shoot people, but I cannot say how many of them died. I cannot say exactly as to how many people I killed.

MR LOWIES: Would you say that you did kill people?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LOWIES: And you had an AK47?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Because I have not been present at the hearing where the applicants were charged, but my instructions are, and Mr Strydom will raise this with you in detail, but I just have to make the point at this stage, it's not true, there is no evidence that anybody was killed by an AK47. The post-mortems will bear that out.

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say, but I am saying that there were AK47s as well as pistols. It is not true that people did not use AK47s during the night of the attack.

CHAIRPERSON: What is being put to you is that according to the post-mortem conducted on the bodies of the deceased, there is no evidence that anyone of them had died of a gunshot wound fired from an AK47.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that, but people used AK47s.

MR LOWIES: Now what I want to put to you, Sir, is again ...(intervention)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not activated.

MR LOWIES: What I would like to put to you again is the following; you are not telling the truth.

MR NOSENGA: I am telling the truth.

MR LOWIES: Now when did you see Themba Khosa for the first time after the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall. He came to KwaMadala several times. He used to come to KwaMadala, but I cannot say exactly when. I know Themba Khosa. Even if the can take me to a parade I can point him out from the rest of the people.

MR LOWIES: Yes, but my point is - and you must listen to the question, when did you see Themba Khosa for the first time after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember, but he did come to the hostel. I also saw him at Ulundi, but I cannot recall exactly when that was. I did see him after the meeting at KwaMadala Hostel.

MR LOWIES: I didn't catch the interpretation. Sorry, Chairman. Could it just be repeated.

MR LAX: He said he did see Themba Khosa after the meeting at KwaMadala Hostel. That is what he said.

MR LOWIES: Thank you.

What meeting are you referring to?

MR NOSENGA: It was a meeting of the residents of the hostel, and I saw him at Ulundi as well.

MR LOWIES: Now when was this meeting, the very same day, the next day, two days thereafter?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall.

MR LOWIES: Can you read?

MR NOSENGA: No, I'm uneducated.

MR LOWIES: With your permission, Chair, may I just get a second? I just want to consult with my colleagues.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: I'm indebted to you, Chairman.

Now is it not so that Mr Khosa only arrived a day or two after, I think it's on the 18th, the Boipatong incident, and he was in the company of the police?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that. What I know is that Themba Khosa arrived at the hostel to collect the firearms that had been used in the Boipatong attack. It is possible that he might have arrived with the police. What I do remember is that he came to the hostel on the 18th, to collect those firearms that had been used in the attack.

MR LOWIES: Now was Khosa an Induna at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Which Khosa?

MR LOWIES: Themba Khosa.

MR NOSENGA: He was not an Induna.

MR LOWIES: According to you, who was in charge of the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, there were Indunas there, because when we entered Boipatong we divided ourselves according to various streets in the area. I only can refer you to the people I was with, people in my group. I can only tell you about what happened in what I was involved in.

MR LOWIES: No, but listen to the question. According to you, who was in charge of the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say, there were many Indunas. In my group Gatchene was the leader. I cannot specify just one person because there were many people in charge, and those leaders were in charge of separate groups who went into different streets in Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: We've heard, just before the lunch adjournment, that Vanana Zulu was not seen by you at all on the 17th, the day of the attack, correct?

MR NOSENGA: You did ask me a question with regards to that and I responded that I did not see him at the meeting.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that at the meeting on the 17th?

MR NOSENGA: I said I did not see him because there were many Indunas there. There were people like Gatchene present, so I cannot say that I saw him.

MR LOWIES: Did you see him at all on the 17th?

MR NOSENGA: I did not see him.

MR LOWIES: Because your statement says that the people who were in charge of the attack were Mtwana and Gatchene. That's not correct, the Mtwana part is not correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, that part is inaccurate. I said there were Indunas who were responsible for leading the attack, but in my group it was Gatchene who was the leader.

MR LOWIES: And Mtwana is Prince Vanana Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: I know him by the name of Mtwana Zulu.

MR LOWIES: And there's no other Mtwana that you know?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, I know him by the name of Mtwana and there's no other person I know of that name.

MR LOWIES: How many times in your life - sorry, I retract that question. Did you ever see Mr Themba Khosa in possession of firearms, of any nature?

MR NOSENGA: As I stated before, Themba Khosa came to collect the firearms that had been used in the attack. He was in his Sprinter. I did see him inside the hostel where he told the hostel dwellers that they should burn the property that had been looted from the Boipatong attack.

MR LOWIES: Did you see him in possession of firearms at any other stage in your life?

MR NOSENGA: As I said, he came to collect firearms that had been used in the attack, so he did have firearms in his vehicle.

MR LOWIES: Besides this incident, that's my question.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know. I only know him to have carried weapons, with reference to the Boipatong attack.

MR LOWIES: And the carrying of the weapons was actually when he collected it, not when he delivered it, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: You see the reason why I'm asking this is, in your statement it says:

"Themba Khosa was an Induna at our hostel"

We know that you disagree with that portion.

"He also attended meetings briefings and debriefings"

And then:

"He also delivered guns to the hostel on a regular basis, using his Sprinter"

This according to you is completely incorrect.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. I only said he came to collect the firearms in his Sprinter. What I said was that he came to collect the firearms that had been used in the Boipatong attack.

MR LOWIES: And it's not true that he also delivered guns to the hostel on a regular basis, using his Sprinter?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: Now in the drive-by shooting for which you were convicted, how many accomplices did you have? How many people were involved with this?

MR NOSENGA: There were five of us.

MR LOWIES: Yes, who were they?

MR NOSENGA: There was Zwee.

MR LOWIES: Yes?

MR NOSENGA: Ntlantla.

MR LOWIES: Ntlantla.

MR NOSENGA: Hunter Ndlovo.

MR LOWIES: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: Victor Kheswa.

MR LOWIES: Also known as Ketisi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's the one, and myself.

MR LOWIES: Is Ntlantla Xinde or not, is his surname Xinde?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Who is Michael Ramakau?

MR NOSENGA: He is somebody from Everton.

MR LOWIES: Was he involved in a drive-by shooting?

MR NOSENGA: No. I made that mistake. There were five of us and one person was driving the car, he was not involved in the actual shooting.

CHAIRPERSON: You say you made a mistake?

MR NOSENGA: I must have made a mistake with regards to Michael Ramakau. It was myself, Hunter Ndlovo, Ntlantla Xinde and Victor Kheswa and Zwee, who was the driver.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I want to find out whether, are you saying that you made a mistake, where? Where did you make this mistake?

MR NOSENGA: I think we misunderstood each other with the person who took the statement, Michael Ramakau was not present.

CHAIRPERSON: So you made a mistake or he made a mistake?

MR NOSENGA: It must have been that person because I do not know anything about Michael Ramakau.

CHAIRPERSON: I see. So the person who took down the statement, on his own included the name of Michael Ramakau?

MR NOSENGA: It must be that we misunderstood each other, Michael Ramakau was not present.

MR LOWIES: So how do you know that this statement is, or this name of Michael Ramakau is in your statement?

MR NOSENGA: I heard you reading from the statement.

MR LOWIES: There's one puzzling aspect though, how would the person taking down the statement know of Michael Ramakau if he was not mentioned by you?

MR NOSENGA: As I'm saying, I may have made a mistake. It is not the person who took the statement who made the mistake, but ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, Mr Nosenga, I don't follow this explanation. What you're being asked is, the person who took down this statement, how would he know of Michael Ramakau unless he was told by you? That is what is being put to you, so what's your ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: As I'm stating, I must have made a mistake. It is possible that I made that mistake and he did not read the statement back to me. I would have attempted to correct it if he had read it back to me.

CHAIRPERSON: So you think that you may have made a mistake and mentioned the name of Michael Ramakau?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Michael Ramakau had not been present.

CHAIRPERSON: But because the statement was not read to you, you didn't have the opportunity to correct that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: So in this case you are not blaming bad interpretation as you initially did, in this instance?

MR NOSENGA: As I have stated I must have made the mistake, and it was not read back to me after it had been taken.

MR LOWIES: Sorry, the last portion was not interpreted. He spoke and nothing was interpreted.

INTERPRETER: He said that the statement was not read back to him after it had been taken.

MR LOWIES: Chair, is this an appropriate time to take the lunch adjournment?

CHAIRPERSON: We'll take the adjournment and come back at a quarter to two.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, you are reminded that you are still under oath.

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Lowies?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LOWIES: (Cont)

Thank you, Chairman.

Mr Nosenga, if you look at your unsigned statement, at page 9 ...

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not activated.

MR LOWIES: If you look at your unsworn statement, at page 9, you say in the last sentence of your statement:

"I pleaded guilty and was defended by a pro deo counsel"

Do you see that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's correct.

MR LOWIES: But with my earlier question this morning the impression was created - sorry, do you want to say something?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, the court found me guilty.

MR LOWIES: But the question is, earlier this morning I got the impression that you didn't know what pro deo counsel is. Do you know what it is?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: Will you please explain, I don't understand.

CHAIRPERSON: One has to give allowance to the fact that this affidavit, if it is that of Mr Nosenga, was not drafted by him, it was drafted by people who knew what they were talking about, using this term of pro deo.

MR LOWIES: I beg your pardon.

CHAIRPERSON: If a man says:

"I didn't pay for my counsel"

... one infers that it probably must have been a pro deo.

MR LOWIES: I take the point, Chair.

Now I would like to explain what happened after the attack, how did the attackers ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Have you come to the end of the statement?

MR LOWIES: No, Chair, I'm still busy, second paragraph.

After the attack, how did the attackers congregate and what happened once the attack on Boipatong where residents were involved, was now completed? Maybe I should be more specific and ask you firstly, how did you know that this is the end of the attack, we are now finished?

MR NOSENGA: From the shacks we went to the male/female hostel as well as children at Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Sorry?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying, after the shack or after attacking the shacks we went to the Boipatong hostel, that is where we launched our last attack. We came back and gathered and we went down the road that's going down next to the hostel.

MR LOWIES: ...(indistinct) you're now referring to, sorry? The one that was attacked or the one, the KwaMadala Hostel?

MR NOSENGA: There's a mixed hostel at Boipatong, not KwaMadala Hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know what is the name of that hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, I just know it's a hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: You've been referring to Umkukweni.

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I want to know, would this be Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: That is possible. There are many trees actually in that area.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, yes.

MR LOWIES: So how was this hostel attacked?

MR NOSENGA: May the question please be repeated.

MR LOWIES: How as the hostel attacked?

MR NOSENGA: People were shot. People who were standing outside were shot, but I did not shoot there, I only shot or fired shots at Slovo Park. I only fired shots for the last time at the shacks.

MR LOWIES: So did you actually see whether these people at the hostel were hit by the bullets?

MR NOSENGA: Some of them fled, crying and some were shot. I heard people crying.

MR LOWIES: Did you actually see them fall?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did.

MR LOWIES: If you have to give an estimate, how many would you say?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, I don't want to tell a lie.

MR LOWIES: No, but I'm asking you to give an estimate, which means you can be out.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, when a man says: "I don't know, I can't estimate", what more does he have to say? Unless there is something that turns on the figure, of the figures that fell down.

MR LOWIES: Chair, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: But he says he can't estimate.

MR LOWIES: I get the point, I'll rephrase.

But you say that it's definitely people and not one person that fell down?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't know.

CHAIRPERSON: You told us that figures fell down. What Mr Lowies wants to find out from you is, these figures that were falling down, these were human beings?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because some of them cried, screamed and started fleeing.

MR LOWIES: But the ones that fell down were more than one person?

MR NOSENGA: There were several of them. I cannot say exactly how many.

MR LOWIES: I want to put it to you, Sir, that this hostel was never attacked. You are telling lies.

MR NOSENGA: There are people who died there, I don't know how many.

MR LOWIES: And there was never any evidence prior to you giving evidence here today, that the hostel was attacked.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying the hostel was attacked. It's a hostel right in Boipatong and from the hostel you can proceed to Slovo Park. People died at that hostel.

MR LOWIES: If you could just bear with me please, Chairman.

INTERPRETER: We request Mr Nosenga to speak out a bit louder so that we can interpret what he says. Sometimes he swallows his words.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Nosenga, do you hear the request by the interpreters? The interpreters are saying you speak very softly and at the end it's very difficult to get what you are saying because you swallow your words at the end of your sentences. That makes it very difficult to interpret. When you speak, please don't hurry, slow down a little bit. Just speak freely and leisurely.

MR LOWIES: Now this hostel, was it on the side of the factories or Slovo Park or KwaMadala?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it is in the middle of the township. Madala is at Iscor.

MR LOWIES: And you were telling us still that the hostel was attacked and from there what happened, which route did you follow?

MR NOSENGA: We regrouped and went back to the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Yes, I know that. The question is not whether you regrouped, the question is, can you describe the route please.

MR NOSENGA: We took the main road, I think it's a taxi route and we went down towards the firms.

MR LOWIES: Yes? Now the main road, are you talking about Frikkie Meyer?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know the name of the road. I did indicate I'm not educated.

MR LOWIES: But it's a tarred road?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there are firms next to the tarred road and we have BP just there and a stop sign next to that area, and there's a section or an intersection indicating a route to Vanderbijlpark and other areas.

MR LOWIES: If I show you map, will you be able to indicate to us which route you took?

Chair, if we may, with reference to Exhibit J, do so with your permission. With your permission, Chairman, may I retract this question and request that it be dealt with by somebody else. I'm not quite au fait with these facts and I think it would be better suited if I do not pursue the matter further myself. So if it's not a problem, I would rather retract the question completely.

Mr Nosenga, forget the question please. On your version, Mr Themba Khosa collected the firearms after the attack, am I correct that this is your version?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, after the attack on Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Where did he collect it from?

MR NOSENGA: The car, his Sprinter came right into the KwaMadala Hostel and these firearms were fetched from the ceiling where they were concealed and they were taken to his Sprinter, his vehicle and he said the things that were stolen from the hostel, things like clothes etc., should be burnt. Beds were also taken and television sets. He said these things should be put on fire to cover up.

MR LOWIES: When did he say so, that very same night or the next day?

MR NOSENGA: The next day.

MR LOWIES: I'm putting to you that this is a lie, Mr Khosa never said so.

MR NOSENGA: He said that. He did say that these things should be burnt. He spoke to the Indunas, he said these things should be burnt. I cannot say something, I cannot suck this information from my thumb.

MR LOWIES: Did you hear him actually giving that instruction? That is the point.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did hear him telling the Indunas. I was there at the hostel, I did hear him say so.

CHAIRPERSON: What actually happened, did Themba Khosa call Indunas and address them or did he call everyone else and address the Indunas in your presence as well?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. He summoned all the residents, but spoke directly referring to the Indunas to say everything that was stolen should be burnt. This message was directed to the Indunas, who would in turn tell the hostel residents.

MR LOWIES: And you witnessed this? You overhead what he said to the Indunas.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was there at the meeting, we were all there at the meeting. I did hear him say that.

MR LOWIES: I want to put to you, Sir, that this is directly in conflict with your evidence yesterday where you said you were not present, he only had a meeting with the Indunas. What is the truth? Both cannot be true.

CHAIRPERSON: Just refresh my memory, was that in relation to the burning?

MR LOWIES: That was, as I understood it, to be in relation to the burning.

CHAIRPERSON: Because my recollection of his evidence was that the leadership would meet separately and then the decision taken at the leadership level would then be conveyed to the general membership.

MR LOWIES: May I come in here Chair?

CHAIRPERSON: Is that what you're referring to?

MR LOWIES: No, no, that was the evidence as a fact, yes, but I'm not referring to that incident. My recollection of the evidence is the following, that they were only informed, the attackers, afterwards that Mr Themba Khosa was happy about the attack and he does not know anything regarding the meeting where Khosa allegedly was. As you will remember the other applicants testified. That's how I have it.

ADV SIGODI: But as I recall it, it was not put specifically in relation to the burning of the loot that was taken from Boipatong, as I recall the evidence.

MR LOWIES: My impression, Chairman, is with respect that it was not directly related to that, but the incident is clear, it was that incident. My note reads as follows Chair, if I may; that:

"After he left we met and we were informed by the Indunas that Khosa was happy and that he had come to collect the weapons and that he said ...(this is now what they were still informed) that the police were going to be coming to search them for weapons."

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. You see my note says:

"Darkie Chonco said these stolen items must be burnt because they would expose the hostel dwellers to arrest"

And then the third answer to that was:

"After the attack, Themba Khosa came looking for the firearms used during the attack. He did not speak to us, we heard from IsInduna. He spoke to them"

Is that the part that you're referring to?

MR LOWIES: That's correct.

So Mr Nosenga, the impression created yesterday was that he only spoke to the Induna and that you did not see that.

MR NOSENGA: I said Themba Khosa came after the attack on Boipatong, he came for the firearms. A meeting was convened for everybody, but he was not speaking directly to us, he spoke directly to the Indunas, to say that everything that was stolen from Boipatong should be burnt before the police arrived because there would be police coming to search, police would be coming from Pretoria, not Vereeniging. That is what I remember as having been asked yesterday.

COMMITTEE DISCUSSES EVIDENCE

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chairman.

My question to you is, Sir, it appears that you were not present because he only had a meeting with the Indunas.

MR NOSENGA: No, I was there at the hostel. I was present when the meeting was held after the attack on Boipatong and a meeting was convened at the stadium.

MR LOWIES: If he had a meeting with the Indunas, you would not be present.

MR NOSENGA: He summoned all the residents, but in his speech, or should I say he directed his speech to the Indunas in the presence of the rest of the residents.

MR LOWIES: I put it to you that it's still contradictory to what you said yesterday, because yesterday - and my note is clear on this, he only had a meeting with the Indunas and they then in turn informed you about the situation.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that.

MR LOWIES: Regarding Michael Ramakau, you also mentioned his name yesterday - my mistake, Monday, as being part of the Kheswa gang, now today you denied that he was.

MR NOSENGA: You asked me about Kheswa's gang and I mentioned people like Hunter, Themba ...(indistinct). I did not mention Michael Ramakau, I did not say he was a member of Kheswa's gang.

MR LOWIES: To be fair to you, you mentioned him in the sense that he was part of the group who committed these drive-by shootings, therefore one can say that he was part of a gang. Seen in this light, do you still ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I did explain that there must have been a mistake made by myself when the statement was taken.

MR LOWIES: No, but you made the same mistake yesterday, that's the point - Monday. Why when it was taken and Monday?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember being asked that question.

MR LOWIES: So if you said so on Monday, it was also a mistake?

MR NOSENGA: What I'm saying is, I do not recall.

CHAIRPERSON: Could you indicate to us where ...

MR LOWIES: The question was relating to who the fellow attackers were, and then he mentioned, he started off with Hunter Ndlovo - I think Michael was mentioned second, Mr Chairman. You will also recall that there was an objection regarding a leading question when this was asked, but only after this was mentioned.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. My colleague has a note here which indicates that amongst the persons that you mentioned who were with you on the attack in Sebokeng, you mentioned Michael.

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that I may have mentioned him, but the person who was present then was Ntlantla Xinde.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. No, no, we understand that but - is the question whether he was making a, he made a mistake yesterday as well?

MR LOWIES: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Do you understand the question? You see you've told us that it was a mistake on your part when you spoke to the person who took the statement from you, to mention that Michael Ramakau was also present in the Sebokeng and Everton attacks, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what's being put to you is the following; when you told this Committee that Michael was present - I think this was during your evidence-in-chief, you're making a mistake as well.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's what I'm saying. I must have made a mistake, he was not present.

MR LOWIES: But it goes further. The very next question after this, the one that we've debated, was whether the people in the car also took part in the shootings, and your evidence was quite clear that you can remember that Michael Ramakau was present, but you cannot recall that Victor Kheswa was present. Sorry, may I retract?

Sorry, the question was whether the people in the car took part in the Boipatong massacre two days later and you said you can still very well remember Michael Ramakau, but you cannot recall whether Kheswa was part of that.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did say that. I do not remember Victor Kheswa being present at the Boipatong attack.

MR LOWIES: But the question relates to Michael Ramakau. It seems like you made the same mistake on two occasions to two different questions. And in you tendered to this question the name of Ramakau. What is your explanation?

MR NOSENGA: It must have been a mistake. Michael Ramakau was not present in the Sebokeng attack.

MR LOWIES: Where does Michael Ramakau reside?

MR NOSENGA: He resides at Small Farm.

MR LOWIES: Where did he reside in June 1992?

MR NOSENGA: At that time he lived at KwaMadala Hostel.

MR LOWIES: I want to put it to you that he did not reside there, Sir, and that is why you're trying to take him out of the fact, out of the gang who was - wait I'm still busy - why you're trying to take him out of the gang who did the drive-by shootings, because he was not a hostel dweller.

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not true, Michael Ramakau resided at the hostel, he was an IFP member. He left Small Farm for the hostel.

MR LOWIES: And now he's back in Boipatong, is that what you're saying?

MR LAX: He said he's back in Small Farm.

MR LOWIES: In Small Farm. It's my mistake.

MR NOSENGA: That person is late, he is deceased.

MR LOWIES: Where did he reside when he passed away?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I last knew the person to be residing at KwaMadala Hostel. I did not check where he was all the time.

MR LOWIES: But why did you then give the answer when I asked you about his residence, to say that he stayed in Small Farm?

MR NOSENGA: I was not always with Michael Ramakau, but I know that he was born at Small Farm. That is where his home was.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that where he resided before going to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright.

MR LOWIES: I want to put it to you, Sir, that you yourself did not reside in the hostel when these drive-by shootings occurred, just like Ramakau.

MR NOSENGA: That is not true. It is not true that I did not reside at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: You heard the evidence of some of the applicants, the other applicants. My question is, whose evidence did you hear? We know about Buthelezi, who else that you can recall?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that I do not know the names of the other co-applicants, but there were many people who gave evidence before the Committee.

MR LOWIES: Would you be able today to identify Buthelezi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Would you be able to identify all the applicants who gave evidence? Firstly, all the applicants who gave evidence in your absence and all the applicants who gave evidence after you arrived, today?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, let's just get to the point. The applicant came to the hearings, he may not have been sitting in the hall, but sitting in another room where he was watching the proceedings. Now what is the issue?

MR LOWIES: The issue is he may not know some of them and if he was there since '91, one would have expected him to do so. And it's part and parcel of our defence that he was not there as a hostel dweller before '91 ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Are you ...

MR LOWIES: ... after '91, during '91, sorry Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Well is it your instruction that everyone who was at the hostel knew one another?

MR LOWIES: ...(indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: But at least you expect Mr Nosenga to know everyone at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Well Chairman, my submission is the following; if they were in leadership positions, surely he would because he was a member of the IFP, on his version. You know because they stand out, I mean it's not like a normal child or whatever, they stand ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Well why don't you ask him about this, because when you ask him about everyone who gave evidence, some of those who gave evidence were not in leadership positions. That's why I'm saying let's get to the person you want to ask him about.

MR LOWIES: As you please, Chair. Could you just bear with me for a minute? With your permission, may I just canvass another aspect whilst we're looking for a certain document?

Mr Nosenga, was Mtwana Zulu present when you attacked the people in Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Mtwana Zulu was not present when we attacked the people at Sebokeng. He issued the command, but he was not present when the attack was carried out.

MR LOWIES: Can I summarise this? He was never present during any attack that you participated in? - to your knowledge.

CHAIRPERSON: That's not what he said. That's not what he's saying.

MR LOWIES: I'm asking, Chair, I'm not putting it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but you're saying you're summarising what he's saying.

MR LOWIES: Could I rephrase?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Can I ask you this. To your knowledge, was Mtwana Zulu ever present during an attack where you took part?

MR NOSENGA: With regards to the Sebokeng incident, he was not present, but the role that he played was that he issued the order. With regards to the Boipatong incident, I did see him.

MR LOWIES: And there were no other attacks where he was present, that you know of?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: Now that we've canvassed this specific statement with you, on your version who did you tell this to?

MR LAX: Can you just repeat the first part of your question, it somehow got cut off in my ears.

MR LOWIES: Sorry, Chair.

Now that we've canvassed the contents of this document, ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say finish?

MR LAX: Canvassed.

MR LOWIES: I may have said finished.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm just interested whether we're finished with this statement.

MR LAX: That's being hopeful.

MR LOWIES: Now that we've canvassed this document with you, who do you say did you give this information to contained in this document?

MR NOSENGA: I said a lot of people came to me and took statements from me, people like Mongezi, Brian. I do not know which statement you are referring to.

MR LOWIES: I'm referring to the one which we've just canvassed.

CHAIRPERSON: There is a statement which you did not sign.

MR NOSENGA: Is that the one?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, this is a statement where on your own you've just mentioned that it was a mistake of you to have mentioned Michael Ramakau. Do you remember the statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, now what counsel wants to find out, can you recall the person to whom you made this statement? If you can, say so, if you can't, say so.

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I did mention before that it was taken by Mongezi and that is the statement that is unsigned.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike.

CHAIRPERSON: You think that the unsigned statement is a statement that you made to Mongezi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it must be it. Yes, because it is unsigned.

CHAIRPERSON: You see because we're talking precisely about that statement.

MR NOSENGA: Yes. It was the statement taken at Medium C in Leeukop.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, alright. You again have the tendency of swallowing your last words, speak up.

MR NOSENGA: ...(no English interpretation)

CHAIRPERSON: And you say this is the statement you made to Mongezi in Medium C in Leeukop?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LAX: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Nosenga, I'm a bit puzzled here, because this statement says in itself in its first paragraph, that you're presently serving a sentence at Maximum B Prison in Leeuhof. So that's the one we're talking about, the one which in it says that you are at Maximum B in Leeuhof.

MR NOSENGA: No, I'm not incarcerated in Leeuhof. Presently I am in Sun City. I only came this side for the purposes of the hearing.

MR LAX: You're not understanding me, let me try again. You were asked about the statement which appears at pages 8, 9 and 10 and which starts in front of you there - and your lawyer can show you what I'm talking about, you've been asked a whole lot of questions about this statement and amongst other things it's the statement where you yourself, as the Chairperson has said, volunteered the information that the mention of Ramakau must have been a mistake that you made. Now you've just told us that this is the one that Mongezi took from you, because it's unsigned and it mentions Medium C, Leeukop. Do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do.

MR LAX: Now what I'm asking you is, this statement doesn't mention Medium C, Leeukop anywhere on it, so that's why I'm confused. Do you understand why I'm confused?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes, I do understand. Two people came to me to take statements, Mongezi and Mr Brian. The first statement was made at Leeukop. Mongezi is the one who took the statement from me. That was the first statement.

CHAIRPERSON: Well I think what my colleague wanted to clarify is that if this statement that we've been dealing with was taken in Leeukop, then as you have pointed out yourself in your evidence earlier on, it probably is a mistake in the statement when it says you are in Leeuhof. Is that ...

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: At the moment - you're not at Leeukop at the moment?

MR NOSENGA: No, I'm not in Leeukop.

CHAIRPERSON: Where are you?

MR NOSENGA: I am in a the small prison in Leeuhof, having been transferred from Sun City.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, have you been at Leeuhof since you began to attend these hearings?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I only came here on Saturday.

CHAIRPERSON: This last Saturday?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. You will recall that the Committee also said at the beginning of this year, in January, I think about the 18th I think it was, ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: This year? I started attending this hearing on the 3rd, on Monday.

CHAIRPERSON: The hearings started last year and we continued in January this year and you were present in January.

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What's that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was present here in January.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, when you were attending these hearings in January, were you being detained in Leeuhof?

MR NOSENGA: No, I was in Stoffberg.

CHAIRPERSON: In Stoffberg?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was in Stoffberg in January.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that a prison?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's a maximum prison.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that in Vereeniging?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I would say so.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR LOWIES: You had always been detained at a maximum prison, not so, except for those three days waiting to be transferred to Leeukop?

MR NOSENGA: At the moment I'm at the small prison in Leeuhof, but yes, it's true, I've always been detained in the maximum prisons.

MR LOWIES: And the only reason why you're detained here is for transport purposes and after this you will go back to the maximum, correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you come to these hearings last year?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, in January, but I was in Stoffberg.

CHAIRPERSON: I mean last year, in August.

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't recall because I think when the TRC sat for the first time, it sat at Sebokeng.

MS TANZER: If I may clarify? In August he was present here at the TRC, but he was not watching, he wasn't actually, he didn't have access to what was going on here, he was sitting in the police bus and in fact at that stage he didn't hear anything in the proceedings. Only in January was the first time he actually got access to the proceedings and heard the proceedings.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I thought so, yes. And that was just once, was it?

MS TANZER: That was - what do you mean once?

CHAIRPERSON: He was here for one day, was he?

MS TANZER: Yes, for one day.

CHAIRPERSON: That's when you - yes.

MR LOWIES: Do you agree with what your counsel said, that you were here in August once in a bus and that you did not attend the hearings here?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Because I can clearly recall your evidence yesterday, which was to the effect that when you were here you heard that you, or that there was a denial that the police were present at Boipatong and that as a result thereof you decided to make application.

CHAIRPERSON: No, Mr Lowies, with all due respect, ...(indistinct) with two different things. The occasion that Ms Tanzer is referring to is when he just came here once in August and only remained in the police vehicle, bus, as the case may be, where he did not come in either in this hall or sit elsewhere to watch the proceedings. That is what he is referring to.

MR LOWIES: Yes, precisely my point. I would like to explore this ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Explore what when - you want to find out whether he was watching the proceedings from the police vehicle?

MR LOWIES: I would like to know how it happened that he said "when he was here", because that was what bothered us yesterday. How it could be said that he was here if he didn't attend the meetings, and now we know something new, which we didn't know yesterday.

CHAIRPERSON: No. When he came to attend these hearings, when he began to attend these hearings he was not sitting in the hall, he was sitting in another area where he was watching, I gather, the proceedings on a TV monitor ... That is what he was referring to. That is when he saw them.

MR LOWIES: That's what he said at one stage, I agree.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: But he did also say when he was here last year he heard this. And I thought - sorry, maybe I misunderstand you, may I just get ...

When we talk about here, we're talking Iscor Club where we are sitting today?

MR LAX: No we're talking - they're talking about him arriving on the last day of the hearing at the Sebokeng College, not here. I beg your pardon, I'm getting just as confused as you.

MR LOWIES: If that is the case, Chairman, his evidence is clear that he heard "here", and that's what ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Put the question.

MR LOWIES: ... and that's what concerns me.

Mr Nosenga, when you gave evidence yesterday you were cross-examined about this quite a lot and one of the answers that you gave was; when you were here, referring to this place, you heard that there was a denial that the police were involved in the Boipatong massacre. Do you agree with this?

CHAIRPERSON: In fairness to him also mention to him that he also said that when he was watching television in prison he saw the hearing and heard that the people were not telling the truth, that he referred to the snake incident.

MR LOWIES: Chair, I don't think it would be fair to say that because that would be wrong. The way I have it is, the only thing that he heard in prison ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Well I am saying to you, also indicate that to him as well.

MR LOWIES: I will do that.

Mr Nosenga, let's just hear this. Did you hear in prison, when Mthembu gave evidence, that there was a denial of police complicity?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I heard him when I was in prison. I was watching television whilst in prison.

MR LOWIES: But the only aspect that was on TV was that he said:

"a snake gives birth to a snake"

He did not talk about police complicity on TV.

MR NOSENGA: I did say that, Sir, yesterday.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm puzzled now. Are you putting it as a fact to this witness that the only footage that was shown on TV was that incident where he, the only incident that was shown on TV, was that relating to the snake and nothing else?

MR LOWIES: I'm putting to him that on that footage there was nothing said about the absence of police complicity.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that a fact?

MR LOWIES: Those are my instructions. But let's hear what he says.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I mean ...

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

CHAIRPERSON: ... it isn't a fact, because if it is a fact we can establish that by getting the SABC ...(intervention)

MR LOWIES: I will rephrase the question. I follow.

CHAIRPERSON: ... to provide us with that.

MR LOWIES: Sorry, Chair, I follow. I will rephrase.

Mr Nosenga, did you also hear when the evidence of Victor was on TV, that there was an absence of police complicity, that that was denied that the police were present in other words?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I am saying, I heard him saying:

"a snake gives birth to another snake"

And these were - Sir, I said Victor said, Victor kills a snake and if a snake gives birth to another snake he will kill the snakes. And he was also asked, he continued to say:

"When Shaka went out on a battle he would come back with a loot like live cattle etc"

MR LOWIES: Yes, but answer the question. The question is, did you hear that he denied police complicity on TV, yes or no?

MR NOSENGA: I said - I am saying there were others who denied the complicity of the police, but I specifically heard Victor Mthembu when he spoke about the snake.

MR LOWIES: So you did not hear Victor speak about the absence or the presence of policemen in the attack, yes or no? - on TV, nowhere else.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying, during the news on SABC 1 you don't get the whole coverage, you just get pieces of information. He spoke about being a Zulu and he also gave an anecdote on the battles that Shaka got engaged in, where he brought home live livestock after the battle.

MR LOWIES: Yes, and therefore nothing was said by him regarding the police, whether they were there or not. That's a fact, not so?

MR NOSENGA: I said I have already indicated my position, I don't know what else to say. I don't know what to say now.

MR LOWIES: The answer is a simple yes or no. Did Victor speak about police complicity? - nothing else. Yes, he did, no, he didn't. That is the question. - on TV.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I cannot answer that question because I cannot say whether he spoke about the police or not, but yes, there are people who came forward seeking amnesty, people who spoke about the complicity of the police.

MR LOWIES: Now once we know that you can't say whether he said that, your knowledge is therefore not the following, and that is Victor did mention the absence of police complicity, on TV, because you do not know.

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now you have to explain what you said yesterday, because you said you heard here that they were lying when they said the police were not involved. Why did you say that?

MR NOSENGA: I said some of them said the police were not involved. I don't know what you're trying to say. I think you're trying to say I'm lying. I was only watching this on television.

MR LOWIES: No, listen to the question. We're finished with TV now. It's a simple question. And you repeated this, you said it at least four times, and that is that you heard here that they were lying about police complicity. What did you mean by that? When did you hear this?

MR NOSENGA: I was not in this hall, I was in another room, not in this hall. I was in another room where I was watching the proceedings on a monitor.

MR LOWIES: But it was here?

MR NOSENGA: ...(no English interpretation)

MR LOWIES: There's no interpretation.

MR NOSENGA: Not in this present venue, in another room on the premises where I was watching the proceedings on a monitor.

MR LOWIES: I see. And you went further, when questioned on Monday by the Chairman, to state that that prompted you to bring your application for amnesty.

MR NOSENGA: No, I am saying I was affected. I am saying I was affected. I was involved actually in the Boipatong incident.

MR LOWIES: Yes, that you also said, but forget about that, we're now dealing with your motivation. You specifically said, yesterday also, but especially on Monday, that when you heard these lies that made you decide to bring your application, the lies pertaining to the police who were present.

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I am saying I was involved. I heard that the people were not telling the truth before the Commission. You see the people of Boipatong lost their children and people died, that's what I said. That's the reason why I came to the TRC to seek amnesty, to say what I know.

MR LOWIES: And also because they were lying when they denied complicity? That's the question, still the question.

MR NOSENGA: The truth is not coming out here, Sir. We cannot conceal the truth before the TRC. People should tell the truth so that they can be pardoned. They should tell the truth about what happened on the 17th of June 1992, at Boipatong. They should tell the truth about the shooting and the killing of people in the houses and the streets. There is one child who is confined to a wheelchair right now, she has no future.

MR LOWIES: I'm talking about your motivation, Sir ....(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, this was canvassed yesterday and the day before yesterday. If you have a specific point to make in this regard which you haven't made, put it to the witness.

MR LOWIES: I want to put it to you that because - I will retract. Can you hear me?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now I want to put it to you that it was only then, when you were here in August, when you heard on a separate monitor that there were allegations that the police were not present, that you decided to apply for the first time for the Boipatong massacre, for amnesty regarding the Boipatong massacre.

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know what you are saying.

MR LOWIES: And further, Sir, if it is true - just to prove to you that this is the situation, if you have a look at page 7 of Exhibit R, it is dated 25 September '96. That's when the statement was taken. You have no reason to doubt that, correct?

MR LAX: Sorry, Mr Lowies, you keep doing this and it gets very, very confusing. You keep saying "that's when the statement was taken" and you keep referring to this Form 1 as a statement. It's not a statement, it's an application form for amnesty. If you would separate out, maybe he'd begin to get the picture a bit better.

MR LOWIES: I hear you and I will do so.

Now when I refer to page 7, I mean the application, the document, the one that is now being shown to you by Ms Tanzer. If you have a look at that, do you have any reason to doubt that it is dated, and that this document was completed 25 September '96, when Mongezi was there?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say I'm sure. Yes, it is possible.

MR LOWIES: If you look further, at page 10 of Exhibit R, then it appears that this document must have been intended to be signed by you in June '96. - the very last page. Now how is this possible, that you complete the form and you have a discussion with Mongezi in September, yet he intends you to sign this document in June, which is three months before? That is funny.

MS TANZER: I object. In fairness to the witness, I mean to the applicant, he can't answer what Mongezi did or intended to do or didn't intend to do. As he said he's never seen the statement.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what counsel wants to find out - and just listen carefully, Mr Nosenga, and if you don't understand the question let me know, I will repeat the question to you in Zulu. The application for amnesty which you've signed is dated the 25th of September 1996, and it indicates that it was signed at Leeukop Medium C Prison.

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And then comes the unsigned affidavit, which you have told us was probably drafted from a statement that you made to Mr Mongezi. That unsigned statement indicates that it was to be signed in June of 1996, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: ...(no English interpretation)

CHAIRPERSON: Because there is a date June 1996 in it, and the exact date in June was still to be filled in and you were still supposed to sign it, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: ...(no English interpretation)

MR LOWIES: Sorry Chair, there's no interpretation. I think it's because he doesn't speak in the mike. I didn't get the answer to that one.

CHAIRPERSON: He said he understands what I'm saying.

INTERPRETER: He understands.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words, your affidavit and the statement which gave rise to the unsigned affidavit, were all prepared some time in June, before you made your application for amnesty, which is dated September 1996. Do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What's the question?

MR LOWIES: Therefore, Sir, it appears on the face of these documents, that your unsigned affidavit was backdated and it was not taken in September. It could not have been taken in September, on the face of the documents.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, Sir.

MR SIBANYONI: Excuse me, Mr Lowies, if you look on page 1 of the statement, there is a date on which this application form was apparently faxed, and the date is the 15th February 1996.

MR LOWIES: No, but I think it was an empty application form. An empty application form was faxed to the place, to be completed. So it arrives at wherever this is, as an empty form. It doesn't mean that it was completed at that stage.

MR SIBANYONI: And also there is a date up there, 23rd September 1996.

MR LOWIES: Yes.

MR SIBANYONI: The question I want to ask, is it perhaps not possible that this form was completed and there were some outstanding, either information, or it was not attested before the Commissioner of Oaths and then it gets returned by the TRC to say: "Please have it attested before the Commissioner of Oaths". I'm asking that as a possibility.

MR LOWIES: I'll investigate that, I can't give an answer. Because Chair, I hear what you say but you see all these - with respect, and if I might bring this point us now, that is why there is a substantial application to have this matter fully investigated. There are so many unanswered questions which we do not know and we haven't got access to those documents.

CHAIRPERSON: I told you repeatedly that raise those matters up with the TRC.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chair, I'll do so.

CHAIRPERSON: We are at these hearings, we don't have those documents here. And only if you have difficulty in getting those documents, then come back to me.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: I'll make sure that you get those documents.

MR LOWIES: Thank you.

Now Sir, if we turn to page 11, this is a second application for amnesty by yourself - wait, before we proceed to page 11, I'd just like to make the following point as well and give you the opportunity to answer. It appears to me further, Sir, that if one has a look at the discrepancy in the dates which I have indicated to you, and if one has a look at your evidence yesterday, today and Monday, that one of the reasons that prompted you, that motivated you to bring an application for amnesty was only when you heard the denial of police complicity, clearly indicates that this document was backdated. And I'm talking about you unsigned affidavit. If you read all those together.

CHAIRPERSON: You know that's a matter for argument. I'm not too sure that the applicant can ...(intervention)

MR LOWIES: I will argue it later. I agree with you, Chair, sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: ... can explain that, yes.

MR LOWIES: If I have interrupted, I'm sorry, I just wanted to ... I apologise.

Now just one aspect regarding page 11, before we start with that. Why was it necessary for you to file a second application?

CHAIRPERSON: Now are you on the second application, starting at page 11?

MR LOWIES: Page 11.

CHAIRPERSON: So we're finished with the affidavit?

MR LOWIES: We have.

Mr Nosenga, page 11. There is a second application for amnesty on page 11, which has been canvassed with you before.

CHAIRPERSON: Just refresh my memory, did he say that what occurs at page 13 is his signature?

MR LOWIES: He denies it.

CHAIRPERSON: He denies it, yes.

MR LOWIES: Now, Mr Nosenga, I'm going to put the contents of this application to you, on page 11 and further. The form has now been shown to you by Ms Tanzer - and with your permission, Chair, may she page through the pages, pages 11 up until 13 and up until the place where his name is - now you see that is now being shown to you, do you deny that this document was signed by you?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot see this properly.

MR LOWIES: Sorry yes, let me give you a better one. There's a better copy available, Sir. We had a problem yesterday as well.

MR NOSENGA: I can see the signature, it is possible that I signed here.

MR LOWIES: Let's examine the contents ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, just tell us, is that your signature or don't you know who signed there?

MR NOSENGA: I did state that, I did indicate where my signature was appended. I do not think that was mine. I would just like to know where that statement was taken.

CHAIRPERSON: No, we will come to the, we will probably come to the statement, but all we want to find out is, did you sign the document there. You see on its face this documents indicates again that it was signed at Leeukop Prison I think, yes.

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that I signed it at Leeukop. I would like to know who took this statement because there was one that was signed and one that was unsigned. Was this statement also taken at Leeukop?

CHAIRPERSON: Well on its face that is what it indicates. But all I want to find out at this stage is, is the signature above the name "Deponent" at page 13, your signature.

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not my handwriting.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR LOWIES: I'm indebted to you, Chair.

Now Mr Nosenga, I'm going to put the contents thereof to you and find out whether you agree with the correctness thereof. Unfortunately I'll have to ask you to turn to page 13 again, because it appears from this that a certain Peter Daniel Magesa was the Commissioner of Oaths who attested to this ...

MR LAX: On the face of it, it says Magesa Daniel Peter.

MR LOWIES: It could be.

MR LAX: Whichever way around, I don't know.

MR LOWIES: I will rephrase it as such, that a certain Magesa Daniel Peter - ja, Peter could be a surname, attested to this. Do you know this person, either by the name of Magesa Daniel Peter, or Peter Daniel Magesa or Magesa or Peter?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not, I'm hearing it for the first time.

MR LOWIES: Now it states here that your date of birth is the 4th of June 1973, it can't be. Sorry, Chair, to assist you, this is page 11, paragraph 5.

MR NOSENGA: I have stated before that I do not know when I was born.

MR LOWIES: And it also states here in paragraph 3, that you reside at Newman, spelt N-E-W-M-A-N, Sebokeng, Everton, Sebokeng.

MR NOSENGA: I resided at 671, Newman Road in Everton.

MR LOWIES: Now in this statement you were requested, in paragraph 9, to supply particulars of any acts or omissions which was committed in the furtherance of the political objective, and you were requested to supply detail. You supplied the following detail:

"We were sent by Baba Mtwana Zulu, member of the IFP, to go and assassinate ANC members"

Now my question is, do you know a person by the name of Baba Mtwana Zulu? - Baby. It's not clear.

MR LAX: He's been calling you Baba all day.

MR LOWIES: ...(indistinct) Baba. I'm sorry, Chair. It makes sense to me now. I retract the question.

Now can you recall that on a second occasion you filled in or you were required to give particulars to a person to fill in a form and that you supplied these particulars?

MR NOSENGA: I did say, Sir, that I am uneducated, I could not have filled in a form.

MR LOWIES: However, is it not true that if you have a look at page 11, paragraph 9.A.2, that where it is stated:

"I do not remember the date and month, but it was in 1993, early"

... that you could not have committed anything wrong there, on your version, as you have given it to the hearing here.

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat the question.

MR LOWIES: It is clear from the date, 1993, that on your version here you could not have committed anything in 1993, because you say everything happened in 1992.

MS TANZER: With respect, Chair, he has claimed that, he hasn't claimed ownership to this document or having signed this document or given in formation relating to this document, so by referring to this as his information is misleading the Chair and himself, the applicant.

MR LOWIES: But it's not put to him that he supplied ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: But I think in questioning him you've got to bear in mind that ...(intervention)

MR LOWIES: I will rephrase it, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: ... that the information that may be here may coincide with what happened, but he doesn't say that. He denies this application.

MR LOWIES: I see. To put it differently, did you tell anybody that you committed acts at Sebokeng, Zone 12, in 1993? (2) and (3) read together, Chair.

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember well.

MR LOWIES: Did you tell anybody as indicated on page 12, paragraph 4, that the nature and particulars that you supplied was to kill supporters of the ANC?

MR NOSENGA: What incident are you referring to, the Sebokeng or the Boipatong incident?

MR LOWIES: On the fact of this document it refers to Zone 12, Sebokeng.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did state that Mtwana ordered us to kill ANC comrades in Sebokeng.

MR LOWIES: Did you state to anybody that quite a number of people died in the incident at Sebokeng, Zone 12?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did say so.

MR LOWIES: Very important too is the next paragraph:

"I do not know the names of the victims, I only saw photos"

Now the photos is important, the fact that you saw photos. Did you mention to anybody that you're not sure who the victims are and that you only know through photos that you killed at Sebokeng, Zone 12?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, I do not know the identity of the people who were killed, I just saw the photos which were shown to me.

MR LOWIES: Yes, but to whom did you say this? The important thing is not whether you said it, at this stage now, the question is to whom did you say it?

"... I only saw photos"

Can you recall?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall.

MR LOWIES: Then you said to this person who completed the form, on the face of it of course, is that:

"Through investigation I'm confident that there's a way to locate the victims' addresses"

Did you say this to anybody when they requested you to fill in a form?

MR NOSENGA: I do not understand you properly, can you repeat that?

MR LOWIES: Were you requested by anybody to give them information that may assist them in identifying the victims and in so doing stated to them the following, words to that effect of course:

"Through investigation I'm confident that there's a way to locate the victims' addresses"

MR NOSENGA: Do you mean after I'd been convicted?

MR LOWIES: Well on the face of what I've read to you. Sorry, you were already convicted at that stage.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did mention that.

MR LOWIES: Can you recall to whom you mentioned this?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall.

MR LOWIES: Did you say to anybody when requested to state political objectives sought to be achieved, that the objectives were the following:

"The objectives to achieve was to fight the communists and we were promised monies in every mission we were ordered"

I think that's what it meant, ordered.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about money. I was questioned on the motive for attacking ANC members and I responded that I got my orders from the IFP, but I never referred to money. I never received any monies from the IFP.

MR LOWIES: So this is completely wrong, the contents?

MR NOSENGA: That is wrong.

MR LOWIES: And then, were you requested by anybody to state justification for regarding any acts or commissions, and more specifically the ones pertaining to Sebokeng, Zone 12, and in so doing stated the following:

"Because I was doing a job which was under IFP instructions, the person who gave me instructions is an IFP member and I am a supporter"

Can you recall such a response to any person?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was questioned on where I got the command from to shoot the people at Sebokeng and I responded that I had got that command from Mtwana Zulu, as member of the IFP.

MR LOWIES: Now this is not here in this document, but I'll leave it at that. Page 13, you were requested to state:

"Did you benefit in any way financially or otherwise?"

And you say, on the face of this document you said:

"Yes, he gave me something, money or grocery" - sometimes.

I repeat the response, it may not be clear.

"Yes, he gave me sometimes or grocery"

Did you respond ...(intervention)

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about money. I never received money.

MR LOWIES: This is completely wrong?

MR NOSENGA: That is not true. I would never received any money from the IFP.

MR LOWIES: Could you just bear with me please, Chairman.

Now the document goes further to state that Mtwana Zulu gave you orders from the Madala Hostel in Sebokeng and of importance here is the following; it appears to me then that the person who must have given you something like the money or the groceries was Mtwana Zulu. My question to you is the following, did Mtwana Zulu ever ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, where do you get that from?

MR LOWIES: If you read it in conjunction with paragraph (c).

CHAIRPERSON: The man said that this is not his statement.

MR LOWIES: I'll rephrase the question. Did Mr Zulu ever give you money or groceries?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about money, Sir, I did mention that. I did say I don't know anything about money.

MR LOWIES: No, but I'm talking about Mr Zulu now, Mr Mtwana Zulu.

MR NOSENGA: I do understand that. I say I was not given any money to go and kill people. I was doing everything in the name of the IFP, I was not doing it on my own.

MR LOWIES: Not for the purposes of killing anybody or for attacking people, just in general, did he Prince give you money ever?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: Did he ever, for whatever purpose, give you groceries?

MR NOSENGA: I have said that, no.

MR LOWIES: Now Mr Nosenga, if I have to ask you this then, is it your version that this application which you didn't sign but is in your name, which was received by the TRC on the 10/5/97, is not yours? It was not filed with your consent?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not sign this statement, I don't know. I did not sign this statement.

MR LOWIES: I'd like you to turn to page 15 please. You have another application ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Just before - when you were in prison were you ever assisted by anyone to apply for amnesty, that is apart from Mr Mongezi? - fellow prisoners or prison warders?

MR NOSENGA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: So can we take it then that the only application, according to you and what you've said now, for amnesty was the one where Mongezi assisted you?

MR NOSENGA: No, you see Mongezi did not come to represent me at the TRC, no.

MR LOWIES: We're not talking about that, we're talking about assisting you in completing a form, applying for amnesty, a form such as the one that has now been indicated to you by your legal ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Just as a matter of interest, page 15 has been pointed out to him and that's not an application for amnesty, but anyway.

MR LOWIES: I'm sorry. Could she just with your permission point out pages 11 to 13?

CHAIRPERSON: He said though that apart from Mr Mongezi no-one ...

MR LOWIES: I retract the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Do you know anything about the document on page 15? Did you request anybody, firstly, to complete a document similar to this one?

MS TANZER: Chair, in fairness to the applicant, he can't really read. I don't think he can read this document, so to ask him that question won't get the proper answer.

MR LOWIES: But he may still be able to tell us. - he may not be.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps you should ask him whether that's his signature.

MR LOWIES: Is it your signature that appears on page 15, at the bottom thereof?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: Did you request anybody, whilst at the Leeuhof Prison, to apply for amnesty on your behalf - to apply for a release ...(intervention)

MS CAMBANIS: Indemnity.

MR LOWIES: ... indemnity.

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall.

MR LOWIES: Now on page 16 there's a document which you have recognised yesterday or the day before, it's a letter written on your behalf you said. On page 17 there's a signature, is it yours? - at the bottom thereof.

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall whether it's myself who signed here.

CHAIRPERSON: We understand, Mr Nosenga, that you may have signed a number of documents and we do not expect you to tell us if you can't remember, what documents you signed, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

CHAIRPERSON: But what we do expect you to tell us is whether the signature at page 17 is your signature.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that's my name, that's Matanzima. Matanzima is my name, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: But did you sign there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it's possible I signed here because this is my name.

MR LAX: Could I just ask something, Mr Lowies?

Can you remember whether before the Truth Commission even existed, during the time when the political parties were negotiating, whether you ever applied to some government department to be released from prison because what you were, what you had done was an act of a political nature?

MR NOSENGA: I think I applied for indemnity.

MR LAX: And do you remember writing a letter about what happened and what you had done in connection with that indemnity? I'm not saying you personally wrote it, somebody must have written it for you.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LAX: And what was the outcome of that application?

MR NOSENGA: I did not get any response until my lawyer showed this to me. There was no result. I did not get any response.

MR LAX: You see the document on page 14 is actually a letter from the Office for Indemnity that was processing these applications, addressed to you while you were at Leeukop Prison and what it says basically is that your application can't be finalised and that it gives reasons why. It was sent on the 11th of September 1996. In fact it's dated the 27th of July '95, I beg your pardon, and it was purportedly received by someone who signed for it with your name, in August 1996, 19th of August 1996.

So do you remember ever getting a letter saying look, your application for indemnity can't proceed just yet, but in due course something will happen?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not recall.

MR LAX: But you do remember writing some letter attached to the form about it, or having a letter written or a statement or something like that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes, I think I remember.

MR LAX: Thanks, Chairperson.

ADV SIGODI: When this letter was written, the letter on page 16, the letter for the indemnity in support of the indemnity application, were you assisted by someone in writing this letter?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, even though I cannot recall.

ADV SIGODI: I did not get the answer, sorry.

MR NOSENGA: The person who assisted me was a fellow inmate. I can't recall really what happened.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, Chairman.

Mr Nosenga, we've established that the document on pages 18, 19, 20 until 22, you say these are your signatures appearing on the different pages, starting at page 18.

CHAIRPERSON: Are we through with ...

MR LOWIES: Yes, Chairman, the previous documents. I'm through with them, I have no questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, you see the letter that is at page 60, which you say that a fellow inmate assisted you in writing.

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I would direct your attention to the second paragraph, the second sentence thereof, which begins:

"... and we have gone to Sebokeng, Zone 13. By that time it was on (is it) January 8, 1991 and it was about 5H30 p.m. ..."

....(intervention)

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I think it's May or June, not January.

CHAIRPERSON:

"... and we have shoot, killing people there"

Did any incident occur in Zone 13 in 1991, in January?

MR NOSENGA: No, Sir, this thing happened in June 1992 on the 15th. I'm talking about the Zone 12 incident.

CHAIRPERSON: So would this be a mistake?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that can be a mistake because the incident happened in 1992, on the 15th of June.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. And then the next paragraph, it says:

"And then again in 1991.01.08, we have gone to shoot at Everton at library and we've shoot people, a Small Farm(?). We have shoot people inside a taxi. It was about 5H45 and 6H00 p.m."

Is that date also incorrect?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about that date. I don't know anything about the time.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I think it says 1991, either January 1991, on the 8th of January 1991 or on the 1st of August 1991.

MR NOSENGA: No, Sir, this thing happened on the 15th of June 1992, including the one of the Small Farm, the taxi incident. That happened on the 15th of June as well.

CHAIRPERSON: And then the last sentence, the next paragraph, it simply begins with:

"1992 I was arrested on February at Parys and they transferred me to Vanderbijlpark."

When were you arrested in Parys?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall, Sir, because they arrested me in connection with a vehicle. Shaka came to fetch me actually.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that in 1992?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't want to tell a lie, I do not recall.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that in February?

MR NOSENGA: I think it was after the Sebokeng incident. It was in 1992, because the Sebokeng incident happened on the 15th of June 1992. I therefore cannot recall exactly when I was arrested in Parys. They left me or they picked me up and they took the Vereeniging Police Station.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the statement which says:

"1992 I was arrested on February in Parys"

... is that correct or incorrect?

MR NOSENGA: I think there must have been a misunderstanding between myself and the person who was taking the statement.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but that's incorrect?

MR NOSENGA: No, no, do you meant that I was arrested in 1992?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall when I was arrested, because I think I remember it was after the Sebokeng incident when I was arrested in Parys.

CHAIRPERSON: The last paragraph on page 17:

"And on the 14/02/95 I was convicted for a period of 14 years imprisonment"

Is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. I was sentenced on the 14th of February 1996, sentenced to 14 years.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja.

MR LAX: Sorry, the interpreter has just said 1996, the document says '95. I'm just not clear, because the witness is agreeing with this, but I'm just not clear what's going on. Was there maybe a problem with the interpretation?

MR NOSENGA: I was sentenced in 1995, on the 14th. I was sentenced to 14 years.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Yes, Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: Chair, would this be - I want to step over to page 18 and I think this could be an appropriate time to take the adjournment. It's 30 seconds to four.

CHAIRPERSON: The inmate that assisted you in taking down the statement, what language did you speak to him?

MR NOSENGA: I spoke in IsiZulu and he spoke Sesotho. Many inmates at Leeuhof speak Sesotho.

CHAIRPERSON: You spoke to him in Zulu and he spoke to you in Sotho?

MR NOSENGA: That is so.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. We'll adjourn and reconvene at 9 o'clock tomorrow morning.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

06-05-1999: Day 4

Application No: Am2778/96

Matter: Boipatong Massacre

ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: I think you should try and expedite your cross-examination. Can you tell this man on the witness stand definitely, yes.

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (s.u.o)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Lowies?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LOWIES: (cont)

Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Nosenga, on your version, why was it that Mr Keswa, Victor Keswa managed to be released every time he was arrested?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know what to say, I did indicate to you that he did not spend a long time in prison.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, you must please answer the question. The question is what is your opinion why did he manage ...

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, I think his opinion is irrelevant. Why is his opinion relevant? Because all he told us that as far as he knows, he didn't spend much time in jail.

MR LOWIES: I will rephrase that. Is it your version that he was in collusion with the government and that that is the reason why he was able to be released every time?

MR NOSENGA: I said he was working with the Police here with the Vaal, I don't know what to say any more.

MR LOWIES: So according to you if he worked together with the Police, they will be able to help you to be released, instead of going to jail for long periods of time?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying the Police did not release me, I was sentenced for the Sebokeng offence, I am still in prison but Victor Keswa, (indistinct) did not spend a long time in prison. I am still in prison.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, isn't it true that you handed yourself over to the Police voluntarily?

MR NOSENGA: I did indicate that yesterday, I did not volunteer myself to the Police, I was arrested by the Police at Parys and they took me to Vereeniging.

MR LOWIES: And you, Mr Nosenga, had a reason to confess to the drive-by shootings, the reason being you were afraid of your life?

MR NOSENGA: I was beaten up, I was being beaten up by the Police, they applied some electric shocks on me.

MR LOWIES: Is it correct that you could not return to your place of birth because you had problems with the comrades?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that I could not have gone back to Everton. I had a quarrel with the ANC members.

MR LOWIES: Now, Hunter Ndlovu, is he still alive?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, I am in prison, I have no idea whether he is still alive or not.

MR LOWIES: At the time when you handed yourself over, was he still alive?

CHAIRPERSON: He has repeatedly said he didn't hand himself over to the Police.

MR LOWIES: I rephrase.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: At the time when you were arrested, was he still alive?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he was still alive.

MR LOWIES: Did he participate in any drive-by shootings that you know of?

MR NOSENGA: I did say he participated in the drive-by shootings.

MR LOWIES: Sorry Chair, I don't have a signal, I don't hear the translation. Can I maybe get another ...

MR LAX: This little box right here up on the stand, is the transmitter, so if you could point these two glass or crystal things towards it, that will give you a better signal.

MR LOWIES: I am indebted. Could that answer be repeated please Chair?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was with Hunter Ndlovu when people were shot at Sebokeng.

MR LOWIES: Do you know whether Darkie Chonco had any part in the drive-by shootings?

MR NOSENGA: Darkie was not present when people were shot in Sebokeng. Darkie Chonco was not there.

MR LOWIES: Jack Mbhele, do you know whether he had any part in the drive-by shootings whether it be with you or with anybody else? Do you know Mr Mbhele? Jack Mbhele?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not get him quite well, I don't know him. Maybe I have forgotten him.

MR LOWIES: Do you know Dondo Mbhele?

MR NOSENGA: I know Dondo, but he was not there. He was at Boipatong at the time.

MR LOWIES: Do you know of your knowledge if he was part of a drive-by shooting? Did he take part in a drive-by shooting with anybody else where you were not present?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying Dondo was not present when we shot people at Sebokeng. I don't know what to say any more.

MR LOWIES: Now when you were at the kwaMadala hostel, there was an aluminium wall, or there is still today an aluminium or an iron wall around the whole hostel, do you know of this wall?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall, I don't want to tell a lie. No, I don't want to tell a lie.

MR LOWIES: But you have been residing there since 1991 and you do not know about this wall?

MR NOSENGA: I was not there for looking precisely at the walls, I don't know what you are trying to say. Are you trying to say that I should know the wall?

MR LOWIES: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I do not recall the wall. I did not go to the hostel to look at each and every corner of the hostel. I had fled from the township, I was not there for the walls. I had fled from the township.

MR LOWIES: Would you be able to show us the room which you occupied in the kwaMadala hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I said I occupied several rooms at the hostel. I don't know how I can show you the rooms, but if you can take me there, definitely I will.

MR LOWIES: So you will be able to show us the rooms that you occupied, all of them?

MR NOSENGA: If I still remember, yes. If I don't, I will not be in the position.

MR LOWIES: Now regarding the allegations against you that you were a spy, who made these allegations against you at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that. That is news to me, I only heard about it here at the TRC. They have been talking about this spy thing, I don't know anything about it. These people did not give you a correct statement.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, I would like you to think clearly. Was there never ever in your life, allegations against you that you were spying on the people of kwaMadala, never, ever?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about that. They are saying I was an ANC spy. If that is the case, I would not have survived my stay at the hostel. I would have done something myself to kill them too, if I was a spy of the ANC, so that is nonsense.

MR LOWIES: According to you, you have no knowledge of any accusations levelled against you by the IFP for being a spy, you only heard it here at the hearing?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is nonsense. I only heard about it here at the hearing and Buthelezi denied.

CHAIRPERSON: Just listen to the question and just answer the question. This hearings will go much faster if you listen to the question and just answer the question. What you are being asked is has anyone ever accused you of being a spy?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything.

MR LOWIES: Were the people not suspicious of you because of your ANC background?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: Didn't it take some doing and some assistance by Mtwana Zulu before you were fully accepted in the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No. I don't know about that.

MR LOWIES: Because your statement on page 18, Exhibit R, paragraph 2, the third sentence reads as follows, I maybe should start at the second sentence with your permission Chair -

"... I was told that ANC killed IFP members, so we needed to defend ourselves. At first they were suspicious of me because of my ANC background, but later they accepted me."

You were referring here to the people in the hostel. So you say this is completely untrue?

MR NOSENGA: I said I arrived at the hostel in 1991.

CHAIRPERSON: That is not the question that you are being asked. What you are being asked, you are being asked about the statement which appears in this affidavit, in this sworn statement which says this is now when you are describing your arrival at the hostel, do you understand that, in 1991 as you told us? You say -

"... at first they were suspicious of me because of my ANC background, but later accepted me ...",

do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: I said ...

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand what I have just read back to you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do understand that.

CHAIRPERSON: What is your answer, what do you say to that, is it true?

MR NOSENGA: That is not true, I did explain how I came to be at the hostel from the township. They did not trust me at the beginning, but later on they did. When I went to the hostel, they did not trust me at first, but later on they accepted me.

CHAIRPERSON: Did they tell you why they didn't trust you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they did. They said some people come to the hostel for information, so they wanted to make sure, they wanted to be certain of the person before the person could be accepted.

CHAIRPERSON: Did they tell you that they suspect that you are there to look for information?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that. They just told me that they did not trust me.

CHAIRPERSON: But they did not specifically accuse you of being there to look for information?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know about that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, all they said is simply that they don't trust people who come there, because sometimes they come to look for information?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LOWIES: There was nothing said that you had an ANC background?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: What did you have to do to convince them of your good faith, that you are not a spy or that you can be accepted by them? How did it change?

MR NOSENGA: I did explain. I wore an Inkatha T-shirt and went to Vereeniging. People from the township do their shopping in town.

MR LOWIES: That all that you did, to gain, to get their trust?

MR NOSENGA: And the shooting of the people of Everton as well as Sebokeng.

MR LOWIES: So do you say that your participation in the shooting of the people at Everton and Sebokeng, made them realise that you can be trusted?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because I managed to go and shoot people from my own township where I was born. I am from Everton and I went there to shoot these people.

MR LOWIES: But sir, you were only involved in shootings in 1992, two days prior to Boipatong? So did they not trust you from 1991 when you joined there up until two days before the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: I did indicate that to be trusted, you had to put on an IFP T-shirt so that the people around the Vaal should know that you are an IFP member, these people were doing their shopping in town.

MR LOWIES: I am talking about your version that one of the aspects that made them comfortable with you, which made them trust you, was the fact that you shot people. Now that only occurred two days prior to the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: I shot people when I arrived, or should I say when I was at the hostel, on the 15th, that is at Sebokeng as well as at Everton, that was in 1992.

MR LOWIES: When you arrived at the hostel, I don't understand? What did you say?

MR LAX: He corrected, he used the word "arrive", but it wasn't translated because he corrected what he was saying, so what he actually said was that he shot people on the 15th.

MR LOWIES: So you did not shoot people when you arrived at the hostel for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not shoot people, I do not want to commit myself to that.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, regarding the going of you to Ulundi, did you do so out of your own free will?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Did you go, we have heard that you went with Vanana Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, and Gatchene too.

MR LOWIES: How long after the Boipatong shooting was this meeting in Ulundi?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know. I don't want to tell a lie.

MR LOWIES: Would you agree with a month more or less after this?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't know sir.

MR LOWIES: Were you always in the company of Vanana Zulu and Chonco there at the - Darkie - there at Ulundi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, and other induna's.

MR LOWIES: Was it not said there at the meeting Mr Nosenga, that you were a spy and that you came there to get the information for the ANC?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: I want to put the following to you Mr Nosenga, we are in the process of obtaining the records of that meeting and the following happened there according to my instructions: Vanana Zulu informed the whole meeting when they had to give feedbacks regarding their regions, that you were a planted ANC spy?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that.

MR LOWIES: That you were requested inter alia to obtain registration numbers of vehicles of IFP members at kwaMadala hostel, of leaders there?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that. I am not educated, how could I have taken down registration numbers of vehicles?

MR LOWIES: And that you were threatened to do so, if you did not do so in other words, you would have been sjamboked?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know that.

MR LOWIES: That was said at a public meeting and it was recorded. Do you deny any knowledge of anything similar to that happening?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I don't know that.

MR LOWIES: It was also recorded Mr Nosenga, that you only arrived at the hostel approximately two days prior, the Tuesday before the meeting, which was in July, more or less if I work it out, the 14th of July, but I will get the precise date later, the fact is definitely after the Boipatong massacre? That was recorded?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know what they are saying.

MR LOWIES: It was also recorded Mr Nosenga, that you arrived there out of your own free will, at the meeting.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: And if it happened, you would have known about it of course?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: That is why I put it to you Mr Nosenga, you have been planted in this hearing, you were not an inhabitant in the kwaMadala hostel at the time of the Boipatong massacre.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know what you are talking about.

MR LOWIES: I put it to you that that is why initially you did not also, in the first application which you say Mkhize completed, refer to the Boipatong massacre, you only referred to incidents happening pertaining to drive-by shootings in the application itself.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know what you are talking about sir.

MR LOWIES: That being the case Mr Nosenga, my instructions are to put to you that the unsigned affidavit has been laundered through the TRC system.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: You are a plot.

MR NOSENGA: Please reveal your source to me, who told you that?

MR LOWIES: What is your answer, these are serious allegations, what is your answer?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, would you describe yourself as somebody who was under the protection of Prince Vanana Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: Do you deny that he looked after you, that he protected you?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying that I do not know about it, nobody looked after me at kwaMadala, I looked after myself.

CHAIRPERSON: When you say he looked after him, does it mean, does it also include supporting him by providing food?

MR LOWIES: Yes, but I hope it is seen as a question and not a statement. It is a question not a statement of fact.

CHAIRPERSON: It may not - you are now referring to the time when he was at the hostel?

MR LOWIES: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, whilst you were at the hostel, were you provided with food on some occasions by Mr Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, as part of the induna, they would provide us with food, even Darkie Chonco did so.

MR LAX: Can I just clarify something here, Mr Lowies. You put the question to him originally in this form, you said do you deny - that is not a question, that is putting it to him if you put it in that way.

MR LOWIES: It is as a result of what he said, what he testified earlier, Mr Chairman.

MR LAX: Are you saying, just refer us to the section where this is what he says in his statement. Maybe you can look for it later and just refer us to it at some point, because the way it came across to me was that you were putting it to him that that is what Vanana Zulu will say and does he deny that this is what actually happened. This is why I was a bit surprised when you said to the Chair well, this is just a question, it is not a statement of fact.

MR LOWIES: I hear what you say. I think I will have to rephrase that, to clarify my stance regarding that and I also have to check my consultation notes regarding that aspect, if you could just bear with me, I apologise to the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Move on to the next question.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, how did you survive at the hostel, on your version? You did not work?

CHAIRPERSON: He has just told us that his induna used to provide them with food on some occasions, Darkie Chonco is one of the persons he mentioned.

MR LOWIES: Was that the only way how you were able to survive in that the induna's were looking after you?

MR NOSENGA: I did state before that in other instances, we did steal vehicles and break into shops in town.

MR LOWIES: Now did Prince Vanana Zulu look after you in a similar manner that Darkie Chonco did?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, we were all treated the same way. The way Prince Zulu treated me, did not differ from the way that I was treated by Darkie Chonco.

MR LOWIES: So he also looked after you?

MR LAX: Mr Lowies, his answer to the original question was in the plural, he said the induna's looked after us, like Darkie and then he mentioned, I think he might have mentioned Prince Zulu as well.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, from the documents which we will hand in later, it will appear that you had close contact with Prince Vanana Zulu?

MS TANZER: I object to this line of questioning. Until these documents are produced before this Committee, I mean how can you refer to these documents, it is unknown?

CHAIRPERSON: Well, we will accept the assurance of Counsel that he will produce those documents, is that right Mr Lowies?

MR LOWIES: We are trying to get hold of the original, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR LOWIES: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What document is that?

MR LOWIES: The minutes of the meeting.

CHAIRPERSON: Which indicates that he had close contact with ...

MR LOWIES: From the contents thereof yes, it doesn't say we had close contact, but from the contents thereof, you could infer that. What is your answer?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that. I regarded him as one of the induna's. I was close to the induna's.

MR LOWIES: Now didn't you travel to - no, I rephrase, did you travel to Ulundi in a stolen vehicle?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I do not know. We were travelling in Damara Chonco's kombi, I do not know if it was stolen or not.

MR LOWIES: So it was not Darkie's kombi, it was Damara's?

MR NOSENGA: I stated that it was Damara Chonco's vehicle, but it was driven by Darkie Chonco when we travelled to Ulundi.

MR LOWIES: Damara is deceased but Darkie is still alive, not so?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that, I am incarcerated in prison. I cannot tell you anything about it.

MR LOWIES: But when your other applicants gave evidence, when you were here, did you not hear that they say that Damara has passed away?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, all I am saying to you is that I don't know that he passed away.

MR LOWIES: I want to put it to you the reason why you are implicating Darkie where everybody else is implicating Damara, is because you want to get at Darkie as well.

MR NOSENGA: That is not true. They are implicating Damara because he is deceased. I am not implicating anyone.

MR LOWIES: You testified earlier sir, regarding Mr Peens, there was no way if you bumped into Peens, that you would not be, in other words meaning that if he arrested you, that you would not be assaulted by him?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know what you are talking about. I said Peens assaulted me when I was still living in the township and I was arrested for a stolen vehicle, I do not know what you are referring to. The threats that happened in Vereeniging were different, at that time I was just threatened, I was not assaulted. That is different from the fact that he assaulted me earlier on when I was still living in the township.

MR LOWIES: Do you know whether he assaulted any other members of kwaMadala from what you have seen or heard?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that.

MR LOWIES: Where did you learn how to use an AK47? Who taught you?

MR NOSENGA: I first learnt in the township as well as in the hostel later on, so I cannot name just one person who taught me.

MR LOWIES: Who taught you in the township how to use a firearm such as an AK47?

MR NOSENGA: No one taught me, I taught myself. I would watch other people who would be carrying such firearms and I would watch how they unload or load them or how they assembled or dissembled them.

MR LOWIES: So can we take it then that before you arrival at kwaMadala, you already knew how to use a firearm such as an AK47?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know how to respond to your question because I have already stated that even in the hostel, I still had to learn, when I arrived at the hostel, I was not very good at it, but I perfected my skill there.

MR LOWIES: The point is, before you arrived at the hostel, you could already use a firearm, yes or no?

CHAIRPERSON: No, Mr Lowies, please let's just not go over one and the same thing, the man says he taught himself to use the AK47 whilst he was at the township and when he arrived at the hostel, he continued to improve his skills on how to use the AK47, that is a fact.

MR LOWIES: I will proceed.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: When you attacked Boipatong that night sir, was everything done calmly or were you in a hurry, I am talking about the attackers?

MR NOSENGA: We took our time, because we were in the company of the Police. Maybe we would have been in a haste if we had been alone, but we were with the Police.

MR LOWIES: How long would you say were you in the company of the Police and were you in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot tell a lie, I do not know.

MR LOWIES: You have no idea?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I do not know. As I said before, I am uneducated so I did not check the time, I do not know anything about the time.

MR LOWIES: Sir, you were not scared at all that night?

MR NOSENGA: What was there to be afraid of, I was with the Police, they were leading us in front when we went to Boipatong, there was nothing to be afraid of.

MR LOWIES: Were they leading the attack?

MR NOSENGA: When we entered the township, we were with them. They were in front, riding in casspirs.

MR LOWIES: When you were in the hostel, did you have to make any contributions towards the purchasing of firearms and weapons?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not contribute anything because I was unemployed.

MR LOWIES: Did you ever have a fall-out with Mr Victor Keswa?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not remember.

MR LOWIES: Did you ever have trouble with Mr Hunter Ndlovu?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not remember.

MR LOWIES: I would like you to turn to page 18 of Exhibit R please. This Exhibit, after it was taken from you, was it read back to you?

MR NOSENGA: No one ever read anything to me, they just took statements and left.

MR LOWIES: So you were never shown the statement and asked whether you agreed with the contents of the declaration and whether you understand the contents of the statement?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not remember.

MR LOWIES: If you don't remember, can you remember whether it was read back to you, or do you know for a fact that it was not?

MS TANZER: Chair, in fairness to this applicant, as he says, he is illiterate, he's got no education, to ask him whether this was read back to him, he is not going to be able to identify that. He needs to know the contents to understand whether it has been read back to him or not.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you just let him answer the question if you can.

MR LOWIES: Would you answer please?

MR NOSENGA: What I started to say that I don't remember anybody reading it back to me.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you remember when you were in Groenpunt Prison in Vereeniging?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do remember.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you remember when someone came to take a statement from you in December last year when your legal representative was also present?

MR NOSENGA: I is possible that I remember because my legal representative came to me.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you remember that occasion or don't you remember that occasion?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember very well.

MR LOWIES: Now, according to you you never had an ANC background, you were never a member of the ANC?

MR NOSENGA: That is true, I was never a member of the ANC.

MR LOWIES: Do you know an incident shortly before that Boipatong massacre, where a lady was necklaced for having had contact with kwaMadala hostel members? Her name is Nomvula.

MR NOSENGA: I remember the name.

MR LOWIES: Did you know her?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say that I knew her, but I do remember the name. I knew the person but I cannot say that I was close to her or I knew her well.

MR LOWIES: Do you know about her murder?

MR NOSENGA: She was alleged to have been killed by people of Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: On the 18th, the day just after the Boipatong attack, what did you do? Maybe I should start off with the following. Did you go to sleep that night of the 17th at the hostel itself?

MR NOSENGA: I returned to the hostel and that is where I slept.

MR LOWIES: Did you attend any meeting there or did you go straight to bed after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: We went back to the stadium after the attack and we had to leave our weapons at the stadium, and we also received ntelezi to cleanse ourselves.

MR LOWIES: Yes, and then you went to sleep?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. I went to my room to sleep.

MR LOWIES: The next morning, what happened? What time did you wake up?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall the time. I cannot recall the time at which I woke up on the 18th.

MR LOWIES: And then, what did you do?

MR NOSENGA: I went to take a shower and then I went back to my room.

MR LOWIES: Did you stay in the room for the rest of the day?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did go out of my room and walked around the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Did you ever leave the premises of the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember.

MR LOWIES: The next day, were you still at the hostel, that is now the 19th?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Did anything significant happen on that day, pertaining to the attack at Boipatong? I am talking about the 19th?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, something did happen.

MR LOWIES: Yes, what happened?

MR NOSENGA: If I am not mistaken, I saw a large number of Police around the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Was that the first time you saw them, or did you already see them on the 18th, that is now the day after Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: If I am not mistaken, I cannot be certain if they had already been there from the 18th, but I saw them on the 19th.

MR LOWIES: Did they at any stage search the hostel in your presence?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember if they did, but at some point they did get into the hostel and searched the rooms after the Boipatong massacre.

MR LOWIES: Was Themba Khosa there?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot tell a lie, I do not know. I last saw Themba Khosa on the 18th when he came to collect the weapons. There were many Police around the hostel, some were in their private vehicles.

MR LOWIES: The Police that were around the hostel - sorry let me rephrase - you say there were Police around the hostel, do you mean they were there when Themba Khosa came to collect the firearms or are you now referring back to the 19th again?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I only saw Themba Khosa for the last time on the 18th when he came to fetch the firearms, and I saw the Police on the 19th outside the hostel.

MR LOWIES: So you never saw Themba Khosa in the presence or in the company of any Police?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't want to tell a lie, I did not see him. There were many Police there.

MR LOWIES: You did not see Themba Khosa talking to the people whilst the Police were present on the premises after Boipatong, it doesn't matter whether it is the first, second or third day?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not recall. I know that the Police came to search the hostel at night.

MR LOWIES: Did you do anything specifically on the 18th at the hostel premises pertaining to Boipatong, anything of note?

MR NOSENGA: You did ask me sir as to what I did on the 18th, I told you that I woke up and went to take a shower and went back to my room. I also walked around on the hostel premises.

MR LOWIES: That's all?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Are you sure? And on the 19th you didn't do anything specific either?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall sir, I did indicate that to you.

MR LOWIES: You see if you were on the premises, surely you would have known about exhibits that were burnt, exhibits that were taken from Boipatong, loot?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, the loot was burnt. They said the stolen goods from Boipatong should be put on fire because that would be used as evidence, so to cover up, these things had to be burnt.

MR LOWIES: Why didn't you mention it? Were you not part of that?

MR NOSENGA: It is the induna's who ordered that these things should be burnt, I handed over what I had so that they could be burnt, so I did not personally participate in the actual burning.

MR LOWIES: Who did you hand your items to?

MR NOSENGA: I gave them to Darkie Chonco.

MR LOWIES: What did you give to Darkie Chonco?

MR NOSENGA: (No translation)

MR LOWIES: It was not translated, I didn't - a TV and a video? CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, don't swallow your last words. What was the last thing you said, was it that you don't remember? The others?

MR NOSENGA: I said I gave him a video as well as a TV set, those are the things.

CHAIRPERSON: Right.

MR NOSENGA: I gave Darkie Chonco.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, didn't you say (indistinct), you didn't say that?

MR NOSENGA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Please speak up and slowly so that we can hear. Don't swallow your last words.

MR LOWIES: Was that the only loot that you took on the night of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LOWIES: I am not asking what was burnt, I am talking about what you took, do you understand the difference?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am saying yes, those are the only things that I stole from Boipatong, the video and the TV set.

MR LOWIES: You didn't steal money?

MR NOSENGA: I did take money, yes, I did take money.

MR LOWIES: So why didn't you tell us initially about that as well, I asked you specifically was that all and you said yes. Now you say you did take money, what is the truth?

MR NOSENGA: I did not get you well, I did not take the money to be burnt as well, I only submitted the video and the TV set to be burnt, not the money.

MR LOWIES: Why are you implicating Darkie Chonco, have you got a quarrel with him?

CHAIRPERSON: Just wait a minute. Just repeat the answer that you have just given slowly. You had been asked why didn't you mention that you also stole money, what was your response, slowly?

MR NOSENGA: He asked me what things I handed over to be burnt at the hostel, things that I took from the hostel, from Boipatong, I said I took the video, a video and a TV. He did not ask me about money. Had he asked me about that, I would have indicated that I could not have taken the money to be burnt, I had used that for, that was to be used for buying ...

CHAIRPERSON: So you say that he only asked you about things that were burnt?

MR NOSENGA: He asked me what goods I had stolen from Boipatong and I said I took a video as well as a TV set, and he asked me to whom I gave these goods to be burnt and I indicated that I gave them to Darkie Chonco to be burnt. He did not ask me about money, yes, I did take the money of course.

CHAIRPERSON: He asked you what did you give to Chonco and you said it was a TV and a video?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Then he asked you were these the only things that you stole from Boipatong.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he did ask me that.

CHAIRPERSON: And your answer was "yes."

MR NOSENGA: Yes, but yes, I also took money actually. That is how I answered, but I also took money.

MR SIBANYONI: Can I ask you a question, why didn't you mention the money as well?

MR NOSENGA: I did not get him well, I did not get him well, sometimes I have a problem with the headset. I could not have burnt the money, the only things that I gave to Darkie was the TV and the video to be burnt.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, if you have a problem with the headset, let us know. Do you want that to be replaced, does it give you a problem?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did indicate that I don't receive well, my reception is not quite good.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, good we please have another headset?

MR LAX: If you just put that in the front, further forward, that should do it. It is not really comfortable ...

MS TANZER: No, the headset is broken.

MR LAX: Can you hear?

MR SIBANYONI: Mr Lowies, I don't remember your question, was it saying what loot did you steal at Boipatong, or what goods did you steal in Boipatong?

MR LOWIES: I think I said goods.

MR SIBANYONI: Goods?

MR LOWIES: Yes. I don't know, I can't ...

MR LAX: I have written the word items here, that is what it was translated.

MR LOWIES: It is more my style. Mr Nosenga, then I specifically asked you, I am not just asking about items that were supposed to be burnt and I said to you, do you understand the difference between items that were supposed to be burnt and anything else and you said yes. I specifically asked you whether you understood what I am asking you. I drew a difference, a distinction, why did you answer "yes"?

MR NOSENGA: I did not get your question very well. Will you please distinguish between your questions.

MR LOWIES: I don't follow your problem, what do you want me to do?

MR NOSENGA: The question that you are asking me.

MR LOWIES: I specifically asked you and I stated to you Mr Nosenga, I am not just talking about items that were supposed to be burnt, I am talking about everything else, was that all that you took, and you said yes. I asked you did you understand the distinction and you said yes. That was the nature of my question. Where could the confusion come in?

CHAIRPERSON: But he has told us that he didn't understand the question, his headphones were not clear, he couldn't hear the Interpreter.

MR LOWIES: Regarding your headphones that were not clear, I specifically heard you saying that you already complained about the headset that was not working, when did you complain about that because nobody heard you doing that?

MR NOSENGA: I indicated just now that my reception is poor and it is difficult to get the interpretation.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the situation now, can you hear him, can you hear the Interpreter?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it clear?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: All right.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, isn't the truth the following, whenever you are in a corner, you blame either the Interpreter or the headset or whatever, but you do not want to admit that you are telling lies?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not correct. If I don't understand, that is it, I don't understand.

MR LOWIES: Well, I want you to reflect on your answers pertaining to your knowledge of the Sotho language, because we are going to call Detective Sergeant Kuni who would be giving evidence that he translated a whole confession that you made, from Sotho to Afrikaans, in other words that he was speaking Sotho to you and that you responded in Sotho to him, in other words you can speak Sotho quite well.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about that, I also speak Zulu at home.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, listen to the question. If you don't understand it, let me know so that I can repeat the question. What Counsel is saying to you is that he is going to call a Police Officer who translated a confession that you made, from Afrikaans into Sotho to you. Do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do understand that.

CHAIRPERSON: And that you replied, you spoke to him in Sotho as well?

MR NOSENGA: I do understand that, he can call that person. I don't know what he is talking about, my father is Zulu and I too speak the language.

CHAIRPERSON: So you deny that the confession was translated to you in Sotho?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I deny that. I don't know where he gets that from. I speak Zulu even in jail, they can go to Leeukop and ask the authorities there what language I speak, I don't know where it comes from. They should go to my home as well and ask what language I speak, my mother is Xhosa.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, and you also deny that you spoke back to this Sergeant Kuni in Sotho?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I deny that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR LOWIES: Now regarding Mr Keswa, I have already put to you that Keswa was in custody physically on the 17th of June 1992.

MR NOSENGA: I did say to you that I only saw Victor Keswa for the last time during the day of the 17th.

MR LOWIES: I want you to reflect, are you hundred percent sure on your version, Keswa was there on the 17th, you saw him, not necessarily going into Boipatong, but you saw him at the hostel, there is no ...

CHAIRPERSON: What other assurance do you really want? The man has said repeatedly that he last saw Mr Keswa on the 17th, during the day. He didn't see him the evening.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair. I would like to put it to you sir, that you have implicated Mr Keswa in the past for offences which he also did not commit, because he was in custody.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about that. I said he was there on the 15th in 1992.

CHAIRPERSON: Where did he implicate Mr Keswa, in these proceedings or in other proceedings?

MR LOWIES: No, in a confession he made to the Police. Do you agree with that?

ADV SIGODI: Mr Lowies, I think in fairness to the applicant, you should try to be more specific as to when he implicated Mr Keswa in offences, which in fact he did not do.

MR LOWIES: May I just ask an indulgence, I just want to get some documents with your permission Chairman. There are so many, I can't have them all in front of me. Mr Nosenga, according to the Police docket in the case where you were convicted, you mentioned an incident where you, Hunter Ndlovu, Victor Keswa, Papie, Mzwake and Sipho left from kwaMadala hostel to Sebokeng, you were driving a 3 litre Ford Cortina, Hunter was the driver, the purpose was to shoot at comrades, members of the comrades. Do you know anything about this?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't know anything about that, I said Tswi was the driver, not Hunter Ndlovu. Hunter Ndlovu was present as well as Tswi and Ndlandla Xindi. I don't know anything about Sipho, Papie and Mzwake. I only mentioned them after I was beaten up. I don't know anything about ...

CHAIRPERSON: Is that a confession you are reading?

MR LOWIES: That is correct Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: What Counsel is reading to you is a confession which you are supposed to have made to the Police, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you remember making a confession?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand that. Yes, I do remember sir, but I did not include Sipho.

CHAIRPERSON: In the confession itself?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did not implicate Sipho.

MR LAX: Did you at the time you were being interrogated and tortured, did you tell them anything about Sipho that might have been written down somewhere?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not recall, but people whose names I mentioned to avoid being beaten up was Papie and Mzwake, not Sipho.

MR LOWIES: What about Hunter Ndlovu, did you mention his name?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, Hunter was present. I did mention that here at the Committee as well.

MR LOWIES: Did you mention Victor Keswa?

MR NOSENGA: I mentioned it here that Gatiza was present, I did not mention it to the Police and I gave you the reason why I did not mention his name, he was as a result not arrested. If I had mentioned his name, he would also have been arrested.

MR LOWIES: In this document I find something funny, you describe the charge for which you are convicted, but you mention the date as being early in December 1992, can you give us an explanation why this happened?

MR NOSENGA: That must be a mistake, I was not arrested in December.

MR LOWIES: No, but that is not the question, the question is you said ...

MR NOSENGA: The incident happened in 1992 and I was arrested in 1993. I was sentenced in 1995.

MR LOWIES: Is it your version sir, that you were tortured to admit this specific offence of which the Police already had knowledge? In other words they already knew somebody was murdered and they wanted you to admit that it was you and others?

MR NOSENGA: That is so. They knew that I resided at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Did they at that stage know that you were involved in the shooting, the drive-by shooting and just wanted you to admit this so that they could use it in court, or what was the situation?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because they assaulted me.

MR LOWIES: What did they want from you in your words, to admit?

MR NOSENGA: The offences that occurred at Sebokeng, the shooting of people.

MR LOWIES: You see, why I am asking you this, if necessary we will lead evidence regarding this, the Police did not know at that stage when you confessed, when the offences were committed, where they were committed and your complicity. That is why we also see here they thought the offence was committed in December 1992, because you told them that?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, what is the value of a document which admits of coercion and torture?

MR LOWIES: It is denied that it was as a result of torture, as a matter of fact, it is very relevant to the applicant's ...

CHAIRPERSON: The man says I was tortured to make that confession.

MR LOWIES: Chair, I am not trying to prove that he committed the offences, that is common cause. What I submit is the following, I submit that from this evidence we will be able to see that he handed himself over voluntarily to the Police and there is a reason for that. That reason has to be explored further.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, you see, if a person says in these hearings that what you are reading from, is a document which was obtained as a result of torture, what value is that document to this Commission?

MR LOWIES: I would say it is relevant regarding the contents thereof firstly, because it shows his knowledge thereof. Secondly, whether the language that is spoke because this is also relevant, whether he indeed submitted that evidence in Sotho and thirdly, I would say that if there is a motive for making this document and for implicating people, it goes further.

CHAIRPERSON: He does not deny that he made the confession as I understand his evidence. What is in issue is whether he made that confession voluntarily. You are free to canvass who interpreted the confession to him, that is another issue, but when you begin to deal with the contents and when you tax him on what is contained in that document, what value is that in the light of his direct evidence before us as to what happened and when it happened?

MR LOWIES: But may I not be able to rebut it if it is not the truth?

CHAIRPERSON: Then you will call evidence, you lay a proper foundation for its (indistinct).

MR LOWIES: But Chair, it may not be necessary if he admits it, it may not be necessary if he admits that the situation is as such, and then I don't have to call extra witnesses.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, you will bear in mind that this is not a court of law, this is an administrative, these are administrative proceedings, this is an enquiry, this is not a criminal trial. This man is not accused before us of the Sebokeng shootings. Your cross-examination on matters which are not directly relevant to these issues, is limited. You should know better.

MR LOWIES: I agree with you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: I am not going to allow you to keep on cross-examining this man on issues which he has made it clear that he denies, because this is a document which he denies. If a man says I was tortured to make this document, you know, there's got to be some limits on the extent to which one can rely on that document, even if to raise issues of credibility, do you understand what I am saying?

MR LOWIES: Yes, I do Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. It is one thing to find out whether a particular statement is the truth or not, but to suggest to him how the Police would have obtained that information, where would that take us to?

MR LOWIES: I agree with you Chair, I will rephrase.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Were you involved in any other shootings after June 1992?

MS TANZER: With respect, I object Chair. We have dealt with this before, and besides the Boipatong, he is not here to incriminate himself in any other manner.

MR LOWIES: I would submit that it is relevant. The relevance is the following, it is my instructions that he was fleeing from the law and from everybody else at the time, and that is relevant, because it shows a motive why he is applying for amnesty. I don't want to go too deep into that, but that is the crux of the matter, there is relevance and it is very pertinent to this matter. I would not ...

CHAIRPERSON: Just repeat ...

MR LOWIES: I am sorry Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Just repeat your answer.

MR LOWIES: Chair, I hear that whenever I put something like that to him, it must be relevant. It is relevant to a motive. I don't want to say too much, because that will inhibit my cross-examination, but it is relevant to a motive. This man was on the run, this is my instructions, and one of the reasons why he acted as he did, then and now, is as a result of that. That I would like to explore, otherwise I would not be able to get to the motive. That I would submit is very relevant.

CHAIRPERSON: A motive for applying for amnesty in this matter?

MR LOWIES: And for falsely incriminating my clients and others.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR LOWIES: Thank you.

MS TANZER: I didn't get that.

CHAIRPERSON: What is your response?

MS TANZER: Well to ask him to confess or to admit to other offences, is asking him to incriminate himself with regard to information that is not before any court of law on which in fact, it is his constitutional right and his right in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act, not to incriminate himself. He has the right to remain silent and now he is being asked to come forward and confess to crimes which allegedly, it is almost, it is a fishing expedition. It is not crimes that are known to my learned colleague, but he is trying to find out if there is any crimes that he has committed, and I think it is an infringement of his rights.

CHAIRPERSON: I will allow the question.

MR LOWIES: I December 1992, did you commit any crimes such as drive-by shootings?

MR NOSENGA: No. I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: I would like to put it to you sir, that the confession that you made, is almost two and a half pages and you give a lot of detail, and you would not have been able to give that detail to the Police, if you were not able to understand the Sotho Interpreter.

MS TANZER: In fairness once again to the applicant, it has not been put to him whether he actually signed this confession. If one looks at the signature, it actually differs from every other signature I have seen. I mean that question at least should be put first, whether he even signed such a document.

MR NOSENGA: That is not my signature. That is not how I sign. It must have been the Police who wrote this.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, are you denying that you had any conversation with the Police so that they could get sufficient information to charge you and convict you?

MR NOSENGA: I stated before sir, that I was arrested in Parys, thereafter transferred to Vereeniging where I was assaulted and that is how I got to confess.

MR LOWIES: And what you said, was it produced to writing?

MR NOSENGA: What I am saying is that a statement was taken from me and I was assaulted by Mr Havenga and others in the process of taking the statement. I don't know what else you want me to say now.

MR LOWIES: If you say a statement was taken, does that mean it was taken down, it was produced to writing?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they did write it down when they were carrying on with their assaults.

MR LOWIES: And is it your version sir, do you deny that you were taken to Lieutenant Heinrich Kalp?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat the name?

MR LOWIES: Heinrich Kalp.

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember that person. It is possible that I may have been taken before him, but everything that happened, was as a result of my assault, of those assaults on me. Everything then was under the white government, and I had not (indistinct) to confess to those crimes.

MR LOWIES: The point is taken that you were assaulted. Were you also assaulted to put your signature on the documents?

MR NOSENGA: That is not my signature.

MR LOWIES: Were you assaulted to put your signature on any document, not necessarily this one? Don't look at documentation, just listen to the question first.

MR LAX: Mr Nosenga, did you sign any documents while you were with the Police as a result of any assaults or tortures? Yes or no or you can't remember, it is up to you?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember well.

MR LOWIES: A certain document was shown to you by your legal advisor, was that one signed by you and I am referring to a document which is marked A6, Mr Chairman.

INTERPRETER: The current speaker was off line, we could not hear.

MR LOWIES: Sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that document before us?

MR LOWIES: No Chair, I wanted to do it during the tea adjournment, which I think is an appropriate time because ...

CHAIRPERSON: Just go on and finish this point.

MR LOWIES: Chair, may I enquire what time are we going to take the tea adjournment?

CHAIRPERSON: What is it that you are referring to?

MR LOWIES: I was referring him to Annexure A6, fourth and fifth pages. Is that your signature?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not how I sign.

CHAIRPERSON: Speak out Mr Nosenga.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying that I did not sign this way, this is illegible.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that it is not clear whether it is your signature or whether - what are you saying?

MR NOSENGA: It is not legible, I do not remember well if I did sign this document. It is possible that I may have signed it.

CHAIRPERSON: Look at that signature at the bottom, tell us whether is this your signature or whether it isn't your signature.

MR NOSENGA: That is not how I sign.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: May the document be handed in as Exhibit U Mr Chairman?

CHAIRPERSON: (Microphone not on) Would somebody continue counting those pages and ..

MR LOWIES: If you want me, I will let my Attorney paginate it for you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, did you see any place there on these documents where you signed?

CHAIRPERSON: Has he gone ...

MR LOWIES: I think his representative has gone through the documents with him, is that true?

MR NOSENGA: That is not my signature.

MR LOWIES: You are referring to the second last ... Chair, I think the best would be if the documents are paginated.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed and let him have some ...

MR LOWIES: May I enquire when we are going to take the tea adjournment?

CHAIRPERSON: Wait, perhaps during the break, he should just go over the document and then let us know which ones are his.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any other questions?

MR LOWIES: I think it will be best now to take the adjournment.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR LOWIES: I think it will be appropriate to take the adjournment now.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, we will come back at 20 past 11.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION:

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (s.u.o)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LOWIES: (cont)

Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Nosenga, you had the opportunity of going through the whole of Exhibit U with your Attorney, with your legal representative, is it correct during the adjournment? I am talking about signatures appearing thereon?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I am sorry just for the record, my learned friend said Exhibit T, is it not Exhibit U?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, would you please stop confusing us?

MR LOWIES: I think my learned friend is confused, but I thought I said U, but I apologise to everybody, let's go on.

CHAIRPERSON: Those who are listening are better judges of what you are saying.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, your signature, does it appear on any of these documents?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Where does it appear?

MR NOSENGA: This is my name, Matanzima.

MR LOWIES: Which document are you referring to?

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Tanzer, did you go through this document with the applicant?

MS TANZER: I did do that Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, would you indicate to us what signatures are being admitted as being that of his if any?

MS TANZER: He admits to having signed a document numbered U.

CHAIRPERSON: That whole bundle is U, but unfortunately it is not paginated.

MS TANZER: Okay, right, exactly, page 4. The statement we were dealing with previously, prior to the adjournment.

CHAIRPERSON: Did someone number this document?

MR LOWIES: Unfortunately yours was not available to be numbered.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, just give us the number, this is U4?

MR LOWIES: I have one ready for you which is numbered, Chair, if that will assist you?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Shall I keep this? Thank you very much. So it is U4?

MS TANZER: Yes, that is correct.

MR LAX: What about U5?

MS TANZER: Yes, he confirmed that that is his signature as well on U5. The document from page 26 onwards, 27, 28 - yes the document from page 26 until page 31, the applicant denies having signed, that is not his signature he says.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it not from U27?

MS TANZER: Yes, I have just numbered it differently, yes, U27.

MR LOWIES: No, it is U26.

MS TANZER: Well, on our - on their bundle is 27.

MR LOWIES: I think, yes, there are 37 pages in my bundle, 38 some of the other bundles.

MS TANZER: The document that starts "vir gebruik deur offisiere alleen".

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

MS TANZER: That document.

MR LAX: It is marked A22.

MS TANZER: A22, yes. That is not his signature, he also notes that there is a "P" instead of an "N", so definitely ...

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, just so that there is no confusion to the extent that this document may have some relevance, just re-check the two bundles at some point, to just make sure that we have the same documents. Unfortunately we don't deal with arithmetic every day, I can understand the problem.

MR LOWIES: That is why I am a lawyer Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, there you admit your signature, the statement was taken by Van der Mescht, a Police Officer?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is where the name Matanzima appears.

MR LOWIES: Do you know the name of this chap, Van der Mescht?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: Can't recall him at all?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not recall him.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, you testified earlier on that you handed your items to be burnt to Darkie Chonco, but that cannot be the situation because in your statement to Mr Kjellberg from the TRC ...

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, for our benefit, when you go to another document, let us know.

MR LOWIES: I will do so Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Because at the moment I have U in front of me. Have you finished with U?

MR LOWIES: I would like to turn to R now, I am finished with U.

CHAIRPERSON: Don't come back to it. All right, so you are onto R?

MR LOWIES: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: right?

MR LAX: Just to assist you Mr Lowies, just to assist you Mr Lowies, the pronunciation of that man is Kjellberg as if it was an "Sh".

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair. On page 22 of Exhibit R you indicated to Mr Kjellberg "I destroyed the TV and threw it away on a rubbish dump."

CHAIRPERSON: Where?

MR LOWIES: That is under paragraph 22, the last sentence thereof, page 22, paragraph 22. What is the true situation?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know. I said I gave the TV and the video to Darkie Chonco. I did not throw this into a rubbish dump.

MR LOWIES: So what is said here is then patently wrong on your version?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I don't know anything about that which is written there. I have been asked several times as to what I did with the TV and the video, and I indicated that I handed these over to Darkie Chonco, not that I took this to a rubbish dump.

MR LOWIES: It appears to me that you have a bone to pick with Darkie, is that not so?

MR NOSENGA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the situation that the statement which says "I destroyed the TV and threw it away on a rubbish dump", that is not correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am saying I gave the TV to Darkie Chonco, the TV and the video at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: You will recall that this issue came about as a result of questioning pertaining to the happenings on the 18th, the day after the Boipatong massacre? I am asking you again, besides the burning of the loot, did anything of significance happen that day pertaining to Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not recall. I indicated that on the 18th, I went for a shower and came back to my room to change my clothes.

MR LOWIES: How long have you showered if you have to give us an estimation?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot know.

MR LOWIES: Do you know anything of a pending attack or a threatening attack on kwaMadala hostel by anybody on that specific day?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you just hold on a second? Just before you go on, the paragraph to which Counsel has just referred you to, that is paragraph 22, it doesn't talk about the video does it?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know sir, but I took the TV and the video.

CHAIRPERSON: And money?

MR NOSENGA: Yes sir, money too.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you give the money to Darkie as well?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not give him the money. I gave him the TV as well as the video.

MR LOWIES: Are you sure you took the video, because there is nothing in the statement indicating that you also took the video?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, he has just said that.

MR LOWIES: Sorry Chair, to proceed then, the question is it appears to me that this is something that you had sucked out of your thumb, because you didn't mention it to Kjellberg?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did take the video and the TV, I am not sucking this from my thumb.

MR LOWIES: Where did you, or how did you manage to get these items to Boipatong, to kwaMadala from Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: They were transported in the casspir. We came back on foot, and the induna's and the Police were travelling back to the hostel in this casspir.

MR LOWIES: But I am going to put it to you that there were passengers in this casspir, it would have been impossible to put the loot in the casspir, plus passengers?

MR NOSENGA: The casspir was not transporting people any more, we came back on foot.

CHAIRPERSON: But Mr Lowies - yes.

MR LOWIES: But what about the Policemen?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying the Police were also involved in the Boipatong incident.

MR LOWIES: No, but were they not transported in the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: The Police are the ones who delivered these stolen goods at kwaMadala hostel, they were accompanied by the induna's.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what Counsel wants to find out from you is if the items that were stolen from Boipatong on the night of the attack, were transported back to kwaMadala in the casspirs, how did the Police then travel because there would have been no space for them in the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: Maybe you did not get me well, there were four casspirs, not one casspir. There were four of these casspirs.

MR LOWIES: But if everybody took loot from Boipatong, then all the casspirs in any event, would have been full?

CHAIRPERSON: No one has suggested as far as we know, that everyone stole items.

MR LOWIES: Let's check this then, is it not so that all the casspirs on your version, were full with stolen loot?

MR NOSENGA: I did not say that. I said yes, there were stolen items in the casspirs.

MR LOWIES: Is it your version that the induna's also returned to kwaMadala inside the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, some of them.

MR LOWIES: Who were they, the ones who were in the casspirs that you know?

MR NOSENGA: I remember Gatchene and Darkie Chonco. I cannot remember the others very well.

MR LOWIES: But Darkie is not even an induna?

MR NOSENGA: But he had a leadership position, I don't know what position he held, but he had a position at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: And what that was, is unknown to you and you are serious? I want to put it to you that you are telling lies regarding Darkie.

MR NOSENGA: I am telling the truth.

MR LOWIES: The two weeks preceding the Boipatong massacre, your evidence was that there was a meeting held at the hostel, where was this meeting held? That was where the decision to attack, was taken, on your version.

MR NOSENGA: No sir, I said that a meeting was held two weeks prior, a meeting where it was resolved that Boipatong should be attacked, but the date was not mentioned.

MR LOWIES: Yes, the question is where was that meeting held?

MR NOSENGA: The meeting was held at the stadium at the hostel, that is where Themba Khosa was present.

MR LOWIES: But your statement, paragraph 5 on page 19 reads that it was in a big hall.

MS TANZER: With respect, I did clarify that in my examination in chief, when he said the hall he actually meant the stadium, that was one of the issues we clarified.

MR LOWIES: But still, I think the witness should answer.

CHAIRPERSON: But it is traversed, we have traversed that.

MR LOWIES: Not in cross-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: I think it was covered at some point.

MR LOWIES: Chair, I will leave it at that then.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: And on your version, who was present? Could everybody attend or just the induna's or what?

MR NOSENGA: Themba Khosa was present as well, that is the meeting that was held two weeks prior to the attack. He was accompanied by a Policeman called Peens, he was in the company of a Police called Peens.

MR LOWIES: Women and children, were they allowed at the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, every hostel resident was summoned to the meeting.

MR LOWIES: And here in the open, Peens is also there, standing next to Khosa, is that what you are trying to say?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I am saying.

MR LOWIES: Now was Peens just part of the audience, or did he also take part in the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall quite well, but he was present at the meeting, he was accompanied by Themba Khosa.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, I was under the impression that the issue in regard to the hall and the stadium, was canvassed at the beginning of your cross-examination, but it would appear that it is a matter which was only canvassed during the evidence in chief, so in cross-examination, it has not.

MR LOWIES: If I then am allowed, I will return to that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Just after this matter. Yes Mr Nosenga, what is your answer?

MR NOSENGA: Will you please repeat the question.

MR LOWIES: Did Peens take part in the meeting or was he just a member of the audience?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying he was standing with Themba Khosa, but yes, he was present at the meeting and other induna's and residents of the hostel, kwaMadala hostel.

MR LOWIES: Now we have heard your evidence that Mtwana Zulu was not present on the day, you can't say whether he was present on the day of the attack on Boipatong. Do you know whether he was present on this specific day, that is now when Peens and Themba Khosa had a meeting which is denied?

MR NOSENGA: I said I did not see him, there were many induna's at the meeting.

MR LOWIES: And you are now talking, remember, about the meeting where Themba Khosa and Peens was, you did not see Mtwana, correct?

MR NOSENGA: I say I did not see him, there were many people at the meeting.

MR LOWIES: Who made speeches there, just Themba Khosa or not?

MR NOSENGA: Speeches were delivered by people like Gatchene and Themba Khosa agreed with him that Boipatong should be attacked. The residents agreed as well.

MR LOWIES: The Police Officers that were there, Peens, he did not say anything? He did not hold a speech?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall quite well.

MR LOWIES: Was there any other member of the Police there, but Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying Themba Khosa came in the company of Peens. I only knew many other Police on the day, the evening of the attack on Boipatong. I only saw Peens at the hostel on the day of the meeting.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, I have to put it to you that you are telling lies. Firstly, in your statement to Mr Kjellberg you specifically mentioned that Darkie, a member of Murder and Robbery Unit in Everton, was also present. Now you say it was only Peens, what is the situation?

MR NOSENGA: Which other Police are you saying, was present?

MR LOWIES: Danie?

MR NOSENGA: I said Peens not Danie, Peens.

MR LOWIES: But in your statement you say Danie was also, and I repeat also, present, do you deny this now?

MR NOSENGA: Danie was present on the evening of the attack on Boipatong, yes, I agree he was present on the day of the attack on Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: You also state in this paragraph 5 that the other people who held speeches there when Themba Khosa and Peens was there, was Mtwana Zulu. Now you say he wasn't there?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that. I said Gatchene delivered a speech. It is Gatchene who delivered a speech.

MR LOWIES: Did Darkie hold a speech?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall. I cannot recall quite well.

MR LOWIES: What was the reason for the attack as conveyed on this meeting, this is now two weeks before the massacre?

MR NOSENGA: I was not told, they just said Boipatong should be attacked and they did not tell me why.

MR LOWIES: Did Mr Khosa hold a speech or did he just confirm what was said by Darkie, by Gatchene, my mistake, by Gatchene?

MR NOSENGA: He said, Gatchene said Boipatong should be attacked and Themba Khosa agreed with him. That is what I heard him say, I actually heard him agreeing with him.

MR LOWIES: How did he agree, how do you know he agreed?

MR NOSENGA: He was speaking Zulu. Gatchene said Boipatong should be attacked and he agreed with him, he said it in Zulu. He was not speaking English or Afrikaans.

MR LOWIES: Can you recall any specific words that Khosa said?

MR NOSENGA: No, I remember him agreeing with the suggestion that Boipatong should be attacked.

MR LOWIES: In the same paragraph you make mention of the fact that the meeting was held in a big hall and everybody attended the meeting in a hall.

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not say at the hall, I mentioned the stadium, not at a hall. There is no hall at the hostel. The hall is in Zone 14 in Mphatlalatsane.

MR LOWIES: What?

MR NOSENGA: There is a stadium right inside the hostel. The hall is at Mphatlalatsane in Zone 14. There is no hall at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: What are you trying to say, were there also speeches made at that hall?

CHAIRPERSON: He is telling you that there is no hall at the hostel, it is just a stadium, the hall is in Mphatlalatsane.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair. Mr Nosenga, with respect, I want to put it to you that when you initially made statements implicating the Police Officers, you did so because of a motive, and that is why you can't recall everything that you told Mr Kjellberg, because now you deny a lot of things which was said to him pertaining to the involvement of Police Officers.

MR NOSENGA: No, the Police were involved, I am saying the Police were involved. Those are the ones who were leading us on our way to Boipatong. I don't know what you are trying to say. Are you trying to exonerate the Police and leaders of Inkatha? They were present on the evening of the attack.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, why would Mr Kjellberg make mistakes like these, let me list them for you. Just in one paragraph, and it pertains to a paragraph where you implicate the Police. Firstly according to what you told him, it was a big hall. You say no, it was a stadium. Secondly according to you Mtwana, that is what you told Kjellberg, Mtwana Zulu held a speech - would you just bear with me - now you deny it. Thirdly, according to you a certain Danie was there, that is when you made the statement to Mr Kjellberg, today you deny it. And Danie was not only there, he also made a speech, today you deny it. It appears to me that you had a motive previously to implicate as many people as possible and that you have forgotten which facts you conveyed to the Investigating Unit, not so?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not true, there were Police. Peens was present at the stadium not in the hall.

MR LOWIES: Was a reason given, I know that they said Boipatong must be attack, was a reason given by Themba Khosa for the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that I only heard him agreeing with the suggestion by Gatchene and the induna's that Boipatong should be attacked.

MR LOWIES: Did anybody say that the dogs or the insects should be killed?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LOWIES: Who said so?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall very well, but he said dogs should be killed. He said everybody who was residing at Boipatong should be killed.

MR LOWIES: Who said this?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall quite well.

MR LOWIES: I still want to know what was the reason for the attack? Was that conveyed to you, yes or no?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, he has repeatedly told us that he was not told the reason for the attack.

MR LOWIES: Did Themba Khosa not say that many members of Inkatha were killed in the location, and that that was the reason for the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about that. I don't.

MR LOWIES: Did Themba Khosa refer to the residents as dogs?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't know exactly who said dogs should be killed, but I cannot recall who exactly.

MR LOWIES: Did anybody say that the residents of Boipatong are not human beings?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know. I just know that somebody said dogs should be killed.

MR LOWIES: Because in your statement in paragraph 6 you say -

"... Themba Khosa also told us to kill the dogs, again referring to Boipatong residents, because they were not human beings ...",

now you say you don't know about that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: And according to you Mr Peens did not speak on that occasion?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't know quite well, I cannot remember.

MR LOWIES: Because on Monday when led by your Counsel, you said that Peens spoke in Afrikaans which was translated? It is also in the statement of Kjellberg? It is not true?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall quite well.

MR LOWIES: So if I put it to you as a fact Mr Peens did not speak there, you cannot deny it?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I do not recall, but Peens was present at the meeting at the stadium at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: You cannot recall anything that he said?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I cannot recall.

MR LOWIES: Now according to this statement, according to your statement Peens and Danie both said there that they would supply weapons. You deny that Danie was there at all?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying the one person that I saw was Peens.

MR LOWIES: Was anything said about Chief Buthelezi at the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall.

CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry, I beg your pardon, did you see Danie at that meeting?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did.

MR LOWIES: Chair, may I enquire, Danie or Darkie?

CHAIRPERSON: Danie.

MR LOWIES: But Mr Nosenga, you have just said on two previous occasions, you did not see him there, now to the Chairman you say he was there, what is the situation?

MR NOSENGA: I did not get you quite well, I did not understand him quite well, Peens was present. Peens was present, not Danie.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me ask you this, Danie and Darkie, are these two different people?

MR NOSENGA: Darkie is a black person, Peens and Danie are white people and Darkie is Darkie Chonco and then there is Danie and Peens. Peens and Danie are working for the Murder and Robbery Unit.

CHAIRPERSON: And Darkie, this is Darkie Chonco?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Was Danie present at the meeting, did you see him at the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: No, Peens. Peens was present.

CHAIRPERSON: All right.

MR LOWIES: Now in another paragraph you still said, you still say the following -

"... Peens and Danie also said that they would supply Rooikop with weapons ...",

so both of them spoke according to the statement made to Mr Kjellberg?

MR NOSENGA: No, I reject that. Peens was present at the meeting.

MR LOWIES: So must I then take it that nothing was said regarding Peens and weapons, whether he would supply weapons?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I still maintain that I did not hear Peens talking. There are people who spoke to the effect that dogs should be killed, but I cannot recall who.

MR LOWIES: But we are moving on now sir, you must listen to the question. Is it your version that nothing was said regarding the supply of weapons by Peens? In other words that Peens would supply weapons?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall very well, but Peens was at the meeting.

MR LOWIES: So to summarise, you would not know what Peens was doing there as you sit here today, you just saw him there, am I correct? If not, please indicate sir.

MR NOSENGA: I just saw him standing there with Themba Khosa.

MR LOWIES: In this statement to Mr Kjellberg you state that -

"... I know that Themba Khosa used to deliver guns to the hostel ...",

do you agree with this portion of your statement?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: So, Themba Khosa never used to deliver guns to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know sir, I would not say he did or not. He used to come to the hostel even though not every day.

MR LOWIES: Your statement is quite clear and I quote -

"... I know that Themba Khosa used to deliver guns to the hostel ...",

you deny the correctness of your knowledge?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: Then you go on, these guns, we used to keep them in the ceiling.

MR LAX: Sorry, just stop for a second please. You guys are not pressing the button correctly, we are getting the Zulu translation on the English channel, if you can just be aware of that please.

MR LOWIES: Thank you, that will assist. What do you say about this statement -

"... we used to keep them in the ceiling ..."?

MR NOSENGA: The guns used to be hidden in the ceiling, it is a rotten ceiling near the showers at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Did anybody say at that stage that the Police would be assisting or not? Assisting in the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember, but I remember it being said that the Police were going to be part of the attack on Boipatong, they were going to support us with their casspirs.

MR LOWIES: Who said this?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember very well, there were many people there, the induna's. I was also there, listening as a member of the IFP. There is nothing much I can say, I am just a follower and if a decision has been taken, I just do as instructed.

MR LOWIES: Now did Peens say that he would supply casspirs, according to you, in other words, Peens say he would, very important?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I cannot recall because we did find casspirs at the veld near Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: Now was there any other meeting held after this, before the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there was a meeting held on the 14th, three days before the attack.

MR LOWIES: How do you recall this day, the date? Is there any specific reason why you can remember the date?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it was on the 14th of June 1992, that is when the meeting was held at the hostel.

MR LOWIES: Who Chaired this meeting?

MR NOSENGA: It was a meeting called by the induna's.

MR LOWIES: Who Chaired the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall, the siren was sounded and there were many people present at the meeting so I cannot say who Chaired the meeting.

MR LOWIES: Can you recall anybody that spoke on the meeting, held a speech or whatever?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot commit myself to things I do not remember properly.

MR LOWIES: Can you recall what was said at the meeting, specifics?

MR NOSENGA: The issue of the attack on Boipatong was discussed, although I do not remember about other matters.

MR LOWIES: Was there no planning as to how it would proceed, what would be done, who would be assaulted or killed?

MR NOSENGA: As I stated before, they said dogs should be killed in Boipatong and I regarded that to mean that the entire township should be attacked. It was not specified that certain individuals in the township should be attacked.

MR LOWIES: Wasn't it said that women and children should also be attacked?

MR NOSENGA: They were attacked and killed, they said everyone should be attacked, including women, children, the aged.

MR LOWIES: So they didn't just say the dogs should be attacked, they specifically mentioned women, children, the aged?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, you know, we have been through this thing before, he has told us that he understood that to mean everyone in the township must be killed. That is how he understood it.

MR LOWIES: I will rephrase that. Was it mentioned when the attack would take place or was it only left until the 17th, at this specific meeting now on the 14th?

MR NOSENGA: No, the date was not specified, I myself did not know the date. We did not know when the attack would be launched.

MR LOWIES: Were you at that stage already told that after the attack, you must bring back the weapons and that they would be hidden again in the ceiling or was that only discussed on the 17th?

MR NOSENGA: At that time, that had not been discussed, we did not even know the date at that time. We just heard the siren sounded on the 17th.

MR LOWIES: Was anything said that you would be going to Ulundi afterwards? I am talking still on the 14th?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember, probably.

MR LOWIES: At this stage, was there any Police Officers?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I last saw the Police at that meeting that was held two weeks prior to the attack, where the induna's and hostel dwellers were also present.

MR LOWIES: What time of the day did this take place, in the morning or in the afternoon, I am talking about the meeting on the 14th?

MR NOSENGA: It was held during the day.

MR LOWIES: In the afternoon or in the morning?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember the time, but it was during the day.

MR LOWIES: Did you not finish in the evening?

MR NOSENGA: No, it did not end in the evening, but in the afternoon.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, I have to put this to you and that is this meeting that you are talking about, never occurred. This is something that you have sucked out of your thumb?

MR NOSENGA: There was a meeting held on the 14th. There was a meeting held on the 14th, I don't know what you mean if you say I am sucking it out of my thumb. A meeting was held two weeks prior to the attack and another one was held on the 14th of June.

MR LOWIES: You see in the statement to Mr Kjellberg, and that is why I am also asking you this, to Kjellberg you said that it was there and then on the 14th already decided that the attack would be on the 17th, under cross-examination now you denied that such a decision was taken.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: But both can't be true?

MR NOSENGA: What I am saying is that I don't know about that, on the 14th I did not know what the date of the attack would be, the same applies to the meeting that was held two weeks prior.

MR LOWIES: Because the statement to Mr Kjellberg reads as follows -

"... at this meeting it was decided that the attack should take place on the 17th of June 1992 ..."

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that.

MR LOWIES: I put it to you the reason for this discrepancy is because the meeting never took place and you are sucking this out of your thumb again.

MR NOSENGA: There was a meeting held on the 14th of June.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry Mr Lowies, are these your instructions that there was no meeting on the 14th?

MR LOWIES: From my clients. And according to you in this statement to Mr Kjellberg, you said that -

"... we were given instructions to bring back the weapons which we would be supplied with, to the hostel, after the attack. We were told to hide them in the ceiling at the hostel after the attack ..."

You deny now that something like that was said.

INTERPRETER: Please repeat the last part of that?

MR LOWIES: Are you denying now, or you have denied now, that this was discussed?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. At that meeting on the 14th, we were informed that Boipatong should be attacked, but the date was not specified. I do not know anything about the guns.

MR LOWIES: And there was no discussion ...

ADV SIGODI: Sorry Mr Lowies, I just want to get some clarity, are your instructions that there was no meeting on the 14th specifically, or there was no meeting which took place just shortly before the Boipatong attack?

MR LOWIES: As far as I understand from my clients, there were no meeting to that effect on the 14th.

ADV SIGODI: On the 14th?

MR LOWIES: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: But they don't deny that there was a meeting shortly before the Boipatong attack?

MR LOWIES: Not on the 14th. Mr Nosenga, still what I would like to know from you, is the following. Do you deny now that on the 14th, that there was a discussion that you would be hiding, that you were to hide the weapons in the ceiling and that you would have to bring them back, etc, that was not discussed then?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. I have already stated that Boipatong was discussed and that it should be attacked. With regards to weapons and that they should be hidden in the ceiling, I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: You see you also state in this paragraph that the meeting was headed by the induna's and took place approximately between half past five and eight o'clock in the evening. I specifically asked you whether it didn't end at eight o'clock in the evening, and you said no, it did not, it was held in the day?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: So this is also not correct?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: Therefore it is not correct?

MR LAX: Please Mr Lowies, we don't have to belabour the point every single time, you put this is not correct? It is patently obvious it is not correct if he says he doesn't know it.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair. On the day of the attack, how did you know that this is now going to be the date, this is now the day for the attack?

MR NOSENGA: The alarm was sounded on the 17th and people were called to a meeting. That alarm was sounded on the 17th, the evening.

MR LOWIES: And who Chaired this meeting?

MR NOSENGA: People like Darkie Chonco and others, including Gatchene and some people from Natal whom I did not know. We all went to that meeting.

MR LOWIES: Was Peens there at this specific meeting?

MR NOSENGA: Sir I said I last saw Peens at the meeting held two weeks prior to the attack and we later met him near Boipatong where they had been waiting for us.

MR LOWIES: Was Themba Khosa at this meeting?

MR NOSENGA: No, he was not present. It was just induna's who were present.

MR LOWIES: Did you see Themba Khosa at all on this specific day prior to the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not see him on the 17th.

MR LOWIES: Because in your statement to Mr Kjellberg you say that the trumpets gave a signal and we gathered at the stadium, at the hostel area. When Themba Khosa arrived at the hostel, he gave certain commands to the induna's who informed us that Khosa had obtained the guns and some of them were from Peens? This is not true?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: The only time that you saw Peens on that day, was at the time of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: That is true.

MR LOWIES: Because in paragraph 10 of your statement you say to Mr Kjellberg -

"... I also saw Peens coming to the hostel on the day of the attack, together with his colleague Chaka ...",

so this is not correct?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: "... they came in Peens' private car ...",

not correct?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LOWIES: You even described the car as a white Opel Monza, not correct?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: To Kjellberg you also said -

"... I saw him hand over money to Victor Keswa ...",

not correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did say that during the day of the 17th, he did hand over money to Victor Keswa.

MR LOWIES: No, but I understand from you - sorry, when did he do this, was this after the attack that Peens handed the money, because this is in conflict with what you said earlier? Can you explain?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I said during the day of the 17th, he did hand over money to Victor, they were at a parking lot, the Iscor parking lot.

MR LOWIES: Not at the hostel?

MR LAX: Sorry, please just explain this for us. Why did you say you didn't see him at all, the last time you saw him you said, was two weeks prior? Those were your specific words?

MR NOSENGA: I must have misunderstood. The question was not very clear.

CHAIRPERSON: You see your evidence was that and you were emphatic, you had last seen Peens at a meeting two weeks prior to the attack and the next time you saw him, was when you met them to go for the attack?

MR NOSENGA: That is so, but the question was not very clear. I last saw Curtis on the 17th, during the day when he was standing together with Peens.

CHAIRPERSON: We are not talking about Curtis, we are talking about Peens. Okay, let's get this thing straight now. Did you see Peens on the 17th?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see him during the day and I was with Curtis.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know how he arrived at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: They were outside the hostel at the Iscor parking lot, that is where he was parked.

CHAIRPERSON: So they did not come inside, into the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, they were just standing at the parking lot.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Yes?

MR LAX: Just one thing, sorry, you said he was parked there, so did you see his car?

MR NOSENGA: It was not his car, it was his service vehicle.

MR LAX: Yes, but what kind of car was it if you saw it?

MR NOSENGA: It was a white vehicle.

MR LAX: Yes, what kind?

MR NOSENGA: A Monza.

MR LAX: When you were just asked a few minutes ago whether you saw his white car, an Opel Monza, you said no, no, you don't know anything about that?

MR NOSENGA: I must have misunderstood, but it was a white Monza that he arrived in.

MR LOWIES: Was Peens alone?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him alone.

MR LOWIES: So he did not arrive with Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: No. I don't remember that.

MR LOWIES: Because your statement says that he arrived together with his colleague, Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that. I only saw Chaka during the night of the 17th.

MR LOWIES: Was this the first time for you to see that money was handed by Peens to Victor Keswa?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Do you know whether in the past as a result of what you had been told for instance, that Victor had been getting money from Peens?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not. I saw it happening for the first time on the 17th at that Iscor parking lot.

MR LOWIES: Do you have any suspicion that Peens may have been giving Victor money before, before this specific day?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: Because to Mr Kjellberg you said the following -

"... Victor confirmed to me later that same day that he was given money by Peens on the day of the attack. I often saw Peens meeting Victor Keswa and I am sure that he got money from Peens."

MR NOSENGA: No, all I am saying is that I saw him giving him money on the 17th, and I do not know how much it was.

MR LOWIES: Did Victor Keswa confirm to you at any stage that Peens had given him money, whether on that day or any other day?

MR NOSENGA: No, I saw him on the 17th being given money by Peens.

MR LOWIES: Because your statement says that Victor confirmed that money was given, that you deny?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

MR LOWIES: At the stadium, who gave you muti to drink?

MR NOSENGA: Every person was free to drink that muti at the stadium.

MR LOWIES: The question is who gave it to you sir, who handed you the muti?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember. There was ntelezi at the stadium.

MR LOWIES: Did anybody hand the gun over to you?

MR NOSENGA: No, I picked it up from the ground, no one handed it to me.

MR LOWIES: How many guns would you say, were there, AK47's?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot estimate, but there were.

MR LOWIES: Did you see any other rifles or guns?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, small guns.

MR LOWIES: Such as?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say, I do not know what type of guns they were, but there were shotguns as well.

MR LOWIES: Do you know what a 38 Special Revolver is?

CHAIRPERSON: We can't hear you, what is - speak up please.

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not.

MR LOWIES: Because your statement reads as follows -

"... I was given an AK47 but I know that 38 Special Revolver and shotguns were used?

MR LAX: It is in brackets Mr Lowies, it is explaining what a 38 Special is.

MR LOWIES: Do you know what a 38 Special is?

CHAIRPERSON: Hasn't he just told us that he doesn't know what it is?

MR LOWIES: Where do you get this information from, did you supply this to Mr Kjellberg or do you say that he wrote it out of his own?

MR NOSENGA: What I am saying is that small guns were also present, they were there, but I cannot explain just what type they were.

MR LOWIES: You would never have supplied the name 38 Special to him, or 38 Special?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, it must follow mustn't it, if the man says I don't know what a 38 Special is?

MR LOWIES: I withdraw the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Lowies, you've got to be able to distinguish between matters that are for argument and matters that you can canvass with the witness. Because otherwise if you are going to begin to argue with the witness, you are going to take a lot of time. You can only canvass facts with the witness, once a man has said I don't know what a 38 Special is, that is the end of the matter.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair, I take cognisance. Mr Nosenga, at that stage, were there already traditional weapons in the stadium or not, or did the people have to go and fetch them after that?

MR NOSENGA: The people who had spears, brought them into the stadium when the siren was sounded. The people did bring traditional weapons into the stadium, it was only firearms that were put in a pile and people were asked to choose from that pile.

MR LOWIES: But how would they know to bring their weapons with when there was only a signal at six o'clock? I mean how did they know that this was going to be the time to bring weapons?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, we went into the stadium and we were told that the day had arrived to attack Boipatong. Darkie Chonco brought the firearms and the other residents of the hostel brought their own traditional weapons.

CHAIRPERSON: When the siren went off, did people on their own, go to the stadium?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, when the siren was sounded.

CHAIRPERSON: Has this been interpreted to you, what I have just said? Has this been interpreted to you, what I have just said?

MR NOSENGA: I heard what you have just said.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you hear the interpretation of what I have just said?

MR NOSENGA: No. He is asking me on how people knew that they should bring their weapons to the stadium, and I am explaining that when the siren was sounded, people went into the stadium and they were told that the day had arrived and then they went to fetch their weapons from their rooms.

CHAIRPERSON: So people first went to the stadium and that is where they were told that the day has arrived for the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And then they went back to fetch their spears?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Weapons like spears and axes.

CHAIRPERSON: All right.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, during the tea adjournment, you were in the presence of your legal representative here at the back and she was reading the statement to you in English, without assistance of an Interpreter.

MR NOSENGA: That is not true. How can she read English to me, because I am uneducated.

MR LOWIES: Well in Afrikaans, the question is there is no Interpreter, do you agree with that? She read a statement to you, whether it is Afrikaans or English, but in the absence of an Interpreter?

MS TANZER: Chairman, if I may, he barely understood what I was reading, I barely understood what I was reading, it was all in Afrikaans.

MR LAX: Sorry, I don't understand what is going on here. Who said anything about Afrikaans, I haven't heard anything on the record about Afrikaans at all. What is going on?

MR LOWIES: Chair, no I just want to make a point, this witness understands Afrikaans and English because I saw that his legal representative read stuff to him in Afrikaans or English, one of the languages.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, if you are adamant you can take the oath and come and give evidence to that effect.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair. Do you deny that you understand Afrikaans?

MR NOSENGA: I do not understand it well. There were some parts where I did not understand her.

MR LOWIES: So if she reads a statement to you in Afrikaans, you would understand certain portions of it?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, I don't understand that language, but she was reading the statement and there were parts that I did not understand.

MR LOWIES: Were there parts that you did understand?

CHAIRPERSON: If there were parts that he could not understand, does it not necessarily follow that there were parts that he could have understood?

MR LOWIES: I retract the question. Do you understand English?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not.

MR LOWIES: When she consults with you, does she consult with you in English?

MR NOSENGA: She does speak in English and sometimes Afrikaans, but I do not understand her.

MR LOWIES: But sir, she went through Exhibit U with you, she asked you regarding Exhibit U, without the assistance of an Interpreter, whether your signature appears on certain pages of Exhibit U, correct or not?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, she did ask me in Afrikaans, and she was showing me the pages and the signature.

MR LOWIES: And you need to respond to her yes, this is my signature, no, this is not my signature, you could do that? Have you got an answer?

CHAIRPERSON: ... if you don't have any other questions which are relevant to these issues, hand it over to your other colleagues. The point has been made. We know that he has pointed out the signature. Whether he understood or didn't understand, we have not been told that.

MR LOWIES: I will proceed Chairman. When you left for Boipatong on the night of the attack, did you see at that stage any Policemen?

MR NOSENGA: I only saw those who were in the casspir, the Police who accompanied us on the attack.

MR LOWIES: According to you, who were the Policemen who accompanied you?

MR NOSENGA: The Police Officers that I knew were Peens, Danie, Rooikop, Chaka and some other big Police Officer who was driving, but I did not know the rest.

MR LOWIES: How would you have been able to recognise each other during the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, we could. We did have identifying marks that we used to recognise each other.

MR LOWIES: What were these marks?

MR NOSENGA: We all wore red headbands and the Police were wearing copper hats when they entered Boipatong.

MR LOWIES: They were wearing, what were the Police wearing?

MR LAX: He said copper hats, that is a word for a balaclava.

MR LOWIES: Oh. What was the colour of these headbands, only red?

MR NOSENGA: We were wearing red headbands.

MR LAX: The question was were you wearing only red headbands?

MR NOSENGA: I only saw the red headbands and we were in our private clothes.

MR LOWIES: Can you describe these headbands besides the fact that they were red?

MR NOSENGA: I know that they were red and we wore them around our heads.

MR LOWIES: Have you seen red headbands like these, before?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question.

MR LOWIES: Have you seen red headbands like this before? Before the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I saw them when we were issued with them on the night of the attack.

MR LOWIES: So it was issued to you? By whom?

MR NOSENGA: We were given by Darkie Chonco, so that we could identify one another. We would use those headbands to identify one another, so that we don't shoot one another.

MR LOWIES: You do not know where he got hold of them? Did you see?

MR NOSENGA: I would not know. I just saw him carrying them in his possession, I do not know where he got them from.

MR LOWIES: When was the decision taken to have these headbands, to wear them?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember correctly.

MR LOWIES: Did everybody wear red headbands?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, the hostel residents. The Police were clad in balaclavas.

MR LOWIES: What was the colour of the Police casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: They were the same colour as the small SAP vans, they were yellow.

MR LOWIES: All of them?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, all of them.

MR LOWIES: Not one was camouflaged?

MR NOSENGA: No, I just saw the four yellow casspirs.

MR LOWIES: Were there not six, is it not possible that there were six, six casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I saw four casspirs, not six.

MR LOWIES: Because in your statement you say -

"... I saw four to six casspirs parked in the field ..."?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that number, six, I only saw four.

MR LOWIES: Did you enter actually into one of those casspirs, or were you one of the ones that walked next to it, beside it?

CHAIRPERSON: But isn't his evidence that he was in the Police casspir? He has repeatedly said this and you have canvassed this.

MR LOWIES: I withdraw the question. Can you recall who was in the casspir with you?

CHAIRPERSON: You have asked him these questions, have you not Mr Lowies? I cannot locate the specific area in my notes, I will give you the benefit of the doubt, Mr Lowies and allow you to ask the question.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair. Who were in the casspir with you, on your way to Boipatong?

MS CAMBANIS: After lunch on Monday, Chair, a few pages after lunch.

MR LOWIES: I did not ask anything on Monday, he was still in chief. I started on Tuesday morning as you can recall.

CHAIRPERSON: He was only cross-examining as from Tuesday. Cross-examine him.

MR LOWIES: Could I get the names please of the ones with you in the casspir?

CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry, the time now is about five past one.

MR LOWIES: It a convenient time to take the adjournment.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Could I maybe just request from you Chair, to get the answer before we adjourn or would that be inconvenient to you?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, get the answer.

MR LOWIES: I am indebted to you.

MR NOSENGA: I was with Gatchene, Lucky Stikenauw as well as Dondo and Themba and other Police Officers, Peens amongst them, Rooikop as well and Chaka and some other fat Officer who was driving the casspir.

MR LAX: Could you just repeat, not the Policemen but the other people that were with you, I didn't catch all the names, I am afraid.

CHAIRPERSON: You mentioned Gatchene, Lucky, Dondo, Themba who ...

MR NOSENGA: And myself.

CHAIRPERSON: All right, so there were five of you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Gatchene was an induna.

CHAIRPERSON: Lucky, Dondo, Themba, yourself and then Chaka, Peens, Rooikop and the driver?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: We will come back at two o'clock.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION:

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (s.u.o)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR LOWIES: (cont)

Thank you. Mr Nosenga, do you know a person by the name of Tsamo?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I know Tsamo.

MR LOWIES: Was he also in the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember. No, I don't remember.

MR LOWIES: Do you know a chap by the name of Makuka?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I know Makuka.

MR LOWIES: Was he in the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: No, not in the casspir in which I was travelling.

MR LOWIES: Do you know a chap by the name of Makeze?

CHAIRPERSON: Who?

MR LOWIES: Makeze.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you spell it for us please.

MR LOWIES: Makeze.

MR NOSENGA: I don't quite understand.

CHAIRPERSON: Speak up Mr Nosenga.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I don't know the person he is talking about. Maybe if you can write the name differently I can know.

MR LOWIES: Mkhize?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I know Mkhize.

MR LOWIES: Was he in the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember him present in the casspir.

MR LOWIES: In the attack on Boipatong, was there anybody from Natal who took part in this attack?

MR NOSENGA: Even though I don't know them personally, they were present. There were many people from Natal during the attack. I don't know them.

MR LOWIES: How can you say they are from Natal?

MR NOSENGA: They are men from Natal, they speak Zulu, they are not from around the Vaal, that is why I am saying they are from Natal. They speak Zulu.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, can I just clarify this with the applicant. When you say there were many people from Natal, were these people from the hostel who came from Natal, or were these people who had arrived from Natal to the hostel, specifically for the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: No, which one? Do you understand the difference?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand the difference.

ADV SIGODI: Let me say it again, it can either be people who stayed in the hostel, but were from Natal, or it can be people who were from Natal, but who had arrived at the hostel specifically to assist maybe specifically for the attack? Which is which?

MR NOSENGA: They were residents at the hostel, many of them were originally from Natal.

MR LOWIES: Have you ever been to Masinga?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know Masinga.

MR LOWIES: Did you know anybody from Masinga at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: There were people from Masinga, yes, but there is no one particular person that I can point out as having come from Masinga.

MR LOWIES: Did Chaka say anything to you on the way to Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember sir. Yes, they were talking, but I cannot remember.

MR LOWIES: Did Chaka say anything that he has something against the people in the township?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, what are you looking at? Look up so that you can hear what the question is.

MR NOSENGA: May the question please be repeated?

MR LAX: Just one second, are you having a problem with your headphones again, you seem to be touching them and rolling your eyes?

MR NOSENGA: I hear, but I do not understand quite well.

MR LAX: If you put that thing again facing this thing on the end of the pole here, you will hear a better signal. Can you hear properly now? Put it flat, can you hear?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can hear.

MR LAX: Clearly?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR LAX: Thank you. Sorry Mr Lowies, let's just make sure it doesn't happen again.

MR LOWIES: I understand, thank you Chair. Did Chaka say anything regarding this attitude towards the people in Boipatong on your way to Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember.

MR LOWIES: Do you know of your own accord whether Chaka, or do you know from any knowledge, whether Chaka had problems with the people in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I said I don't know but then I don't think he could have had a problem with the people of Boipatong, because his house was burnt down at Zone 6.

MR LOWIES: How do you know this?

MR NOSENGA: People of Boipatong did not harass him in any way. I am saying that I cannot know as to why he attacked Boipatong, because the people of Boipatong did not harass him, because his house was burnt in Zone 6, Sebokeng.

MR LOWIES: Did Chaka say that he had to kill the dogs because his house had been burnt down by the ANC?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember sir.

MR LOWIES: Mr Chairman, I had been bribed by my colleagues to stop my cross-examination, no, in all seriousness, I have no further questions. The further aspects fall better within the ambit of knowledge of my other colleagues and at this stage then, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: I have even forgotten that you said you were going to ask two questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR LOWIES

CHAIRPERSON: Who is next in line? Thank you Mr Lowies. I think I am next in line, Mr Chairperson.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PRETORIUS: Mr Nosenga, you said this morning you don't know a Special 38 revolver at all, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I don't know.

MS PRETORIUS: On the 15th of June 1992, when you went out to Sebokeng for the drive-by shootings, what kind of weapons did you use on that day?

MR NOSENGA: I did mention that I was using an AK47.

MS PRETORIUS: That is on the 15th of June, not the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, at Sebokeng, that is right.

MS PRETORIUS: You see, why I am asking you that is because I have the court file here, I have copies for everybody Mr Chairperson, it will be

Exhibit V I think. I have paginated some of them, some of the Exhibits. On page 13 Mr Nosenga, it is unfortunately in Afrikaans, it will be Exhibit V, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you able to sort out the number of pages in Exhibit U?

MR LOWIES: I have requested Mr Hanro Fredrech to have a look at it, I don't know how far he has gone with it.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, very well. All right. Which page?

MS PRETORIUS: Page 13. There is a plea that you gave to the Court on the day that you pleaded guilty to the nine charges of murder, six of attempted murder and then also for the weapon and ammunition which you had. I would like to refer you to page 14, paragraph 3.3. There you pleaded -

"... I had a .38 revolver and shot with it through the window as I was sitting on the right hand back seat. I did not fire any shots on the minibus taxi."

According to this plea that you gave in court, in the Supreme Court, you used a .38 revolver. Can you give an explanation for that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know where they got that .38 revolver from.

MS PRETORIUS: Did you sign the plea on page 15?

MR NOSENGA: No, no. This is my name yes, but this is not, yes it is me who signed here, that is my name, Matanzima.

MS PRETORIUS: Matanzima, that is your signature. So you did sign that this is correct in court on that day?

MR NOSENGA: But they did not find me in possession of a 38.

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Nosenga, I will leave it at that. I think it is quite clear what you are saying here.

CHAIRPERSON: You see the - you have stated that you have signed the document that Counsel has just drawn your attention to, right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: You see, what you are being asked is at page 14, paragraph 3.3 in which you say you were in possession of a .38 revolver.

MR LAX: He handled?

CHAIRPERSON: Well, he handled, yes?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know that, I was not arrested in possession of the 38.

CHAIRPERSON: But did you say in that statement, did you tell anyone at any stage that you handled a .38 revolver?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible I said that, but I know that I had an AK. There were others with revolvers or pistols.

CHAIRPERSON: No, but did you tell anyone that you handled a .38 revolver during the Sebokeng or the Everton attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember sir.

MR LAX: Can I just ask something, have you ever handled a revolver? Do you know what a revolver is as opposed to a pistol?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't. I cannot compare the two, I don't know which is which.

MR LAX: Well, why did you plead guilty to be using a 38 revolver when you used an AK47?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know how this came to be included in the document here.

MS PRETORIUS: Mr Nosenga, you told the Committee that many people came to see you whilst you were in prison. Can you remember whether a Miss Nichols came to see you?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember very well.

MS PRETORIUS: Did any lady, a white lady come and see you in prison and this is quite some time ago, in 1995 or in 1996?

MR NOSENGA: Not in 1995, I cannot remember very well.

MS PRETORIUS: In 1996?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't remember very well.

MS PRETORIUS: Do you know whether Ms Cambanis visited you in prison?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know Cambanis.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Cambanis is the lady who is sitting there.

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember very well.

MS PRETORIUS: Because why I am asking you, on this court file, there is a sticker that Nichols Cambanis and Associates asked for the typing of the record of this matter on the 26th of February 1996. I thought maybe they came to see you before they asked for the typing of the record, that is on page 1.

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember very well.

MS PRETORIUS: When Brian and Mr Berger went to see you, can you tell the Committee what did they say, why did they go and see you, can you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: They said they had come to see me concerning the Boipatong matter, I mentioned this yesterday as well.

MS PRETORIUS: No, I realise that but I want to know were they the first people who came to see you in connection with Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, the first people to come to Leeukop prison, was Mongezi.

MS PRETORIUS: Yes, but in the statement that he had completed for you, there is not mention of Boipatong, so that is why I am asking you.

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know. They asked me about the Boipatong as well as Sebokeng issues.

MS PRETORIUS: Brian, can you give us any idea who Brian is? Was he an Attorney or a person from the ANC, a person from the TRC?

MR NOSENGA: He was an Attorney, he was not coming from the ANC or the TRC.

MS PRETORIUS: How do you know he was an Attorney?

MR NOSENGA: He told me that he is an Advocate from Johannesburg, that he had been sent to me by Mongezi.

MS PRETORIUS: Is that what Brian said to you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, when I was in Stofberg.

MS PRETORIUS: No, I realise that but you said that Brian and Mr Berger came to see you, so I just want to get it clear. Brian said to you he was an Advocate from Johannesburg who had been sent by Mongezi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he had come in the company of Mr Berger.

MS PRETORIUS: Do you know when that was?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember.

MS PRETORIUS: Can you remember which year, whether it was last year, the year before that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot remember.

MS PRETORIUS: Can I ask you this, can you remember how long after you had made the statement to Mongezi, did they come to see you?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember. A long time expired before he came.

MS PRETORIUS: A long time expired after you had made the statement, before they came?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it has been a long time after the statement was made.

MS PRETORIUS: Is it possible that they came after you heard Victor Mthembu talking on the TV?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know. I cannot tell a lie.

MS PRETORIUS: Did you give a written statement to them, or did they only take notes or what happened on that day?

MR NOSENGA: They had a paper like this, I don't know whether they were taking notes or what. They said to me they wanted a statement about what happened at Boipatong.

MS PRETORIUS: And you told them what had happened according to you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did.

MS PRETORIUS: You see, because it is so strange that the first document that you admit to signing, doesn't mention Boipatong at all, and the next document that you admit to signing, is the document taken in this year, 1999 that refers to Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know.

CHAIRPERSON: You are referring to pages 18 to 23?

MS PRETORIUS: That is correct, I am sorry, I didn't refer to that. That is correct Mr Chairman. That is the document that Mr Lowies today has been asking you about, that is the first document that is in front of the Committee, that you admit to, speaking about Boipatong because the unsigned document is not, you didn't sign the unsigned document? The second document, the application form, the second application form, you did not admit to and then also the letter that you wrote, let me just say the second application form is the document on pages 11, 12 and 13, that is the other one you did not admit to and then this document that is for indemnity, you also said it is not your signature, the next letter is a letter written by you, but there Boipatong is not mentioned, so the first document that you admit to about Boipatong, is the one that was taken this year, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know.

MS PRETORIUS: Because I want to put it to you that when this Committee started, there was no application of you in front of this Committee and it was only in January, the 19th of January that any statement was put before this Committee that you admit to, that was in connection with the Boipatong incident?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know how it happened, I don't know.

MS PRETORIUS: I have no further questions, thank you Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PRETORIUS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Da Silva, do you also need a month?

MR DA SILVA: Mr Chairman, you ruled on Monday afternoon that I wouldn't ask questions, so ...

CHAIRPERSON: You have a version that you have to put and you are fully entitled to have that denied or ...

MR DA SILVA: Well, the witness doesn't implicate my client. There is only one aspect that I wish to canvass if I am allowed to do so Mr Chairman, a very short aspect.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, before we come to you, because you are an implicated person, why don't we finish with the applicants first, and that will be Mr Strydom.

MR DA SILVA: As it pleases you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: That is if he has any questions.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: I've got a few.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Just as an introduction Mr Nosenga, I just want to put to you three things that has been put to you again, but on behalf of the applicants that I appear for, I just want to put it to you. Firstly I want to put it to you that you were not staying in the hostel during June 1992?

MR NOSENGA: That is not correct.

MR STRYDOM: Secondly I want to put it to you that you were not part of the attackers that attacked Boipatong on the 17th of June 1992.

MR NOSENGA: I was present at the time of the arrest on Boipatong on the 17th.

MR STRYDOM: Thirdly Mr Nosenga, I want to put to you therefore your implication of the Police in this attack, is false.

MR NOSENGA: No, it is not false.

MR STRYDOM: You told us that you grew up in Everton?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Did you go to Boipatong from time to time?

MR NOSENGA: It was for the first time in 1991 that I was fleeing from the ANC comrades of Everton, that is when I went to kwaMadala hostel. I only went there for the first time in 1991.

MR STRYDOM: No Mr Nosenga, I am asking about Boipatong. When did you go to Boipatong for the first time in your life?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall, but yes, I used to go to Boipatong before I went to stay at the hostel of kwaMadala.

MR STRYDOM: Can you give any reasons why you went to Boipatong from time to time?

MR NOSENGA: I had relatives who had been killed there, I had relatives, I was visiting my relatives.

MR STRYDOM: You also said that they were killed. Were they killed during the Boipatong attack?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Can you give any names of any of your relatives that were killed during the Boipatong attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, not now, maybe if you could go to my family they will give you names, because we have Nosenga's as our relatives in Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: But why did you say that relatives of yours were killed, do you have specific knowledge in that regard, or is it only speculation or why did you mention that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I am not speculating. My family came to tell me that I also participated in killing my relatives in Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: You were asked Mr Nosenga, why did you go to Boipatong before the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And you said that you used to go there because you had relatives that you were visiting?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct and friends as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Friends?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You said that your relatives were killed during the attack?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, but you did not know the names of these relatives?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know them.

MR LAX: Can I just clarify something please, the people you don't know, are the people who were killed in the attack, have I understood you correctly?

MR NOSENGA: At the time we were attacking Boipatong sir.

MR LAX: What I would like to ask you is what about those who were killed before the attack, who were the reason why you went to visit your relatives there, who were those people? Do you understand, you are looking puzzled?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't understand.

MR LAX: You have just told us this, you were asked had you been to Boipatong before the attack and you said yes, you went there to visit relatives and friends who had been killed there. This was before the attack, you then went on to say that there were also relatives killed during the attack. What I want to know is which of your relatives did you go and visit before the attack in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't know their names, but yes, we have our relatives bearing the same surname in Boipatong.

MR LAX: And do you know how they were killed and why they were killed, these people whose families you went to visit?

MR NOSENGA: It is at the time when we went out on this Boipatong massacre, they too were killed because they were also residents.

MR LAX: No, you are misunderstanding me. We are talking about people whom you visited before the attack, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

MR LAX: Now, what we are trying to understand is those people killed before the attack, how were they killed and what was it over and was it in violence perhaps or was it just natural causes, we don't know so we are just trying to get a picture of why you went to Boipatong and what it was about. Do you understand?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

MR LAX: Can you help us?

MR NOSENGA: They were killed during the times of violence at Boipatong.

MR LAX: Can you recall approximately how many times people were killed from your family who were living there?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not remember.

MR LAX: Can you recall by whom they would have been killed, if they were killed in the violence, it would have been by one or other of the sides or the people involved in the violence?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know really.

MR LAX: So you don't know to which political grouping or supporters they may have belonged, the people who were killed?

MR NOSENGA: I can explain shortly about my family. Most members of my family are not involved in politics, they just go to church.

MR LAX: Yes, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Do I then understand you to say some of your relatives were killed during the unrest in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And others were killed during the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, I heard that my relatives had been killed, when we launched that attack on Boipatong. That is what I heard. I am not sure whether any relative of mine died before that attack.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I am lost now. When my colleague asked you a moment ago, I understood you to say that there were relatives, some of your relatives were killed in Boipatong during the unrest?

MR NOSENGA: No, I must have misunderstood that question. My relatives were killed during the attack on Boipatong, when the hostel residents went on that attack on Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: I see, so when you went on to say - you did not know who killed those relatives? I see. Your relatives were only killed during the attack on Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And these are the relatives you used to go and visit prior to the attack?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, and these are the relatives that you don't know their names?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, I have forgotten their names.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg yours?

MR NOSENGA: I have forgotten their names.

CHAIRPERSON: Surnames?

MR NOSENGA: They are Nosenga's.

CHAIRPERSON: I see.

ADV SIGODI: Where did they stay in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Some stayed in Slovo Park and some stayed in the township, but I do not remember now because I have spent some time in prison.

ADV SIGODI: Can you remember the Zone in the township, in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know, but they stayed in the township, I will just take a taxi, but I don't know which Zone they stayed in.

ADV SIGODI: Do you know the street?

MR NOSENGA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, let me ask you Mr Nosenga, if you don't understand a question, say so, so that we can repeat the question or explain the question to you. Yes?

MR SIBANYONI: Mr Nosenga, who are your friends whom you visited in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before sir, I have forgotten their names, but I did have relatives that I used to visit in Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: No, you are not being asked about your relatives, you are being asked about the friends, your friends that you visited in Boipatong, do you understand the difference?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. The one person that I remember is Vusi.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. What is his surname?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know the surname.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR STRYDOM: How many of your relatives were killed during the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember how many they were.

MR STRYDOM: According to you, were some of your friends also killed during the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I do not have knowledge in that regard, but I did have friends in Boipatong. I am not in a position to tell you whether they did die or not during that attack.

MR STRYDOM: So this person you mentioned, Vusi, was he killed or injured according to you during the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember.

MR STRYDOM: How can you say you do not remember, do you know if he was injured or don't you know?

MR NOSENGA: Sir I do not know whether he was injured or killed.

MR STRYDOM: You testified that your relatives that were killed, have the same surname and you also said Nosenga. I want to put to you that I've got the list here of all the people that were killed during the attack, and there is not a Nosenga amongst them, do you have any comment?

MR NOSENGA: I was told that my relatives had been killed in that attack. My family told me so. It is not something that I have just made up.

MR STRYDOM: Who told you that, which family member of you told you that?

MR NOSENGA: My sister, Nomvula.

MR STRYDOM: Now that you have testified that you had been in Boipatong prior to the attack, I want to know how well do you know the township itself? I will start off by asking you do you know the name of any street in that township?

MR NOSENGA: No, as I stated before, I do not know the street names.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know the factories on the northern side of Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, I will be telling a lie.

MR STRYDOM: Do you a company by the name of Metal Box?

MR NOSENGA: No, I only know of the factories near Tserelo, close to the BP garage.

MR STRYDOM: Are you sure it is a BP garage near Tserelo that you are referring to?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is a BP garage. It is close to the robots, it is close to the robots and there are factories near by.

CHAIRPERSON: But do you know the Metal Box, is it Metal Box, yes, the Metal Box firm?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know, it could be one of those.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know this BP garage has got the yellow and green colours that is connected to these garages, do you know that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not.

CHAIRPERSON: What he is saying to you is that BP garages have a yellow and a green colour. Do you know that?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible, but I cannot tell a lie. I know that it is painted, but I do not know the colours.

MR STRYDOM: The garage that you are referring to, can you state which colour is painted at that garage?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot.

MR STRYDOM: You see, I want to put to you that the garage on the corner, close to Tserelo is actually a Trek garage, will you agree to that?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that. As I stated before, the garage I know is next to the robots, and there are factories close by, on your way to Sebokeng.

MR STRYDOM: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: How often, prior to the attack, how often did you go to Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I used to visit, but not regularly. I would go there once and go there again after a while, it was not an everyday occurrence. I would go there once and go there again after a couple of days.

CHAIRPERSON: How would you get there, would you use a taxi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I used to board Taxi's to Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: During these visits, did you also go to Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: I used to go to the township, but I did have a relative in Slovo Park. I used to visit those people who resided in the township.

MR STRYDOM: I want to know did you visit relatives or any other people for that matter, in Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, I had relatives at Slovo Park as well as at Boipatong, the township, but I used to visit the township.

MR LAX: You still haven't answered the question. Just listen carefully to the question and we will all finish a lot quicker. The question was a simple one, have you visited anybody, let's put it as plainly as that, at Slovo Park, yes or no?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR STRYDOM: So the first time you ever set foot in Slovo Park, was the night that you went there to attack according to you?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. That was the first time I went to Slovo Park.

CHAIRPERSON: You didn't visit your relative who is at Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: No, I used to visit the township. I would go to the township, not to the shack area.

MR STRYDOM: Can you give any indication in relation to the township, where will you find Slovo Park? Can you state the Slovo Park section, in relation to the township Boipatong, where would you find that?

MR NOSENGA: When you enter Boipatong and you go down the street, there is a mixed hostel. Further down there is a clump of trees and further down you will find Slovo Park, that is after you have left the township, on your way towards Sharpeville.

MR STRYDOM: If you come from kwaMadala hostel, will you first get the township, that is now Boipatong, and then Slovo Park, or will you first get Slovo Park and then Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question.

MR STRYDOM: When you come from the kwaMadala hostel side going towards the township, will you first get Slovo Park and then Boipatong township, or the other way around, that is to say first Boipatong township and then Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: You pass the township first.

MR STRYDOM: This hostel you are referring to, does it have a name?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know the name of the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: This hostel, is it situated amongst houses in the Boipatong township or is it on the side?

MR NOSENGA: It is close to the houses, this is not far from the houses. It is also next to a big shop. From the taxi rank, the hostel is just some distance away.

MR STRYDOM: So on the occasions you went to Boipatong prior to the attack, and you used taxi's, you could see this hostel?

MR NOSENGA: When you board a taxi from Everton, as you enter Boipatong, you enter by the garage and go down the main street and the hostel is close to the taxi rank.

MR STRYDOM: The question is if you use a taxi and you want to go to Boipatong, the taxi, you get out of the taxi, will you see the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: So on previous occasions when you went there, you saw that there is a hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I could see the hostel. It is a mixed hostel.

MR STRYDOM: What do you mean a mixed hostel, is it for women and men, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is a mixed hostel, men and women and children live in there.

MR STRYDOM: I want you to have a look at Exhibit M1 and 2, but I will show you M2, that is the colour photograph, M1 is the other photograph, it is not a coloured photograph. M2 is the colour photograph, I am going to refer you to M2, the coloured picture. Before I ask you questions about this Exhibit, I want you to orientate yourself, have a proper look, see if you understand it. I will point out to you where the kwaMadala hostel is situated. It is just out of sight, but on this side. The kwaMadala hostel is this side, I will also show you the factories, do you see the factories? That is an aerial photo, do you see the Boipatong township?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Can you point out Slovo Park on this photograph?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot see properly, there are many houses here.

MR STRYDOM: What I want to show you further, let me ask you first, Frikkie Meyer Boulevard, do you know the name of that street, do you know the street?

MR NOSENGA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: What was the address of the relatives that you visited in Boipatong? What street did they live in?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know the street name.

CHAIRPERSON: I am not asking you about Frikkie Boulevard, I am asking you about the name of the street, be very careful, the name of the street where your relatives lived in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know. I do not know the street name.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say you don't know the name of the street, because of (indistinct) - did you say (indistinct)

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am not educated therefore I cannot know which name is which.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know the house number?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember it well.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, in regard to any of your relatives who were in Boipatong, you don't know the street names or the house numbers?

MR NOSENGA: No, I just know the physical houses.

CHAIRPERSON: I see, yes.

MR STRYDOM: You know the road that runs from Vanderbijlpark to Sebokeng, the tar road, do you know the road? I want to show it on this picture, and I will also show you the garage on the corner and the tar road that turns across this picture. Do you know that road?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot say I do know the road, I just see a lot of houses in the picture.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but forget about the picture now, when you come from kwaMadala hostel and you want to go to Boipatong, you will cross a tarred road, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Are you referring to the road from Vanderbijl to Sebokeng, because there is a road from Vanderbijl to Sebokeng and there is also another one that goes into the township itself. You can also use the roads that goes via a bush or forest.

MR STRYDOM: I am referring to the road that will take you from Vanderbijl to Sebokeng, the tar road you will cross if you come from kwaMadala hostel and you want to go to Boipatong. That is Frikkie Meyer Boulevard, do you know that road?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not know it.

MR STRYDOM: You testified already that there is an intersection there at the garage, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that.

MR STRYDOM: At the garage, there is an intersection, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Now, which two roads intersect there?

MR NOSENGA: There is a road that goes under the bridge from the hostel, there is also a garage and factories. There is one road that takes you to the hostel, to the township and there is another one that takes you towards Sebokeng and the garage is just there.

MR STRYDOM: And there is a robot there at the intersection, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: True.

MR STRYDOM: The night of the attack, when you left the hostel with the other attackers, which route did you follow towards Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: We left the main gate of the hostel and we went along the tar road and went under the bridge. We did not take the tar road towards Boipatong, but there is a forest near the hostel and that is the route which we took. From that spot, the garage is a distance away. That is where we stopped and found the casspirs waiting for us.

CHAIRPERSON: Just repeat again.

MR NOSENGA: We went under the bridge from the hostel, there is a clump of trees near the robots, we did not take the street, the tarred roads towards Boipatong township, but there is a route towards that forest, it was a forest in Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: Is a road or just a path?

MR NOSENGA: It is a footpath.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: Before you reach the township itself.

MR STRYDOM: On your way to Boipatong that night, did you go passed that robots at the garage?

MR NOSENGA: No, we did not take that route, we took the other one that moved towards the veld.

CHAIRPERSON: Where were the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: They parked at the veld, just before you get into the township.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that in your evidence in chief, you said that the group went to the robots at the garage.

MR NOSENGA: I mentioned that on our way back, that is where we went, not on our way to the township. I mentioned that route when I was questioned on the route we took on our way back from Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: I can refer you to my note, in fact it says ...

"... we took the main road and we went to the BP ...",

in fact you said the BP, not the robot, the BP, referring to the garage?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that.

MR STRYDOM: In your evidence in chief, you testified that we took the main road and my note is then went to the BP garage.

MR NOSENGA: No, I was questioned on the route we took on our return. I explained the route we took and where the casspirs were parked. When we came back, we went via that route near the BP garage. I don't know whether you misunderstood me or what.

MR STRYDOM: I just want to put to you the record will speak for itself, so you say on your way back, you went passed, on foot, passed the BP garage, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. That is what I stated.

CHAIRPERSON: The note which I took down just before lunch on Monday, it says -

"... we were told we would meet the Police outside the hostel, near the BP garage ..."

They said that we must attack on 17th June. This is a report that he was giving in relation to the 14th of June, where he says we were told we had to attack.

ADV SIGODI: They said the day has come, let us prepare ourselves.

CHAIRPERSON: They said we were to attack on 17th June, we were told, this is now at this meeting of the 14th, we would meet the Police outside the hostel, near the BP garage.

MR LAX: There is another portion just before that.

MR STRYDOM: There is a portion, I can just read my note Chairperson. Were you divided into groups, that was the question ...

CHAIRPERSON: Was that before this one?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, "no one group cross bridge", I've got telegram style notes here, "came across casspirs. We took main road, went to BP" and then I've got "open veld" after that.

MR LAX: If I could just say my notes says "we went towards the BP garage", but I've got here "we took the main road to leave the hostel via the gate, went towards BP garage, down towards bridge, came across the casspirs."

MR BERGER: Chairperson, if I can assist, my note reads "left the hostel in one group, crossed the bridge and came across the casspirs. We took the main road towards BP, crossed open veld to the bridge, where we came across the casspirs."

MR LAX: Yes, more or less ...

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I accept that, I've got a telegram style, "went towards BP", I haven't got "towards" here.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, was it before the portion that I have just read?

MR LAX: Yes.

MR BERGER: Apparently it is after.

CHAIRPERSON: It is after that, oh, okay. Let me just get it. Yes, okay very well.

MR BERGER: I don't take everything, but it comes after the question were there any women at the stadium, which is before they left the stadium.

CHAIRPERSON: All right. Yes, "went through the main gate, we proceeded towards the BP garage, at the open space we met the casspirs." Is that ...

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I will take it from there. The place where you met the casspirs, was that on the Boipatong side of the main road, or still on the kwaMadala side of that road?

MR NOSENGA: On the Boipatong side, that is where we met the casspirs in the veld.

MR STRYDOM: Okay, now I want you to look at Exhibit M2 again and if you accept that the garage is where I pointed point (d) on that paragraph, I also want to point out an open veld on this side, on the Boipatong side of the tar road, is that the veld where you got the casspirs, or found the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: That is the garage near the robots. This is the spot where we met the casspirs, this is the veld. There is a main road.

MR STRYDOM: Just for record purposes, the witness points to that piece of veld between the main road and Boipatong, it seems to be many footpaths running through that area there.

MR LAX: Perhaps Mr Strydom, you could point out to him that were the tree actually is, that is point (a)?

MR STRYDOM: You referred to a tree, I want you to have a look at this sketch, do you see any tree on that photo?

MR NOSENGA: Here the tree is and here is the veld, and there is the BP garage. I can see although it is not very clear. Here is the veld where we met the casspirs.

MR STRYDOM: The trees you are pointing out, is in front of the factories, if you accept those are the factories, point (e). Just point the trees again.

MR NOSENGA: There - at the Boipatong robots, there are trees around there, but I cannot see properly on that map.

MR STRYDOM: Sorry, I didn't get an interpretation.

MR LAX: What was the last part of what he said, he said something about Boipatong, etc. It wasn't translated to us.

INTERPRETER: He said there was a clump of trees near the robot, the robots at Boipatong and he was repeating that there is a route that goes towards Boipatong and another one that goes towards Sebokeng.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. Did the group follow the tar road up to the robots or not?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, but we did not proceed to the robots directly, but we took another route towards Boipatong. The route that we took, went towards the veld, we did not go directly to the robots.

MR STRYDOM: Can you explain how did the group get to that area where you found the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: We were one big group when we left the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, and when you eventually got to the tar road and you have to cross the tar road now to get to the Boipatong side, how did you get from there, to the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: We were one group when we left the hostel, and as we approached the robots, we turned towards the route that goes towards the veld, and the route that we took, was not very far from the robots. As we proceeded along that route, we found those casspirs, that was just before you enter the township.

MR STRYDOM: Can you walk across this tar road and walk onto the open veld area between the tar road and Boipatong, without any problems?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that.

MR STRYDOM: As the group went over the tarred road towards Boipatong, did you have any problems getting onto the veld area, or did you have to follow a specific route to get there?

MR NOSENGA: As I mentioned before, we were one group and we did not go towards the robots, but branched off towards that veld. That is where we met the casspirs. As we left the hostel, we were just one group, until we reached that veld.

MR STRYDOM: I want to show you Exhibit M2 again.

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Strydom, you know M2 is so vague with regard to that part of the world, M1 is very clear with regard to the departure from the hostel and crossing the roads and all that stuff.

MR STRYDOM: I just want to make sure that I have the same M1. Is M1 ...

MR LAX: M1 has e, f, g, h at the top of it. Unfortunately mine is in black and white but it is much clearer.

MR STRYDOM: Sorry, yes, I should have referred the witness to this photograph. I am going to show you, this is M2, just orientate yourself, see if you can understand that sketch.

MR LAX: Sorry that is M1 as we've got it recorded.

MR STRYDOM: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that M1? All right.

MR STRYDOM: Just to make it easier, do you see the kwaMadala hostel depicted where I point it to you now?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Do you see the factories that I show to you now?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Do you see the main road from Vereeniging to Vanderbijl, or Sebokeng/Vanderbijl?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: And do you see the Boipatong township that I point to you now?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Do you see the main road running in front of the factories?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Do you also see the intersection between these two roads there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: And I point to you now where the garage is, do you see where the garage is?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Now let's start with the position of the casspirs, can you indicate on this Exhibit M1 now the position of the casspirs, where you found them?

MR NOSENGA: There. That is where we found the casspirs.

MR STRYDOM: Just make a cross where you say the casspirs were, if you can make a cross.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, near that forest.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, the cross I will point out ...

CHAIRPERSON: (Indistinct)

MR STRYDOM: There are other crosses, the one cross, I will encircle that cross.

CHAIRPERSON: Shall we put his initials next to that cross?

MR STRYDOM: I will do so Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: AMN. Did you say you encircled it?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I circled it because there are other crosses as well, so I just marked that cross with a circle to indicate which one the applicant marked.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, okay, very well. That is the cross which is more or less towards the corner of the, the intersection of the roads, between (e) and (f)?

MR STRYDOM: I can see now, but in the veld. That is the one Chairperson.

MR LAX: Yes, I've got it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson. I want you to indicate now how the group got to that position where the casspirs were - the route.

CHAIRPERSON: From the hostel?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, from the hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand what is being required of you?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I do sir.

CHAIRPERSON: All right.

MR STRYDOM: Just point out the route that was followed towards that - I am going to give you a marker pen, pink marker pen, can you draw a line to show ...

MR LAX: Mr Strydom, it might be easier if he just uses his finger, he is not familiar with it.

MR NOSENGA: I cannot see this road quite well. There are several roads here. It is a garage here and factories here, this is the route along here, along Vanderbijlpark, this is the road that we took.

MR STRYDOM: If I point to you the main gate of kwaMadala hostel, I want you to confirm that. It is near that green roofs there, just on the one side of kwaMadala hostel. Was that the position of the main gate?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct sir, that is where the main gate is.

MR STRYDOM: Do you see a parking area in front of the main gate? That is that grey area.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can see that.

MR STRYDOM: Do you see the road that comes from Iscor towards the robots and towards the BP garage?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can see it sir.

MR STRYDOM: The question is, after you left the main gate, you got onto the tar road, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, the main road, the one that goes under the bridge.

MR STRYDOM: You walked along underneath the bridge, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: And you were following the route now towards the BP, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, now do you see the intersection between Frikkie Meyer and the other road, there at the robots, although you cannot see the robot, but do you see the intersection?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot even see the garage.

MR STRYDOM: But if I point out to you the intersection and I put to you the intersection is at that point I am showing to you now, do you see it, the intersection of that road and that road, do you see that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Yes, I can see that intersection.

MR STRYDOM: In relation to the intersection and in relation to the casspirs, can you say how did you get to the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: We took this road sir, and when we got to the robots near the Boipatong garage, we took this route. This is where we arrived as a group, this is where we met the casspirs.

MR STRYDOM: So what you are pointing out is that you crossed over to the open veld towards the casspirs, very close to the robots, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, yes, we crossed the road.

MR STRYDOM: And at that stage the group was still intact, it was one group of people moving towards the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: I want to show you certain trees, I want to put to you that those trees is the fence of a nursery, do you know a nursery close to kwaMadala hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible, it could be the trees that we spoke about, yes, that is possible, that is when you go towards the veld on your way to Boipatong, you leave the garage behind a little bit.

MR STRYDOM: As you pointed out, the route you followed, was not a route that will take you behind the nursery towards the tar road, I am going to point it out to you, it is from the tar road, behind the nursery, that will say in between kwaMadala hostel and the nursery, to the right of the nursery, you did not follow that route? I am going to point it out for you, from the tar, behind the nursery towards the tar?

MR NOSENGA: I did indicate that is not the route that we took. I said when we left the robots, we took this direction. I did not say we took that road. I did say that we left the garage behind and the firms, and we took this route towards the veld.

MR STRYDOM: So you did not go behind the nursery, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I did say no. We went towards the robots, but we had to take the route through the veld towards the casspirs.

MR LAX: Can I just clarify here, I am hearing you say subtly different things and I am a bit puzzled now. I want you to be clear, this area of trees that is now being pointed out to you, which way did you pass in relation to those trees that is being pointed out to you? I want you to think carefully, show us on that map, which way you went in relation to those trees, because that wasn't pointed out to you before. Just show us carefully.

MR NOSENGA: Sir, this is the route from kwaMadala and this is the tar road towards Boipatong and here is the garage. We went towards the garage, but then we had long walked passed the trees towards Boipatong because the trees are on the side of kwaMadala hostel. We took this road and we went towards the veld. We did not take this route.

MR LAX: Thank you. So in fact you went to the left of those trees as one looks at this picture, to your left hand side, towards the robots and then you cut down into the veld, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: From the robots, we took this route through the veld and you can actually see here the tar road to Vanderbiljpark and you can see the one that is going to Boipatong and the one that is going to the hostel as well. We had left the main road behind or on the side.

MR LAX: The one, if you are looking at that main road, the one that runs from right to left across the photograph, or from left to right whichever way, it would be the one you would have had to cross to get to Boipatong, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, that is the route that we took.

MR LAX: Listen to my question now. On the left of that photograph, what direction is that, towards which place?

MR NOSENGA: There is one route here that takes me to Sebokeng and another one leads me to Vanderbijl, another one leads me to Boipatong. Here are the firms here.

MR LAX: I can see where the firms are. On the right hand side of the photograph, what direction is that?

MR NOSENGA: It takes me towards Vanderbiljpark.

MR LAX: Thank you Mr Strydom.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you. Now at the point you went into the veld, you did not have to cross a bridge, is that correct? Close to the robots where you went into the veld, you did not have to cross a bridge, is that correct or not?

MR NOSENGA: As I have explained, when we left, we took the direction towards the garage, that is towards the Boipatong area, and we then went through this veld.

MR STRYDOM: Let's make it easier, are you aware of a footbridge that is situated lower down, towards Vanderbijl and I am going to point out to you a position of a footbridge, that is lower down towards Vanderbijl, I am pointing out point (h) on Exhibit M1?

MR NOSENGA: Where is this bridge, where is it headed?

MR STRYDOM: You can't see it on the photograph, do you know if there is a bridge or not in that area? A footbridge where I show you point (h)? This area, do you know a footbridge or not?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall, no, I do not see it here. But I am saying we took the route, I do not remember. I cannot remember very well, I cannot remember the bridge very well.

MR STRYDOM: To get to the veld, you did not cross a footbridge, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, we went through the veld off the tar road, I don't know which bridge you are talking about. We crossed the road towards Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: Whilst we have the map here, on your way back, did you follow the same route from the veld back to the kwaMadala hostel as you have just described to us, or a different route?

MR NOSENGA: We took the main road that leads towards kwaMadala hostel and it goes next to the BP and the firms, the BP garage and the firms.

MR STRYDOM: So, is it then correct to say that on your way back, the group of people you were at that stage, followed the route on the tar towards the BP and then across the main road, towards kwaMadala hostel?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct sir.

MR STRYDOM: On your way back, how many people were in your group on their way back now to the kwaMadala hostel?

MR NOSENGA: There were many of us, I cannot say how many.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps, why don't you tell us this, when you were going back, were you still one big group?

MR NOSENGA: On our way back, we only became one group when we met at the hostel, the one that is in Boipatong, or at Boipatong, that is where we grouped together into one group.

CHAIRPERSON: At the hostel you all came together and formed one big group?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now, from there to kwaMadala hostel, did you walk as one big group?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, until we crossed the robots.

CHAIRPERSON: And until you eventually arrived at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: So that group on your way back, passed the garage, as you were walking, just on your right hand side?

MR NOSENGA: Some of them were walking on the side of the veld, and others yes, were walking on the tar road itself.

MR STRYDOM: So people positioned at the garage at that stage, would have been able to see this group moving towards the robots to cross the main road, to go back to kwaMadala hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, but yes, we walked passed the garage.

MR STRYDOM: And whilst walking, you didn't try to hide yourself, you were openly walking towards the robots and then on your way to kwaMadala hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, we were walking freely in the company of the Police.

MR STRYDOM: If you say that at that stage you were in the company of the Police, what do you mean by that?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I am saying the Police went back to the hostel in casspirs to deliver the stolen goods, but we were not walking at the same time as the Police casspirs were driving back to the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but if that is the case, why did you say in the company of the Police? The Police already passed and went on their way to kwaMadala hostel, you were walking, why did you say that we were now in the company of the Police?

MR NOSENGA: I am not saying we were in the company of the Police, the Police drove back to the hostel with induna's first and we came back later, we followed later rather.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I see it is four o'clock, will it be an appropriate stage to take the adjournment?

CHAIRPERSON: How far are you from ...

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I hope to finish, it is difficult to say it depends on how long it is going to take obviously to get certain answers, but I envisage that I may finish by lunch tomorrow.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I think in that event, we may just have to go on so as to save time.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: We will adjourn at half past four.

MR STRYDOM: As you please Mr Chairman. When you got to the casspirs, on your way now, again I am going to take you back, on your way to attack Boipatong, you said there were four casspirs, they were standing in the veld, did they have their lights on?

MR NOSENGA: No, the lights were off.

MR STRYDOM: You have already told us who was driving the casspir you got into and the other occupants, did you see who were driving and other occupants, apart from the attackers, of the other casspirs?

INTERPRETER: May the question please be repeated?

MR STRYDOM: You said there were four casspirs. I am not referring to the casspir where you eventually got into, I am referring to the other three casspirs, could you see who the drivers were and who the other passengers were?

MR NOSENGA: No sir, I did not see. I did not see that, I don't know the people who were driving those casspirs.

MR LAX: Did you see who the other passengers were?

MR NOSENGA: There were many of us, people were just getting into the casspirs as it was possible, and I got into this one particular casspir.

MR STRYDOM: Who made the decision which person must get into which casspir?

MR NOSENGA: I had indicated that it was Gatchene who indicated.

MR STRYDOM: Did Gatchene ...

MR BERGER: I am sorry to interrupt Chairperson, we have arranged consultations, could Ms Malindi and I please be excused? Thank you.

MR STRYDOM: The question is did Mr Gatchene also tell the other attackers to get into certain casspirs, so he divided them up, saying this group will go to this casspir and this group with that casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, he said people should get into the casspirs because some of them went to Boipatong on foot. A casspir is not so big, some of them were walking. I only heard him saying "gentlemen, here are the casspirs, get inside."

MR STRYDOM: Was it out of your own free will that you got into the casspir, nobody told you to do so?

MR NOSENGA: No, it was of my own free will that I got into the casspir in which Peens and others were travelling.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you get into the casspir with Peens if he was the person that was responsible to torture you on various occasions?

MR NOSENGA: This person tortured me when I was still in the township, will you please repeat the question.

MR STRYDOM: There are four casspirs, Gatchene told the people that they could get into the casspirs. You wanted to get into a casspir, now you choose the casspir of Peens, the person that has been responsible to torture you on previous occasions, that is what I am asking you an explanation, why didn't you choose one of the other casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: I just chose that one, it was out of my choice. I cannot say exactly what reason I had, I just chose to get into that casspir.

MR STRYDOM: I have reached a stage where the people got into the casspirs, did the four casspirs move more or less at the same time, in the same direction with the people walking next to the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question.

MR STRYDOM: All the people got into the casspir, not all the people, some of the people got into the casspirs, some were still outside, and now did you start moving towards the township?

MR NOSENGA: The casspirs were driving in convoy.

MR STRYDOM: So in convoy, you mean the one behind the other one, one in front and then one after that, in convoy, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Some people walked on foot as we entered Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: So when the casspirs entered Boipatong, they were still in convoy?

MR NOSENGA: When they entered the township, they separated, they went to different streets in the township.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. If I show you Exhibit M1 again, can you just indicate where the convoy entered Boipatong just before they split up? I want you to do it with reference to the position the casspirs were initially. Can you just indicate which route did they follow to the township?

MR NOSENGA: They took that direction, that is the route that they took and when they entered the township, they went to different streets, but I cannot see the streets on this picture.

MR STRYDOM: The witness is pointing out more or less in the middle of the township, on the kwaMadala side of the township, the casspirs entered Boipatong, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. There is a big street somewhere around there, but I don't see it on the picture.

MR STRYDOM: I want to show you Exhibit J, I see you are shaking your head, I will try to explain this map to you. The open veld you have just indicated on the photograph, is to the left of this plan.

CHAIRPERSON: What Exhibit is this?

MR STRYDOM: Exhibit J.

CHAIRPERSON: Exhibit J, yes?

MR STRYDOM: The open veld is somewhere here, to the left, the factories are on this side, and this map depicts, indicates or shows the various streets in Boipatong with all the houses, do you see it?

MR NOSENGA: I do see, but I do not understand a thing.

MR STRYDOM: I want you to try to understand it, because you start shaking your head before even I try to explain it to you.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you seen that map before?

MR NOSENGA: No. I see it for the first time. This is the first time that I see it. I do not think I am in a position to read it.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. I want to put to you that you indicated that the casspirs entered more or less in the middle of the township and that will be somewhere close to Bapedi Street or Majola Street or Imzimbubu Street in Boipatong, that one is Imzimbubu, that one is Bapedi and that is Majola Street. You indicated that the casspirs entered from this side, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I did say so. At the beginning of the township, at the entrance of the township.

MR STRYDOM: Immediately after the casspir you were with, entered the township, what happened?

MR NOSENGA: We got off the casspir, took cover and went into the first house. Some people broke windows, we went into the house and I partook in the shooting of people in that house. I went to the dining room and I did not see anyone there.

MR STRYDOM: Was that at the stage before you reached - do you know where the shops are in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I only know the one that is close to the hostel in Boipatong, near the taxi rank. That is the shop that I know. It is near the main road on the taxi route.

MR STRYDOM: When you entered the first house, was that before you reached the shops that you know?

MR NOSENGA: That is so.

MR STRYDOM: After you entered Boipatong, can you give an indication, how many houses did you pass before you went into the first house, roughly if you can estimate?

MR NOSENGA: I said there is one house at the entrance, and that is the first house in which we went into.

MR STRYDOM: That is the house that you said was painted white? You said a white house, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Shortly after you entered, you went into that house. Did you kill any person in that house, that white house?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there is a person that I killed.

MR STRYDOM: You had an AK47 with you, was the weapon set on automatic or did you fire single shots?

MR NOSENGA: I used that interchangeably, sometimes I would use single shots and sometimes put it on automatic.

MR STRYDOM: When you fired shots at the first person, did you use it on automatic or singular shots?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember.

MR STRYDOM: The person that you killed, at the stage when you fired shots, how far was that person from you?

MR NOSENGA: The person was close because he was inside a house. I shot at that person at close range.

MR STRYDOM: Can you say if it was a man, a woman or a child?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember. I don't remember whether it was a man or a woman.

MR STRYDOM: Did you fire more than one shot towards this person, or not?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember, but the person fell.

MR STRYDOM: After the white house, you entered the second house, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: In the second house, let me first ask you, this second house, how far was that from the first house, from the white house?

MR NOSENGA: The houses were like this, they were on both sides of the road. But it wasn't much of a distance between the two houses.

MR STRYDOM: But was it still close to the place where you entered the township from the veld?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. It was close because it was just on one street, although I do not remember the street name, but there were houses on both sides of the street.

MR STRYDOM: Apart from you, did some other attackers also enter the second house?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, if I remember correctly, there were people who entered the second house, people like Dondo. Some were on the street, shooting from there.

MR STRYDOM: Not somewhere from the streets, I am asking you, you said you entered the second house, did any other attacker enter the second house?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because I was in a group, there were five of us. There were people who entered the house while others remained in the street.

MR STRYDOM: Were you the only person with an AK47 that entered that house?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember.

MR STRYDOM: Did you kill people in the second house?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Did you shoot the people at close range?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because the house is not very big, it is a four roomed house. They were not far.

MR STRYDOM: How many people did you kill in the second house?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember.

MR STRYDOM: Did you kill more than one person, or can't you say, that is in the second house?

MR NOSENGA: I said I do not remember just how many there were, but they did die.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Nosenga, you enter a house, you've got an AK47, you see people, you fire shots at them. Did you see any person that fell down because of a shot that you fired?

MR NOSENGA: Yes sir, I said I did see some people falling, but I do not know how many were killed.

MR STRYDOM: The question was in the second house, the person or people that you fired shots to, were they adults or children?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember whether it was adults or children.

MR STRYDOM: So don't you remember seeing children in that house or not? Let me ask you this - did you see children in that house?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember well. I do not remember whether there were children present.

MR STRYDOM: Because I see in your evidence in chief you said "we went to the second house, and we killed children and adults", why did you say that?

MR NOSENGA: I said I did kill people, but I do not know who they were.

CHAIRPERSON: He is asking you about what you said in your evidence in chief.

MR NOSENGA: I said I do not know how many people I killed.

CHAIRPERSON: You said now you don't know whether you killed children or adults at the second house, what he is putting to you is that in your evidence in chief, you said you went into the second house, you killed children - did he say women as well?

MR STRYDOM: My note reads children and adults, women and children. The question is why did you say that in the second house children were killed?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that I said so, but when I went into that house, there were people. I said there were people in the second house and I shot at them. I do not know whether children were present there.

CHAIRPERSON: No, but what he is asking you is why did you say in your evidence in chief that you went into the second house, you killed women and children when you now tell is that you don't know whether there were children or whether there adults in the second house?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that I did kill them.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand what he wants you to explain?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do.

CHAIRPERSON: He just wants you to explain why do you tell us now that you do not know whether you killed adults or children in the second house, whereas earlier on you had told us in your evidence in chief, that in the second house you killed women and children? Do you have any explanation for that?

MR NOSENGA: I understand you. It is possible that I could have killed the woman because there were men and women in that house.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand that question?

MR NOSENGA: You say I give evidence to the effect that I killed women and children in that house.

CHAIRPERSON: Counsel says that when you gave your evidence in chief, you said you went into the second house and shot at women and children, but as he asks you a question now as to whether you remember who you killed in that house, you say you do not remember whether there were women or children. Do you see the difference?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What he wants to know is why do you give these two versions, two different versions?

MR NOSENGA: It may be that I am forgetful. Ever since I have been assaulted by the Police, I have this problem of being forgetful. Also it is possible that I did kill the adults and children in that house.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that you've got a memory problem because you had been assaulted by the Police?

MR NOSENGA: After the assaults I suffered at the hands of the Police.

CHAIRPERSON: With your memory?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I have a problem.

CHAIRPERSON: With your memory?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: When you are moving to the other aspect, let us know so that we can take an adjournment.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I want to move now to the third house, so this will be an appropriate stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, we will adjourn and resume at nine o'clock tomorrow morning.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

07-05-1999: Day 5

Application No: Am2778/96

Matter: Boipatong Massacre

ON RESUMPTION:

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (still under oath)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Strydom?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: (continued) Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, when you entered the township in the casspir now, did you see any people or any person of the township walking around or standing around?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there were people walking in the street, some of them died.

MR STRYDOM: When you entered the township and saw these people for the first time, what were they doing?

MR NOSENGA: They were walking in the street.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see any person who defended the township, or who looked as if he is on duty to defend the township at the stage when he entered the township?

MR NOSENGA: No, I just saw people walking in the township.

MR STRYDOM: So I take it, when you entered the township, you did not see any people sitting around, because you say you only saw people walking around?

MR NOSENGA: I said I saw people walking in the evening.

MR STRYDOM: In your statement, on page 21 paragraph 17, and just to remind you that is the statement that was taken by Mr Kjellberg, paragraph 17 you say -

"... we all entered the township from the field side on different streets. The people and the casspirs were split up. I do not know the time of the attack, but I know it was dark."

Then you said -

"... I saw how people were sitting around open fires surrounding the township, run away when they saw us."

In the light of the fact ...

MR LAX: Sorry, we didn't get the translation of that.

INTERPRETER: I was just rectifying a mistake with him Chairperson.

MR LAX: Okay, thank you.

MR STRYDOM: Can you just repeat the answer please?

MR LAX: No, the Interpreter is just correcting something with him, just trying to work something out.

MR NOSENGA: I saw people in the street walking and when we started firing, they ran away.

CHAIRPERSON: No, but what do you say to the statement that was put to you?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say about the statement, I saw people who were walking and when shots were fired, they ran away.

MR STRYDOM: At any stage during the attack, did you see an open fire?

MR NOSENGA: No, I didn't see any fire. I said I saw people walking in the township. When shots were fired, some of them fled.

MR STRYDOM: The casspir that was with you, could it drive freely in the streets of Boipatong, or were some of the streets barricaded?

MR NOSENGA: The casspir went into the township, but I can say that the casspir went into the township easily without any barricade.

CHAIRPERSON: In the casspir in which you travelled, did the casspir have any difficulty in driving around the township, whilst you were in the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: No, it did not have any difficulty.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR STRYDOM: After the casspirs split up, did you see any one of the other casspirs during the time you were in the township?

MR NOSENGA: I saw the casspir in which we were travelling. I saw the casspir in which I was travelling, they split up, these casspirs split up.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but the question is, after the split, and up to the stage you left the township, did you see any one of the other casspirs, did you come across any one of the other casspirs again?

MR NOSENGA: I last saw them all together at the veld at Boipatong, and I only drove around in the casspir that I have mentioned before.

MR LAX: Mr Nosenga, just listen to the question please. The question is not whether you saw them together or not, the question is did you see any one of those casspirs again while you were in Boipatong, after the time that you left your casspir until the time that you left the township? Do you understand the question? Do you understand the question, just listen?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do.

MR LAX: What is your answer?

MR NOSENGA: I said I only saw the casspir that I was travelling in.

MR STRYDOM: You mentioned that Gatchene was one of the people in your casspir, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I said.

MR STRYDOM: And you also said that he is an Induna, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is how I know him to be.

MR STRYDOM: So would you say that he was the person in charge or the leader of the group that you were in during the attack?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: And Dondo was also one of the members in that group, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: So Dondo was not the person in charge of that group or the leader of the group, it was Gatchene?

MR NOSENGA: At the time when we fired shots at the people, he is the person who commanded us to do so, but whilst we were in the casspir, Gatchene was - I will say Gatchene was in charge.

MR STRYDOM: Did Gatchene also get out of the casspir at any stage?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he did get out of the casspir, but I was with the other three people, I was not with him when we attacked.

MR STRYDOM: At what stage did the Policemen in your casspir, put on their balaclavas?

MR NOSENGA: When the casspir travelled from the veld in Boipatong, that is when they put on the balaclavas.

MR STRYDOM: Was it only the Policemen that put on balaclavas?

MR NOSENGA: I only remember the Police.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you say in paragraph 17 of your statement -

"... some of our people did also wear balaclavas, but not me?"

MR NOSENGA: No, I stated that the hostel residents were headbands, and it was the Police who wore balaclavas, when we went to Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the position then that you did not say that some of our people put on balaclavas?

MR NOSENGA: No, even yesterday I mentioned that we were wearing headbands.

MR STRYDOM: During the course of the attack, did you see any white people that painted their faces black?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they were wearing balaclavas.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but I am not referring to balaclavas, I am just ...

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there were some who were painted black.

MR STRYDOM: That is now without balaclavas, but with painted faces, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: They did wear them, they did wear balaclavas.

MR STRYDOM: Just to get clarity, so you say they painted their faces black and then they put balaclavas over the painted faces?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they had put something on their faces, although I do not know what it was, and they did wear balaclavas as well.

MR STRYDOM: Where did you see these people?

MR NOSENGA: At the spot where we came up on the casspirs in the veld.

MR STRYDOM: These people were they part of the group that were in your casspir, or from other casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: I saw them in my casspir, the casspir that I was travelling in.

MR STRYDOM: Now we know the Policemen in your casspir, Chaka, Peens, Rooikop and another person. Did Peens paint his face?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. They had painted themselves, I even saw them in the township.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, please stop looking at the document next to your Attorney, do you understand?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

CHAIRPERSON: Speak up when - don't just mumble, we don't hear what you say.

MR STRYDOM: You said Peens painted his face and Rooikop?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I said the Boers had painted themselves.

MR STRYDOM: And the driver of that casspir, did he also paint his face?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. Although I did not know him.

MR STRYDOM: Why didn't you say in your statement that Peens and Rooikop painted their faces?

MR NOSENGA: I do know that they had painted themselves and they wore balaclavas. It was only the black people who had not painted their faces.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the position that Peens painted his face?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he had smeared something on his face.

CHAIRPERSON: Was this paint black?

MR NOSENGA: It was black.

CHAIRPERSON: Did he paint all his face?

MR NOSENGA: He had just painted the areas that he is indicating.

CHAIRPERSON: So he painted the entire face, but for the eyes?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And thereafter he put on the balaclava?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: I want to refer you to paragraph 18 on page 21 of that statement. I will read it to you -

"... we got out of the casspir on the first street that we entered."

Is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that.

MR STRYDOM: "... we got out of the casspir on the first street that we entered."

MR NOSENGA: I did state that we took cover when we came upon the first house and the casspir that we had been travelling in, drove slowly down the road.

MR STRYDOM: Yesterday you indicated the place where you entered the township, and that was the first street. In that street, did you go from house to house shortly after you had entered?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I started before that. We went into the first house and there were houses on both sides of the street.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, you said in evidence in chief that you went to five houses. All I want to know is if these houses are in that first street and in close proximity to each other?

MR NOSENGA: They were on one straight.

MR LAX: The question was, were they in close proximity to each other, in other words, were they attaching each other or near by each other, one after the other? That is what you are being asked.

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. The houses are close to one another.

MR STRYDOM: Yesterday I asked you about the first house and second house you went into. Now I want to ask you about the third house. What happened in the third house you went into?

MR NOSENGA: As we got there, some of us broke windows and we went inside the house. There were people inside.

MR STRYDOM: What did you do with your AK47 in that house?

MR NOSENGA: I fired shots.

MR STRYDOM: Did you fire shots at people?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Were you close to these people when you fired these shots?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Did you fire many shots?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember, but I did fire shots at them.

MR STRYDOM: Did you kill people in that house?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Can you give the Commission any indication how many people you killed in the third house?

MR NOSENGA: If I am not mistaken it could be three.

MR STRYDOM: Can you say if they were women, children or adults, men?

MR NOSENGA: They were adults.

CHAIRPERSON: Were they women?

MR NOSENGA: There was a woman.

CHAIRPERSON: Now when you say you killed, if you remember, although you don't remember very well, you think you killed three people, how do you know that these people died?

MR NOSENGA: They fell close to me and I am therefore sure that they died.

CHAIRPERSON: They fell down?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I saw them falling down.

CHAIRPERSON: And then you assumed that they had died?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I thought so because they were very close to me. Thereafter I went looking under the beds, but found no one.

MR STRYDOM: How many magazines did you have for this AK47?

MR NOSENGA: Two.

MR STRYDOM: How many bullets were in each one of these magazines?

MR NOSENGA: It could take 40. It was a steel magazine and it could take 40 bullets.

CHAIRPERSON: Were these magazines full?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they were.

CHAIRPERSON: So you had about 80?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Apart from the magazine that was in the chamber of this AK47, you had another one somewhere on your body, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I had two magazines and one was facing down, that is the one I was using at the time.

MR LAX: What he is indicating is that, he is showing that the one points up and the one points down, it is quite a common way of having two magazines on an AK.

MR STRYDOM: Did you empty the two magazines during the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not.

MR STRYDOM: Did you count afterwards how many bullets you had left?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR STRYDOM: Did you empty one of the magazines?

MR NOSENGA: I do not want to tell a lie, I do not remember, but I fired shots.

MR STRYDOM: I want to refer you to paragraph 23 on page 22 of your statement. I am going to read it to you -

"... during the attack I finished four cartridges, cases, with about 30 rounds in each."

Which would mean 120 bullets. What do you say about that?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, I have been asking you to please speak up.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about that.

CHAIRPERSON: You deny what is stated here?

MR NOSENGA: I said I had two magazines that could take 40 bullets, now he is telling me about a magazine that takes 30 bullets.

CHAIRPERSON: In paragraph 23 of your statement you are recorded as having stated that during that attack, you finished four cartridge cases with about 30 rounds in each, do you understand that? You say that is not true?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not true.

MR STRYDOM: And you never said that to Mr Kjellberg who took the statement? Is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: No sir. I did not have a magazine of that kind.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is, you did not say that to the person who took the statement from you?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR STRYDOM: According to you, you have killed people in the first, second and third house. The fourth house, what happened there?

MR NOSENGA: We also found people there and we went into the house.

MR STRYDOM: Did you kill people there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did fire shots.

MR STRYDOM: Did you again fire these shots at people that were close to you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, but not too close. They could have been that far away from me.

MR STRYDOM: You have indicated a distance, can you just state which distance did you indicate here?

MR NOSENGA: Like that far.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you referring to the grey box that is just behind me?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. From where I am, it could be as far as that box.

CHAIRPERSON: That is about four paces.

MR STRYDOM: Just for record purposes I estimate it between two and three metres. So you couldn't miss the person at that distance with the AK, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: How many metres are there in a pace?

MR STRYDOM: A metre is a bit longer than a pace. It depends on whose pace it is, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question.

MR STRYDOM: What I am putting to you is that over that distance, you would not miss a person if you aim and shoot at him or her?

MR NOSENGA: Please clarify that question.

MR STRYDOM: You had an AK47, you fired a shot or shots at the person approximately two to three metres from you. Under those circumstances, did you miss that person or did you hit that person?

MR NOSENGA: I shot at most people inside the house and I saw them falling. I don't know if there were others that I could have missed.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, what is the answer, did you hear the question?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, just repeat the question.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Mr Chairman, what I am stating is that over the distance of two to three paces, the distance that you showed at the Commission here, you could not miss the person with the AK47 you were shooting with, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: So would you say that you killed people in the fourth house?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that.

MR STRYDOM: Did you kill people in the fourth house you went into?

MR NOSENGA: I fired at people in that house.

MR STRYDOM: How many people did you fire at?

MR NOSENGA: I think it was just one person if I am not mistaken.

MR STRYDOM: Every time you come out of one of these houses, you find the casspir in the street, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: It was driving slowly and the people in the casspir, were shooting at the people in the streets.

MR STRYDOM: So obviously the people in the streets that ran away, would have seen this casspir?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know, but the people were fleeing, but because there was light, I should assume that they saw the casspir.

MR STRYDOM: And then you went into the fifth house. Did you kill people in that house?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I got into the fifth house and shot and killed as well.

MR STRYDOM: How many people did you kill in that house?

MR NOSENGA: Two of them if I am not mistaken.

MR STRYDOM: If we add the five houses together, the people that you killed in those houses, how many people would you say did you kill in total?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall.

MR STRYDOM: In your statement you said -

"... I think I killed eight or nine people,"

would you say that is more or less correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, I said I went into five houses. I am saying I went into the first house, I don't know how many people I killed in the fifth house, not that I killed nine people in the fifth house.

MR STRYDOM: No, no, you stated earlier that he killed two people in the fifth house, but I want to know if you add all the houses together, all the people that you killed, you say that you killed approximately eight, nine people in the five houses, adding them together?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't want to tell a lie.

MR STRYDOM: All right. After the fifth house, did you go into any other house during the course of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember. I just walked up the street, others were shooting at the same time. I only shot again at Slovo Park.

MR STRYDOM: Did you go into houses at Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: I shot people in a shack, I did not get into the shack. I cannot remember whether I got into a shack, but I did shoot people.

MR STRYDOM: Those people you killed in a shack, did you shoot through a window, or right through the shack, or what did you do? Did you go into it?

MR NOSENGA: Slovo Park is not like the township, you have this precast wall and some fences as well.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but that is not the question. Let me ask you in this way, would you say that you killed people in Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did shoot people there.

MR STRYDOM: How many people did you shoot at in Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember. I do not remember how many people I killed there.

MR STRYDOM: Do you remember shooting at more than one person?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible, because I did shoot people. There were many of us, I cannot say how many. I did shoot at people, I cannot say how many people I shot and how many of these people died.

MR STRYDOM: You won't be able to say approximately how many people you killed during the course of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't want to tell a lie. Whether there are people who just got injured, other died, really I cannot say.

MR STRYDOM: Paragraph 19 of the statement, page 21, it is stated here -

"... I think I killed eight or nine people that night in eight different houses."

Let's just apply our minds to the eight or nine people, is that then not correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is a mistake.

MR STRYDOM: The second mistake in that sentence is that during the night, or that night, in eight different houses. You didn't go into eight different houses?

MR NOSENGA: No. I am saying I went into five houses in the township itself, five houses from the first houses. I did not go into eight houses.

MR NOSENGA: But why did you tell Mr Kjellberg eight houses?

MR NOSENGA: No, maybe the mistake is with the person who was interpreting for me. I did indicate, I am saying the person who was interpreting, was such that I would stop him at some time. I only went into five houses.

MR STRYDOM: And that five houses was in the Boipatong Section, not the Slovo Park Section?

MR NOSENGA: At Boipatong, not Slovo Park. I am saying the township houses at Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Nosenga, I want to put it to you that in the area where you described where you entered Boipatong with the casspir, no houses was attacked.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about that.

MR STRYDOM: I can take it further, obviously no people then were killed in those houses.

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know about that. We did go into the houses there.

MR STRYDOM: I also want to put it to you that I have checked the post mortem reports, and the post mortem report is a report by the person that examines the body of a deceased person, to get an indication what the cause of death is. What I am putting to you is that your version, that you shot at least six people, possibly more, probably more with the AK47, does not accord with these post mortem reports.

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that, but I saying there were AK's there. I am saying we did have AK47's when we were shooting people, we were not using small guns. We were not using small guns, we were using big guns like AK's.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I have taken that up with my learned colleague, and she indicated to me that she is prepared to admit the contents of the post mortem reports. As far as the legal advice for the family is concerned, we've got that memorandum where they set out the causes of death and that has been admitted between the applicant and the family in terms of that document, but the outstanding admission would have been between the legal advisor for the 17th applicant, Mr Nosenga, and she is prepared to admit the contents of that.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you confirm that Ms Tanzer?

MS TANZER: I do confirm that, I admit the report.

MS CAMBANIS: Mr Chairman, I would just like Adv Strydom to place on record the conversation that we had concerning, we did raise the question of the post mortems, it was common cause between Mr Strydom and myself, the post mortem reports do not indicate that AK bullets were not used to kill persons. I can't agree with what Adv Strydom is saying, he conceded in our discussion yesterday that there was no proof that no AK was used, arising from the post mortem so I am bewildered by what he is putting.

MR STRYDOM: I have gone through all the post mortem reports and the reply or the memorandum and the reply, and from that I gather the following.

CHAIRPERSON: I think the issue really turns on whether the post mortem report indicates that the AK47 were not used on the day in question, is that the issue?

MS CAMBANIS: That is the issue, thank you Mr Chairman.

MR STRYDOM: I will state that, the reports do not indicate which weapons were used, but for a few instances where it is stated that a shotgun was used, you can find that in some of the reports.

CHAIRPERSON: But if the post mortem report does not indicate the firearm used, excepting for the shotgun, it doesn't exclude the possibility that an AK47 may have been sued?

MR STRYDOM: It does not exclude it, but I want to take it further by stating that in total in Boipatong, eight people died as a result of bullet wounds, three of those and that one can pick up from the post mortem reports, were shot with shotguns, three other people were shot in a house with a 9mm - cartridge picked up.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, just before we get to that, it would not, are you basing this on the reading of the post mortem report?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, the causes of death is stated, it will say in Afrikaans, a [bullet wound or stab wounds], I have counted all the [bullet] wounds in these reports.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Could you indicate to us how many gunshot wounds are reflected in the post mortem report?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, 12. Let me just add again, 12.

CHAIRPERSON: (Microphone not on)

MR STRYDOM: On these reports, there is an indication that 12 reports show that there are gunshots, yes, bullet wounds.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that in regard to one person?

MR STRYDOM: No, 12 bodies had gun wounds is them.

CHAIRPERSON: (Microphone not on)

MR STRYDOM: Three of that 12 were ...

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger, have you had sight of the post mortem report?

MR BERGER: I have not studied them, Ms Cambanis has studied them.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Cambanis, have you had sight of the post mortem report?

MS CAMBANIS: I have, yes, I have. I have not done this exercise. I simply raised the question of the gun, whether an AK could or could not have been used. I have not done the exercise, I cannot dispute what my learned friend is saying.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, so as to make sure that at least if we have to record something, we have to record something that is common cause, could you perhaps during the break see what you could agree on, what is common cause from the post mortem report?

MS CAMBANIS: Yes, I can, we can do that.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I will endeavour to do that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, just indicate to them what it is that you want to place on record, and give them the opportunity to deal with it.

MR STRYDOM: What I want to place on record is that 12 people died inter alia of a result of being shot with firearms.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Of that 12, three were shot with a shotgun. Three people who lived in 765 Hlubi Street and I must state here, there is doubt if it is two or three, but I will state three, died inter alia of a result of bullet wounds and I also seek to get the admission that 9mm cartridges were picked up in that house. Four people in Slovo Park died as a result of bullet wounds, and two other people died as a result of bullet wounds and those people are in the Boipatong area, not Slovo Park. If that is all added together, then it adds to 12.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, so far on we know the - my arithmetic is deserting me here, the nine people may well have been killed by means of an AK47?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but I am excluding a further three people, in 765 Hlubi Street, because there were cartridges picked up in that house, 9mm cartridges, and there was evidence during this hearing about what happened in that house.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And then giving you the benefit of the doubt then, then we are left with about six people who could have been killed by AK47's?

MR STRYDOM: Possibly, but four of those six have got Slovo Park addresses, so it is left with two people that could possibly be killed with inter alia AK47 bullets.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I understand that, yes. Okay.

MS TANZER: If I may Chair, if my learned colleague able to say how many people were wounded as a result of gunshot wounds on this night in question, once he is putting the question of gunshots?

CHAIRPERSON: I think we can find out from him.

MR STRYDOM: Unfortunately there are no post mortem reports in that regard. I won't be able to say that.

CHAIRPERSON: What about the J88?

MR STRYDOM: That I haven't got, but I can look at the evidence, I've got all the evidence in relation to the people that had been injured, and I will be able to state that as well, maybe not with total accuracy, that I will have to concede.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Ms Cambanis, will you therefore consider these matters that Mr Strydom has placed on record?

MS CAMBANIS: We will do that at tea time, thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you let us know? You don't have to do that today, you can do that on Monday.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, assuming for a moment that the figures that I have stated, is correct, I want to put to you that you couldn't have killed so many people with an AK47 as you are stating.

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know about that. I am saying I shot people using an AK47. I still maintain they were AK47's, these firearms were used. I shot people.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you as a fact, that in close proximity, houses in close proximity to each other, not so many people died as you want to tell this Committee?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that, I am saying many people died, and some of them ran away.

MR STRYDOM: Apart from the people that you fired shots at and killed according to you in these five houses, did the other people that were with you, also kill people in those houses?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there are some people who fired shots. I know specifically the third if not the fourth house, from the first house. In the first house, I am the one who fired shots, and I am not sure about the third or fourth house.

MR STRYDOM: If you are not sure, what are you not sure about? What happened at the third or fourth house?

MR NOSENGA: I am not sure how many of us went into those houses. I am the first one to fire shots in the first house.

MR STRYDOM: The question is did you see in one of these five houses, that any other person in your company, killed people in those houses?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying yes, someone in the name of Dondo did fire shots. You did ask me that question as to whether I alone fired shots, and I said others fired shots too.

MR STRYDOM: But do you know if he hit somebody with the shots he fired or don't you know?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question?

MR STRYDOM: You said Dondo also fired shots in the third or fourth house. What I want to know is could you see if he hit someone with the bullets he was firing?

MR NOSENGA: I heard a gunshot in the house and I was concentrating at the people that I was shooting.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know what weapon he was carrying?

MR NOSENGA: No, it is a small gun, I did indicate that I don't know the names.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you stop shooting after the fifth house?

MR NOSENGA: I just stopped on my own, with an intention of using the bullets at Slovo Park, but others continued shooting on that very same street. Others did not shoot of course, but others continued shooting right through Slovo Park, right through to Slovo Park.

MR STRYDOM: So the last shot you fired, was in the fifth house, and after that you fired shots again in Slovo Park, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say that you wanted to save the rest of your ammunition for Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: No, he did not ask me that question. He wanted to know what I did from the fifth house.

CHAIRPERSON: After the fifth house, why did you stop shooting? That was the question. You give a lengthy answer, amongst which you said I wanted to save the rest of my ammunition for Slovo Park. Now I want to find out from you, did you say that you wanted to save the rest of your ammunition for Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I said that.

MR STRYDOM: After you left the fifth house, and you were now on your way to Slovo Park, can you give any indication as to the route that you followed now to get to Slovo Park? Did you carry straight on in that same street, did you make a turn somewhere, or can you give any indication?

MR NOSENGA: We proceeded right through the same street. There is one main taxi route, and we proceeded towards the hostel. We proceeded towards the mixed sex hostel, and we proceeded towards Sharkville or Sharpeville where there is a clump of trees and we got out of the township.

MR STRYDOM: I just wanted to know, from the place where you went into the houses, you say you carried right through to Slovo Park, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. From the last house that I shot in, there is a main route, a taxi route, and there is a big shop around there, as well as a taxi rank. We proceeded as if we were going towards Sharpeville, but before we got there, there is a clump of trees and there are a lot of shacks around there and that was Slovo Park.

MR STRYDOM: So you went passed the shops and a taxi rank on your way to Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, we did.

MR STRYDOM: And these shops you refer to, are they more or less in the middle of Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there are houses around, and there is also this hostel in Boipatong that I referred to. There is also a taxi rank nearby. We then took the route towards Sharpeville. There are a lot of trees around there, as well as shacks. That is where we arrived at.

MR LAX: Can I just clarify something Mr Strydom. Did I hear you correctly that you went on one road the whole way through, you didn't go off that road? You stayed on the same road the whole way through?

MR NOSENGA: No, I said we took that street and we turned somewhere and took the route, the taxi route and before you come to the Boipatong hostel, there is a taxi rank as well as a big shop. We proceeded on the route towards Sharpeville and before you get there, there is a clump of trees, and a lot of shacks, that is the spot at which we arrived.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know where the park is in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I will be telling a lie.

MR STRYDOM: What happened when you arrived in Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: People were fired at, some were stabbed with spears and some were hacked with axes. But we shot at them as well.

MR STRYDOM: How many people did you fire at, at Sharpeville?

MR NOSENGA: I said I do not remember.

MR STRYDOM: Sorry, I said Sharpeville, that is Slovo Park, sorry. Peens, did he fire any shots?

MR NOSENGA: I will be telling a lie. I don't know, I last saw him firing on the streets in the township.

CHAIRPERSON: Now you are now in Slovo Park, where are the casspirs at this stage?

MR NOSENGA: The casspirs were travelling with us. I did see them in Slovo Park, because we were on foot, and they were in our company, they were accompanying us.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you, from the very first house, the casspir in which you were ...

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it was always accompanying us, it was driving slowly along the road, and the people in the casspir, were shooting at people fleeing in the streets.

CHAIRPERSON: And then when you proceeded to Slovo Park, it also went to Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it was driving slowly with us, until we arrived at Slovo Park.

CHAIRPERSON: At the fifth house, to go to Slovo Park, the casspir also went with you to Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What about the rest of the people in your group, did they remain in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: We all went to Slovo Park.

CHAIRPERSON: Did somebody say well, "let's go to Slovo Park", or was it just an individual decision?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember, but somebody did state that we should go to Slovo Park.

CHAIRPERSON: After the fifth house, someone said "let's go to Slovo Park?"

MR NOSENGA: I am saying that it is possible that it happened.

CHAIRPERSON: Or someone didn't? Did someone say right, "let's now go to Slovo Park"?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember, but we did proceed to Slovo Park.

CHAIRPERSON: What made you go to Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: They said we should go to Slovo Park?

CHAIRPERSON: So someone said "let's go to Slovo Park?"

MR NOSENGA: I said yes, there is somebody who stated that, but I do not remember who.

CHAIRPERSON: And then you went to Slovo Park, together with the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: On your way to Slovo Park, was that hostel you referred to, attacked?

MR NOSENGA: It was attacked on our way from Slovo Park, people who were standing outside the hostel, were shot at.

MR STRYDOM: Did you shoot people at that hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not. I only fired shots in the township and in Slovo Park.

MR STRYDOM: But isn't the hostel also in the township?

MR NOSENGA: It is in the township. It is a mixed sex hostel.

MR STRYDOM: I want to refer you to paragraph 21 on page 21 of the statement. It reads as follows -

"... we walked through the township attacking houses, on the way to Slovo Park, which was squatter camp on one side of the township, we also attacked a hostel. There were most women in the hostel."

It was stated here that on the way to Slovo Park, you attacked the hostel, and not on your way back. What is the truth now?

MR NOSENGA: I deny that. The hostel was the last place to be attacked on our way from Slovo Park.

MR STRYDOM: And then it reads -

"... we continued the shooting in Slovo Park."

So clearly what you wanted to say in this statement was that you attacked the hostel before you got to Slovo Park. Is it again just a wrong statement?

MR NOSENGA: No, I deny what is contained in that statement. The hostel was the last place to be attacked, on our way from Slovo Park.

CHAIRPERSON: When you are going to Slovo Park, did you have to go passed the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it was on our side and we turned in the opposite direction, but on our way from Slovo Park we went passed the hostel, and people were shot at there.

MR STRYDOM: How many people did you kill at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I stated that I did not shoot anyone at the hostel. I last fired my gun in Slovo Park, I did not fire at anyone in the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: And the other people with you, did they fire shots at people which you could see, injured or killed people at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, some of them did shoot directing their shots towards the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: And you in fact saw people falling down?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see them although I did not fire shots personally, but I did see people falling down.

MR STRYDOM: I will check my notes, but if my memory serves me correctly, under cross-examination of my learned friend, you said that you killed people at the hostel.

MR NOSENGA: I did not kill anyone at the hostel. I only fired shots in the township houses in Boipatong and as well as at Slovo Park, I did not shoot at anyone at the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: And you gave a description of how you saw the people falling over at the hostel, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: I stated that I did see people falling down at the hostel, but I did not shoot.

MR STRYDOM: Let me ask you, in Slovo Park, could this casspir move around amongst these houses?

MR NOSENGA: The casspir did enter Slovo Park and it parked there. There is a road towards Sharpeville, a dirt road, so the casspir could travel along that road.

MR STRYDOM: Let's just get clarity, so when you reached Slovo Park, did the casspir come to a standstill and remained there until the casspir left Slovo Park again or did it drive around amongst these shacks in Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: Slovo Park is a shack area, the casspirs parked, it did not drive around the area until we were finished shooting at the people.

MR STRYDOM: Why do you say casspirs parked?

MR NOSENGA: There were casspirs travelling with us as we went into Slovo Park. I also stated that in Slovo Park, mostly houses are not fenced.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but that is the problem that I have, did you see more than one casspir parked in Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: More than one. The casspirs also proceeded to Slovo Park.

MR STRYDOM: How many casspirs did you see in Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: As I stated before, four.

MR STRYDOM: So would you say that the casspirs you initially saw, rejoined when they got to Slovo Park, or regrouped?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, after we had attacked the township, the casspirs regrouped and they followed our casspir. The other casspirs followed the one in which I had been travelling towards Slovo Park.

MR STRYDOM: Where did this regrouping start, still in the township Boipatong, or only at Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: I noticed them on our way to Slovo Park.

MR STRYDOM: Do you have any knowledge how it came about that the four casspirs got together again or was that coincidence?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not know, but I did see them proceeding towards Slovo Park. I cannot say how they regrouped.

MR STRYDOM: When the casspirs got together, did the people that went along with these casspirs, then all got together so there was one group again?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is so. When we left Boipatong, I saw another group following us, because the streets were parallel to one another, so I saw one other group joining ours.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you testify earlier today that the last occasion you saw the other casspirs, was when you entered the township?

MR NOSENGA: No sir, that is not what I said. I said the casspir I had been travelling with, accompanied us, it was driving slowly along the streets. Peens and others did not enter the premises of those houses, but they remained in the casspir.

MR STRYDOM: No Mr Nosenga, I asked you if during the course of the attack, if you ever saw the other casspirs again, and you said no, "the last time I saw the casspirs together, was when you entered the township." Now you say you in fact saw the other casspirs just before you entered Slovo Park, they regrouped?

MR NOSENGA: I said I last saw them as we entered the township, because they split up when we entered the township.

MR STRYDOM: I know you said that, but after that I asked you did you see them again during the course of the attack and you said no, you never saw them again. Do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: I was referring to the attack on Boipatong, the township. You had not asked me with regards to Slovo Park. When we entered the township, the casspirs split up.

MR STRYDOM: But even according to your own version now, they regrouped before they entered Slovo Park, so you saw them then again in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, what I am saying is that the other casspirs followed the one that I had been travelling in towards Slovo Park. In the township I did not see them, I last saw them when we entered the township, because when we got there, the casspirs split up according to different streets.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the situation that when your casspir, the casspir in which you had been travelling, went towards Slovo Park, the other casspirs followed it, is that what happened?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I am saying, they followed the casspir that I had been travelling in because as we moved towards the tarred road, they followed.

CHAIRPERSON: All the casspirs then went to Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. I said I saw all four at Slovo Park.

CHAIRPERSON: They were just waiting outside, they did not enter the Slovo Park?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they waited outside on the road, and we entered the area and killed people and when we were finished, and we were moving towards the Boipatong hostel, that is where people were shot.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, and then the casspirs also followed you towards the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. There is a question that was not clarified, property was looted.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I am not asking you about any items. I am just asking you about the casspirs.

MR NOSENGA: The casspirs did join us.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. The casspirs now are on their way towards the hostel in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. They were turning towards that road. That is where other members of our group shot at people in the hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: But the casspirs were with you as you were going towards the hostel, the mixed hostel where shooting occurred?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there is a main road there.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, and then from there, and this hostel is in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, in the township.

CHAIRPERSON: Right inside the township?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, right inside the township.

CHAIRPERSON: And all four of these casspirs went to this hostel?

MR NOSENGA: The casspirs did join us as we went towards the hostel in Boipatong, and that is where people were shot at.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but were the casspirs at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they were there.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

MR LAX: Could I just check one thing Mr Strydom. After that, did they carry on with you back to the hostel, these casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: They left before us, and we followed on foot. After people were shot at the Boipatong hostel, the casspirs left to Madala hostel and then we as one group followed on foot.

MR LAX: Okay. So at that time, all the attackers were one group?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LAX: So where did you all regroup as attackers? At that hostel? Where, I am not sure?

MR NOSENGA: We regrouped at the hostel and that is where people were shot at, and we regrouped and decided that we must go back to the hotel, kwaMadala hostel.

MR LAX: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: The time now is just after eleven o'clock, do you still have a lot of ground to cover?

MR STRYDOM: I am going in sequence, so I will move on after tea, if it is convenient, I think I will be busy for some time still, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: All right, very well.

MR LAX: Mr Strydom, just after tea on Wednesday, I found that piece of evidence that you were talking about.

MR STRYDOM: About what happened at the hostel?

MR LAX: Yes. He said very clearly that he did not fire any shots at that place.

MR STRYDOM: I will accept that, I withdraw that question then.

MS TANZER: And that it was the last place in the attack?

MR LAX: Yes, he said that he last fired shots at the shacks, he was quite clear about that.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, we will take the tea adjournment and then return at half past eleven.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION:

MR MAPOMA: Sorry Chairperson, just before we proceed, we have made available to the parties involved, three documents. One is the cell register, which is intended to assist in showing the whereabouts of Victor Keswa during the relevant period. There are two documents, and then the third document is a register of the visitors of the prisoners.

CHAIRPERSON: What do these documents establish if anything?

MR MAPOMA: The cell register establishes Mr Chairperson, that Victor Keswa was in prison at the relevant time.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the relevant time here?

MR MAPOMA: During May up till June 1992.

CHAIRPERSON: From March 1992?

MR MAPOMA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: All right, up to ...

MR MAPOMA: Actually Chairperson, he was detained two times, first in March and thereafter released, but the most important one is May where he was detained in May and then released only on the 27th of June 1992.

CHAIRPERSON: When was he detained in May, on the 27th of May?

MR MAPOMA: Yes, on the 27th of May.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, and then he remained according to the cell register, in custody until the 27th of June?

MR MAPOMA: 27th of June.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, shall I record that fact.

MR MAPOMA: One other aspect which may not be that important is that on the 18th of June, he was taken out of prison to court, and then returned on that very same day, on the 18th of June.

CHAIRPERSON: You see, I am just concerned that these loose documents may well get lost. Perhaps they should constitute some kind of a bundle, which we can then give the next alphabet and then - so that if there is any reference to them, we can know what documents you are referring to. Okay, but anyway, shall I record what you have just ... The first document that you are handing in, is a cell register, relating to Vanderbijlpark Police station?

MR MAPOMA: Pardon sir, sorry, I didn't get your words.

CHAIRPERSON: The first document you are handing in, is the cell register which relates to the Vanderbijlpark Police station?

MR MAPOMA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Should we give this a separate exhibit perhaps? The last exhibit was V wasn't it? The last alphabet is Z, isn't it, so after Z, there will be no more exhibits. No more exhibits after that. Okay, the cell register, will then be marked Exhibit W. I am simply going to record that it shows that Victor Keswa was last detained as from what - is it the 5th?

MR MAPOMA: The 27th of May.

CHAIRPERSON: From the 27th of May 1992 and remained in custody on 27th of June 1992.

MR MAPOMA: Yes sir.

CHAIRPERSON: On 18-6-1992 he appeared in court, he was taken to court, right? What is your next document?

MR MAPOMA: The next document is the occurrence book.

MR BERGER: I am sorry Chairperson, just before Mr Mapoma puts in another exhibit, are you recording that what these cell registers establishes as a fact, that Victor ...

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, I am recording what appears on the face of the document, that is all that I am recording.

MR BERGER: Because there seems, just by glancing through it, there seems to be problems with sequencing.

CHAIRPERSON: With what?

MR BERGER: Sequencing for example. If one has a look at the...

CHAIRPERSON: Where is the original?

MR MAPOMA: We do have the original Chairperson, I will make it available.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, if there are certain problems that Mr Berger would like to highlight, have you had sight of the original?

MR BERGER: No, I haven't.

CHAIRPERSON: Would it not be better that you make the original available to all the legal representatives and once you have done that, and let's see whether there is any agreement as to what appears on its face.

MR MAPOMA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, all right. I will leave this as it stands for the moment, but it can always be expanded on or dealt with subject to what you are going to advise us after you had gone through the record, the original.

MR MAPOMA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: All right, so the next document would be the occurrence book, is it?

MR MAPOMA: The occurrence book, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, shall we mark that X, all right. I am not going to record, is there any issue for this one? You haven't seen the original either, okay fine. Shall we - I wonder whether in view of the fact that they haven't seen the original so as to see whether there are any problems with this document, shouldn't we hold onto admitting these documents? We can give them numbers.

MR MAPOMA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, very well. So the next one is OC book, X, right, and then the third document?

MR MAPOMA: It is a visitors' register, prison.

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Mapoma, it is not a register, it is an application to visit.

CHAIRPERSON: It is a permit. It is not an application for a visit, it is a permit.

MR LAX: Yes. This is the permit you fill in when you visit a prisoner, not the actual register you sign in the prison.

MR MAPOMA: Yes Mr Chairman. But the substance of it Chair, is to show that somebody did appear to visit a prisoner on that particular day.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I will simply record this as being a permit for a legal visit to the prison.

MR MAPOMA: Yes Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: That will be Exhibit Y, is it?

MR MAPOMA: Yes Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: All right, would you therefore make available the original to these documents and then advise us Monday what the situation is.

MR MAPOMA: As Chairperson pleases.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well, thank you. Is that all?

MR MAPOMA: That is all Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON:

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (still under oath)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: (continued) Mr Chairman, after dealing with the documents, I have also got a document and seeing that there is only one exhibit number, I want to grab at that opportunity to hand it in. I've got the original with me as well, that is minutes of the Ulundi conference held on the 18th of July 1992 and the 19th of July 1992.

CHAIRPERSON: (Microphone not on)

MR STRYDOM: We have made copies, can I just ask to hand out the copies. The original will be available for insight, I will keep it with me.

CHAIRPERSON: What is it that you are handing in?

MR STRYDOM: The minutes of the National Conference of the Inkatha Freedom Party, held at Ulundi on the 18th and 19th of July 1992.

CHAIRPERSON: Have the other legal representatives seen that?

MR STRYDOM: No. We have made copies, I only received this document yesterday afternoon, so we made copies, it is available now. Will it be convenient to distribute them now, Chairperson?

CHAIRPERSON: All right, yes, now these documents, these are the minutes of the Inkatha Freedom Party is it the 17th Annual General Conference, held between the 17th and the 19th of July 1992?

MR STRYDOM: That is correct Chairperson, that is so, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. The second document, is this a continuation of ...

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, yes, that is also part of the minutes. It starts on the 19-7-1992, but on page it looks like 6, there is an indicated that these minutes, it happened on the 18-7-1992.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, we've got the 18th, all of them are recorded on the 18th, aren't they, and then the second part relates to the 19th?

MR STRYDOM: The 19th, but there is also a portion that relates to the 18th, the second part of the second document.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, is that VI?

MR STRYDOM: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What was the last Exhibit that you had submitted?

MR STRYDOM: The last number that was given, was Y.

CHAIRPERSON: I mean that the applicant had handed in, can you still recall? Was it U?

MR STRYDOM: Was it U, Nosenga's docket.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, well, I suppose let's just give them, we will give the first one which has a heading of "The Conference", Z. Shall we say Z1 and Z2? How does one refer to the pages now of the conference? Shouldn't we just number them from Z1 all the way through to the end?

MR STRYDOM: I will accept that Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Shall we just call them Z and then you can call it Z1 and all the way through?

MR MAPOMA: Very well.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, could these documents be admitted as purported minutes and the reason that I say that is because you will see from Exhibit T ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I am aware of Exhibit T, the response to the request for these things.

MR BERGER: And the Inkatha Freedom Party said they have no minutes, so we don't accept these at all. If I may just add, I have asked my learned friend if we could have sight of the originals of those documents.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Finally ...

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chair. Mr Nosenga, I want to show you Exhibit M2, the aerial photograph of the Boipatong township and Slovo Park township. Again just to put you in the picture, I want to point out certain points and then ask certain questions. You indicated to me yesterday that the casspirs originally gathered in that open veld area across the factories, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I said.

MR STRYDOM: And then you also indicated that, or you testified that the place where you entered the township, was approximately in the middle of the township, and I am going to indicate approximate middle of the township where the vehicles entered, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Now today you gave evidence about five houses that you went into, would that be houses more or less in the area shortly after you have entered the middle of the township?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. Even though I cannot see clearly, but that is how it is.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, and then you said that you carried straight on with the road. If I indicate a route, would you agree with that? I am going to indicate in the middle of Boipatong township going down to the centre of the township, is that the route that was followed?

MR NOSENGA: I do not see quite clearly here. It is mixed up here, I cannot follow. I said we went into the first house.

MR STRYDOM: I don't want you to point out specific houses. Let me point out Slovo Park to you, do you see the Slovo Park area which I am pointing out to you now? Do you see that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes, I can see Slovo Park.

MR STRYDOM: From the place where you entered Boipatong you said you went straight down and then made a turn and went further down to Slovo Park, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes, we took the main taxi route.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. If I point to you that the shops are in the vicinity, in the middle of the township there is some open space there, in that vicinity, would you agree with me the shops are somewhere there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there is a shop there if not shops, near the ranks.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. And then you continued further down until you get a place close to Slovo Park where you also see trees, are those the trees you referred to?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, those are the trees I was talking about.

MR STRYDOM: Then you said that the casspirs came to a standstill. I want you to indicate if it is possible for you, to indicate more or less where these casspirs came to a standstill, the four casspirs. Was it close to the trees?

MR NOSENGA: They came to a standstill on the street, they did not get into the shacks. These are the shacks here.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, just for record purposes, the witness indicates a position just left of the trees as depicted on the photograph, the open space.

CHAIRPERSON: He has indicated on Exhibit M2 is it?

MR STRYDOM: That is M2.

CHAIRPERSON: M2? Right, would you show us?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, can I mark it with a circle, the indicated position of the - is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, these are the shacks, these are the trees, the casspirs came to a standstill on the streets.

CHAIRPERSON: Show your other colleagues first, yes.

INTERPRETER: Mr Chairperson, is it possible that the Interpreters be furnished with the map, so that we can interpret correctly as it has been stated?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have an extra map?

MR STRYDOM: Unfortunately we do not have an extra map available.

MR MAPOMA: I have given them a copy.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR LAX: Can we proceed, Interpreters?

INTERPRETERS: Yes, we may continue.

MR STRYDOM: You also said something about a hostel, and that hostel is where you passed on your way back. Now can you point out a hostel on this map or give an indication more or less where this hostel is? To make it easier for you Mr Nosenga, is it close to Slovo Park or the middle of Boipatong, on the side of Boipatong, or can you give any indication where this hostel is?

MR NOSENGA: I did indicate that we left the hostel behind in the township. On your way actually to Sharpeville, you can actually see Slovo Park. I cannot see quite clearly.

MR STRYDOM: Let me ask you like this, you have indicated the route that was followed through the township, passed the shops, then directly down to Slovo Park. Did you follow that same route going back?

MR NOSENGA: We came back on the very same direction.

MR STRYDOM: Then according to you Mr Nosenga, the hostel must be on that route again?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is possible it is on the same route. When we left Slovo Park, when we went to Boipatong there is a hostel after we have left Slovo Park, and there is a very big shop there and there is a taxi rank on the side, and we took the tar road, the main taxi route that is going up.

CHAIRPERSON: How far is that hostel?

MR NOSENGA: The hostel and the taxi ranks are not very much far apart. The hostel can be perhaps at the distance as I have pointed out.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the distance, it is about four, five paces, metres?

MR STRYDOM: As the Committee pleases. Okay, is that the distance between the hostel and the taxi rank?

MR NOSENGA: The taxi rank is not far from the hostel, it can be here, that is the place that I am pointing here. You can actually see the hostel from the taxi rank. There are shops and there is also this main taxi route that is going up.

CHAIRPERSON: The houses I mean in this hostel, are they the same as the houses in Boipatong, are they different?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. There are houses there next to the hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but what I want to find out is the houses in the hostel, do they look the same as the houses in the township?

MR NOSENGA: The hostel is close to the houses. I really don't know how to explain this, I have just explained to you how far the hostel is in relation to the taxi rank.

CHAIRPERSON: The houses of the hostel, the houses that comprise the hostel, are they the same as the township houses?

MR NOSENGA: No, I think they are not the same.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR NOSENGA: I think they are - I don't know how to explain this. They have a somewhat fading white paint.

CHAIRPERSON: (No translation)

MR NOSENGA: They are big, I am just not in a position to say.

CHAIRPERSON: Are they patterned along the same township houses?

MR NOSENGA: No, they are not the same, the hostel houses are different. You see in the township you have streets in between the houses, the hostel is somewhere in that place. I don't know how to explain that.

MR STRYDOM: This hostel you are referring to, is it a multi-storey building or just a single storey building?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say.

CHAIRPERSON: You are mumbling something, we can't hear you.

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say whether it is ...

INTERPRETER: The legal counsel is asking whether it is a facebrick building or not.

CHAIRPERSON: He is enquiring whether the hostel is a double storey or not?

MR NOSENGA: No, it is flat.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: In any event, after the shooting at the hostel, the four casspirs then left the group behind, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, the casspirs left. The group was left behind.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, now after the group was left behind, did you shoot, did you fire any further shots? Sorry, yes after the casspirs left from the hostel, did you fire any shots in Boipatong or not?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not fire any shots. I last fired my gun at Slovo Park.

MR STRYDOM: Then did this group left the Boipatong township at the same place where you had originally entered the township?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that.

MR STRYDOM: You have indicated earlier in your evidence the place where you entered with the casspir, now all I want to know, did you exit the township also at that place?

MR NOSENGA: No, we changed direction.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know which route did you follow to get to the tar road where you said you were walking when you went back to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: If I remember correctly, we took the main taxi route which joined the road to kwaMadala hostel and the factories nearby, we did not take the road to Vereeniging but opted for the one that move towards the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, I accept that, well you said that you took the tar road in front of the factories, and I can point you to the road, is that the road? There are the factories and that is the tar road, you walked on that road back to the hostel, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: The main road, the route that joins Boipatong and kwaMadala hostel. It joins Iscor and Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, that is the - I think the name of the road is Noble Boulevard?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know.

MR STRYDOM: But my question in fact is, from the hostel to the tar road, did you follow a straight line, did you go in one street, directly to the tar road or did you move through the township, through many streets to get to the tar road or did you just take one road, straight to the tar road?

MR NOSENGA: As I stated before, we did not change directions. We just walked along that route in Boipatong and joined the street that leads you to Boipatong, to Madala hostel. That is the route we took.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Nosenga, you said that you took a TV, a video and money? Did you take the video in Boipatong township?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, the TV, video and cash.

MR STRYDOM: Did you take that in the houses you went into, one of the five houses you went into initially?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: You also said and you must correct me if I am wrong, that the TV and the video was loaded into the casspir in Slovo Park, where it was parked, is that correct, to be transported back to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: This television set, can you describe the size, was it a big screen, a small screen or can you indicate the size?

MR NOSENGA: It was a big screen TV.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the size, how big was it?

MR NOSENGA: About this size.

CHAIRPERSON: A big one? What 51 cm? Is it 67 or 51?

MR STRYDOM: Yes, the indication is the big one.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, just indicate again.

MR NOSENGA: About that size.

MR STRYDOM: About 66 cm's, that is the big size, the screen size I think.

CHAIRPERSON: Who are the television watchers?

MR BERGER: I am, the screen is 51, the size of the TV is bigger, but I can't guarantee the make.

MR STRYDOM: I know that is the medium size, but I will accept that for cross-examination purposes, 51 cm. Now, you carried this television set and the video for some period, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I loaded them onto the casspir. The only thing that I held onto was the cash.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, you said that the goods, the TV and the video, were loaded into the casspir at Slovo Park, so you must have carried it some distance?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not say so. I did not say Slovo Park, I never mentioned Slovo Park. I loaded them onto the casspir in the township.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Nosenga, I asked you specifically where the loot was loaded into the casspirs and I mentioned the position where the casspirs came to a standstill in Slovo Park, in the road there where you indicated, and you said yes?

MR NOSENGA: You only questioned me on the property just now.

CHAIRPERSON: Just a minute ago, Counsel asked you whether the TV and the video were loaded into the casspir as Slovo Park and your answer was yes.

MR NOSENGA: No, I said at the township.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, no, no, he is not saying that you took the items from Slovo Park, all that is being put to you at this stage is that you said the items that were stolen, were loaded into the casspirs at Slovo Park, which is where all the casspirs were.

MR NOSENGA: No sir, the goods were loaded in the township. I must have misunderstood that question. As I said before, there are some questions that I do not understand. I stole the goods from the houses in the township and that is where I loaded them onto the casspir.

CHAIRPERSON: No one is suggesting that you stole anything from Slovo Park, but what is being put to you is that it is at Slovo Park where all the stolen items were loaded into the casspirs.

MR NOSENGA: No, I must have misunderstood. He questioned me on how the casspirs proceeded to Slovo Park, but I did not say that the goods were loaded onto the casspirs at Slovo Park.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that he only asked you about how the casspirs followed one another to Slovo Park, is that the question that you heard?

MR NOSENGA: The question related to the goods, I just heard of it now.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, okay. Now from which house did you steal the TV, the video and the money, the first, the second, the third, the fourth or the fifth house?

MR NOSENGA: I think it was the third house.

CHAIRPERSON: From the third house?

MR NOSENGA: I think that is where I removed property from, yes, the third house.

CHAIRPERSON: All these three items, the money, the video and the TV?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I removed all of them from one house.

CHAIRPERSON: And you put them straight onto the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I loaded them onto the casspir as we walked along the street, then the Police were busy shooting at people in the street.

CHAIRPERSON: Who said you must load them onto the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Gatchene.

MR STRYDOM: Now apart from yourself, did the other people in your group also take things which they put into the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, many people stole property. I am not the only person who stole from Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: Was there any other people in your group that stole TV's?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, some people did and they also stole items of clothing and food if I remember correctly, as well as cash.

MR STRYDOM: And all of this was loaded into the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, everything was loaded onto the casspir. Some were, some property was loaded onto the other casspirs, but I only noticed the ones that were loaded onto my casspir.

MR STRYDOM: How do you know stolen goods were also loaded into the other casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: The people mentioned it. I only concentrated on the casspir that I had been travelling in. The items that were burnt at the hostel, at Madala hostel, could not have been carried just in one casspir. There were many items that were burnt at the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: The question is, you didn't see other items being loaded into the other casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: I just heard, I did not see them loading the goods into the casspir, but I was told that other items had been stolen from Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: When the casspirs left the group behind, they went onto the hostel, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, they proceeded to kwaMadala hostel.

MR STRYDOM: When you got back, were these casspirs still there at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not see them again.

MR STRYDOM: When the casspirs left you behind, I am talking now to the casspir you travelled in before, did the Policemen in that casspir, leave with that casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question.

MR STRYDOM: Did the Policemen leave in that casspir? Did they travel in that casspir from the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, the Police left.

MR STRYDOM: In the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they left in the casspir. It was only the hostel residents who followed on foot.

MR STRYDOM: Gatchene also walked back?

MR NOSENGA: No, he rode in the casspir as an induna.

CHAIRPERSON: So others got into taxi's?

MR NOSENGA: Gatchene was an induna, he rode with the Police and the casspir that had been escorting us in the township. There were many items and Gatchene went on, rode on the casspir when they went to deliver the stuff at the hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: The other people walked on foot back to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, we walked on foot.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know who off-loaded the items at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not know who off-loaded the goods, I just saw them at the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Where did you see the goods again at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: They were inside the yard, the goods were inside the yard. There was a main gate at the hostel and there is an open space near that gate and that is where I found that goods.

MR STRYDOM: And the goods you found there, were those the goods not only from your casspir, but from all the casspirs?

MR NOSENGA: That is so, there were many items that I saw.

MR STRYDOM: How did you know which items are the items you stole in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I could recognise them because I had only stolen two items, the TV and the video and I took them.

CHAIRPERSON: As we understand from you, all the stolen items from the four casspirs were put together on the ground, inside the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we understood that, now what he wants to find out is how did you know that this is the television set that you stole and this is the video that you had stolen, how did you identify the goods?

MR NOSENGA: I recognised them because the TV set that I had stolen, was big.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you identify them by the size?

MR NOSENGA: Yes

MR STRYDOM: You don't know what the make of that TV was?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, I am not educated.

CHAIRPERSON: What about the video, how did you manage to identify the video?

MR NOSENGA: It was flat and that small. I recognised that this was mine, and it was black in colour.

CHAIRPERSON: Was it the only video that was there? There were no other video's there?

MR NOSENGA: I only saw that one.

CHAIRPERSON: What about the TV?

MR NOSENGA: There were other TV's and some other items that I could not recognise.

CHAIRPERSON: So there was just one video and you knew that you had stolen the video, so this must be your video?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry Mr Strydom, what time did you come back to the hostel, do you know?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall.

ADV SIGODI: Was it at night or was it ...

MR NOSENGA: It was at night, I cannot remember the time.

ADV SIGODI: Did you collect these goods at night?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there are lights inside the hostel. We collected them after they had been delivered by the casspir inside the hostel.

ADV SIGODI: Okay.

MR STRYDOM: On your way back to the hostel, did you see any vehicles travelling in the street you were walking in?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there were cars travelling along the main road.

MR STRYDOM: Private vehicles or military vehicles or Police vehicles or what kind of vehicles did you see?

MR NOSENGA: I just saw private vehicles, I did not see military vehicles.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see anyone of the attackers in your group, firing shots at any vehicle?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not see anyone firing.

MR STRYDOM: In the township, did you see any person breaking windows?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see people breaking windows, but I cannot identify them, because I went inside the houses.

MR STRYDOM: So you can't identify any person that broke windows?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot tell a lie. I do not know who broke the windows.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you state in your evidence in chief that you remember one of your fellow attackers breaking windows, and you gave the name of Stikenauw?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember that properly. I said Stikenauw had told me that he had raped a woman.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you and I've got the note here right in front of me, that you said that Stikenauw told you that he raped - you connected Stikenauw with something that was said about the rape, I agree with that, but before that you said I remember the fellow attackers breaking windows and you then, in that context also mentioned Stikenauw, so why are you changing your version? Why can't you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know about that.

MR STRYDOM: Do you deny that you said that Stikenauw broke windows?

MR NOSENGA: I say I don't know.

MR STRYDOM: I don't know what you mean when you say "don't know." Can you tell me, do you remember him breaking windows or didn't you see him breaking windows?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I said I did not see anyone. They did break windows, but I went inside the houses.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that maybe hundreds of houses' windows were broken, you can't state that you saw any one of the people with you that broke a window? Why not?

MR NOSENGA: I did not see anybody breaking windows.

MR STRYDOM: Am I correct when I say that many, many houses' windows were broken or is that a wrong statement?

MR NOSENGA: I will not dispute that. I will not dispute it.

MR STRYDOM: Did you yourself break any windows?

MR NOSENGA: No. I did not break any window.

MR STRYDOM: In one of those first five houses, did you see anybody breaking windows there?

MR NOSENGA: No sir, I stated before that I did not see anyone breaking windows. I went into the houses to deal with the business at hand.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that today you stated that in one of those houses, I think the third or fourth house, the group broke windows, some people of your group, broke windows. Do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember that.

MR STRYDOM: This story that you state that Stikenauw said something about rape, what did you hear?

MR NOSENGA: He told me that he had raped someone in Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: When did he tell you that?

MR NOSENGA: After the attack on Boipatong.

MR STRYDOM: On your way back to the kwaMadala hostel on the night of the attack or what, or when?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that.

MR STRYDOM: I just want to know you said he told you after the attack, now I want to know, was that on the way back when he told you that, back to the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: He told me on the same day, after the attack.

CHAIRPERSON: Once again, you are mumbling something. I want to hear your Zulu words, just speak up please.

MR NOSENGA: I said he told me on the same night of the attack, after the attack.

MR STRYDOM: Did you say the same night of the attack, after the attack, is that what you said?

MR NOSENGA: It was after the attack on the 17th.

MR STRYDOM: But just before that you said on the day after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I must have misunderstood you.

MR STRYDOM: I believe that maybe I misunderstood you, so maybe that is the problem, but I heard that. In any event, you say that on the same night it was said? Where was Stikenauw and yourself when this was said?

MR NOSENGA: We were in Stikenauw's room.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know the room number?

MR NOSENGA: No. I only know my room number, room 3.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you go to his room after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I went to his room and thereafter I went to my own room, that is after we had been to the stadium to drink ntelezi.

MR STRYDOM: When you got to the stadium after the attack, who, which leader was there at the stadium?

MR STRYDOM: This induna, people like Gatchene.

MR STRYDOM: Can you remember anybody else?

MR NOSENGA: Bekhi Chonco. I do not remember the others.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, what was your answer to the question, why did you go to Stikenauw's room?

MR NOSENGA: I said that at that time I had not gone to bed, so I went to his room, thereafter I went to my own room. I said I went to Stikenauw's room ...

CHAIRPERSON: What he wanted to find out is why did you go there.

MR NOSENGA: I had just gone there to visit.

MR STRYDOM: So you say at the stadium was Gatchene and Darkie, Prince Vanana Zulu was not there?

MR STRYDOM: I do not remember well. According to - well, let me make a statement - was he the leader of the whole hostel, Vanana Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: I knew Mtwana Zulu to be an induna at the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: But you don't remember seeing him at the hostel after the attack, at the stadium after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I said I did not see him.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer?

MR NOSENGA: I said I did not see him at the stadium.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Tell me, the muti or ntelezi, did you get some of that after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it was given to us at the stadium.

MR STRYDOM: Who gave it to you?

MR NOSENGA: It was just placed on the ground and every person was free to drink. I drank it of my own free will.

MR STRYDOM: But you don't know who put it there on the ground so that you can take it?

MR NOSENGA: No. We also returned the firearms to the stadium and Darkie Chonco removed them.

MR STRYDOM: So you just drank some of that ntelezi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did drink it. It was for cleansing.

MR STRYDOM: I want to read your statement, page 22, paragraph 24, the middle of the paragraph -

"... we then washed by a certain muti provided by Chief Mtwana Zulu."

What do you say about that?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. I did not see Prince Zulu there.

MR STRYDOM: It goes further -

"... we were all happy, chanting and singing."

Did that happen?

MR NOSENGA: That is so. We did sing at the stadium and we were all excited.

MR STRYDOM: "We were praised, especially by Mtwana and Gatchene and told that we did a great job"?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. I did say that I did not see Mtwana. What we did was to place our weapons on the ground, in a pile, the same weapons that we had used in the attack.

MR STRYDOM: So this is again something that appears in this statement that was not coming from you?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know the contents of that statement.

CHAIRPERSON: You say you put your firearms, the weapons on the ground of the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: We returned them to the stadium, we put them on the ground and Darkie Chonco collected them.

MR STRYDOM: So nobody praised you there at the stadium there after the attack, stating that a great job was done?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that. We did sing and we were happy, but I don't remember anybody congratulating us.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know what Darkie Chonco did with the weapons?

MR NOSENGA: They were stored in the ceiling once again.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that Darkie Chonco?

MR NOSENGA: He is the one who removed them from the ceiling in the first place.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the situation that Darkie Chonco removed the firearms from where they were hidden in the ceiling and put them in the stadium?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: So after the attack, you put the weapons on the stadium?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, from where he removed them.

CHAIRPERSON: And then Darkie Chonco removed them and hid them where he had removed them from?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: You didn't assist him doing that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not assist him.

MR STRYDOM: If your statement reads "we hid the weapons in the ceiling of the hostel", that is again wrong?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know about that, I did not hide any weapons. I did not handle firearms, but I would be given one as an IFP member, but it was not my responsibility to look after them.

MR STRYDOM: How do you know that the weapons were hidden in the ceiling on that night?

MR NOSENGA: We were at the stadium and we placed our firearms there and Darkie Chonco was the person who removed them and Themba Khosa and I (indistinct) on the 18th, to collect them.

MR STRYDOM: But you can't really say where Darkie Chonco put the firearms after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: He did take them to the ceiling, that is where the firearms were always hid. That is where we stored our weapons at the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: That ceiling that you refer to, that ceiling is there at the showers, is that right, or not?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, near the showers.

MR STRYDOM: That is far from the stadium, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I think so.

MR STRYDOM: So from the stadium, you can't see what is going on at the showers?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Did someone assist Darkie Chonco to take these weapons and hide them in the ceiling?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember, I just saw Darkie.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And did it also include the spears, were not there, were they? The spears, they were not there? Did he just remove the firearms?

MR NOSENGA: The spears were taken by their respective owners.

CHAIRPERSON: He only removed the firearms?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he just removed the firearms.

MR STRYDOM: You said on many occasions that Darkie Chonco was in control of the firearms. Aren't you making a mistake that the real person in control of the firearms was his brother, Damara?

MR NOSENGA: No. I did not see Damara handling the weapons, firearms. The only person that I saw as responsible for those firearms, was Darkie.

MR STRYDOM: So am I correct in saying that according to you, Damara had no specific role, either a leadership role or any kind of specific job in the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Even though I do not know what position he held, but he was highly regarded. That is Damara Chonco.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that all the other applicants state that Damara Chonco was the person in control of weapons in the hostel, what do you say about that? You are the only one that states that Darkie is actually the person that dealt with the weapons.

MR NOSENGA: I deny, I dispute that. They are just implicating Damara because he is dead. I am not implicating Darkie falsely, I know Damara as well as Darkie.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know if Darkie is still alive?

MR NOSENGA: I said I do not know. I do not know what has happened to him, I have been in prison.

MR STRYDOM: Well, if you don't know if he is dead or alive, how can you give that reason that they implicate Chonco because he is dead, Damara, because he is dead? Darkie may also be dead?

MR NOSENGA: Damara died, I do not know with regards to Darkie.

MR STRYDOM: So you specifically heard that Damara is dead?

MR NOSENGA: What I am saying is that Damara died. I do not know as to what happened to Darkie.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I just want one of the applicants to stand up to be identified. Can the first row of applicants just stand up please. Can this person on the left, just move out please. Do you know that person, Mr Nosenga? The one on the left, the other two may be seated. I just want ...

MR NOSENGA: I do not see him for the first time, but I do not remember his name. He was an IFP member residing at the hostel. He also appeared before this Committee. I also know the others in the front row. They are all members of the IFP.

MR STRYDOM: So the person that is standing, you can't give his name?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember his name. As I said before, there were many people living at the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Just to get clarity, but before these hearings here, when you were staying in the hostel, did you see him in the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. That is the person standing.

MR STRYDOM: Can you give any details about a position, or his situation in the hostel, or was he just according to you, a person in the hostel, just another person?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, he was an IFP member, residing at the hostel. He was a hostel resident as he was an IFP member.

MR STRYDOM: If I put to you, let me just get clarity, that is not, his nickname is not Gatchene?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR STRYDOM: When you referred to Gatchene during your evidence, you did not refer to that person?

MR NOSENGA: I know a certain Gatchene, maybe there were two Gatchene's.

MR STRYDOM: No, I am not stating he is Gatchene, but you didn't, when you spoke about a Gatchene, you didn't refer to him?

MR NOSENGA: No. I know Gatchene.

MR STRYDOM: The applicant can be seated, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Just for the record, what is the applicant's name?

MR NOSENGA: It is Mr Mkhize, Bhekinkosi Mkhize.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Nosenga, from your evidence now, I can gather that - no, let me first ask another question, the night of the attack, before the attack at the stadium, did you see the person we know now as Mr Mkhize?

MR NOSENGA: I did state that I didn't see everyone, maybe he was also present, but I noticed there is an induna who was present at the stadium. There were many people there, so he could have been present as well.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but you can't specifically remember him at the stadium, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do not remember. I cannot commit myself to having seen him.

MR STRYDOM: Do you in fact say that you can't say that you saw him on the 17th of June 1992, at all?

MR NOSENGA: As I stated before, there were many people in the stadium, there were many people who were from Natal, residing at the hostel, it could be that he was present, but I only noticed the induna, our leaders. Some hostel residents, I did not know, some I knew them by their first names, some I did not even know their names.

MR STRYDOM: Were you at the hearings already when Mr Mkhize testified?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, but I was not in this hall, I was in another room in the same building.

MR STRYDOM: But you could hear what he was saying?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember, there are so many people who rendered their testimony here. I did not hear him.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Nosenga, I want to put to you that Mr Mkhize testified and so has all the other applicants, that he was a key person, in fact he was one of the two leaders of the attack on Boipatong. Do you dispute that?

MR NOSENGA: No, there were induna's there, Gatchene was present too. I am saying the attack on Boipatong was, or should I say, did not involve only two people, not the Mkhize that he is talking about. I don't know anything about that.

MR STRYDOM: I further want to put to you that the other leader was Damara Chonco? Can you answer that, the other leader was Damara Chonco?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is a mistake. Darkie, yes, was present, but I did not see him. I am saying the one person that I saw in charge of the firearms, was Darkie Chonco, I did not see Damara. Now, if you are saying it was Mkhize and Damara who were leading the attack on Boipatong, really that is something news to me.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that indicates that you were not part of the attack, because all the other people said that they were leading?

MR NOSENGA: They are mistaken. They are not giving you the right information.

MR STRYDOM: At any meeting prior to the attack, did you see the person we know now as Mr Mkhize, making a speech or addressing the people?

MR NOSENGA: I said no, I cannot say I saw him at any meeting that you are referring to.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that that will indicate that you did not attend any, that you were not in the hostel when those meetings were held.

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know sir, I was present at the hostel at the time of the meetings. The meetings that I had already referred to.

MR STRYDOM: I don't want to ask a question I have already asked, but do you agree with me that Darkie is much younger than Damara and Damara is an induna?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, but I know Damara to be Darkie's elder brother. It is true, Damara is older than Darkie.

MR STRYDOM: So, you also didn't see Damara at the stadium before the attack, addressing the people, giving instructions or anything of the kind?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did say that I did not see him. I saw Darkie Chonco at the stadium, at the meeting.

MR STRYDOM: Did Darkie say anything at the stadium before the attack?

MR NOSENGA: He was present at the stadium. The one person that I remember very well, is Gatchene who said "the time that you have been moaning about, has arrived". The one person who brought firearms along, was Darkie. He was present at the meeting.

MR LAX: Mr Strydom, did I understand the import of your earlier questions where you said that Damara was the induna, are you saying that, are you putting it to him that Darkie wasn't an induna?

MR STRYDOM: Yes.

MR LAX: He didn't really answer that aspect.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Mr Lax. What I am putting to you is that Darkie was just an ordinary resident. Do you agree with that, that Darkie was not an induna, but he was just an ordinary resident?

MR NOSENGA: Darkie was an induna, I did indicate that I didn't know about Damara Chonco.

CHAIRPERSON: What about Damara, was he also an induna?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember very well, but he was a leader of the IFP.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that Mr Mkhize was arrested on the 30th of June 1992 in connection with the Boipatong incident.

MR NOSENGA: I am not disputing that, people were arrested.

MR STRYDOM: And I want to take it further, at that stage you were not in the hostel yet?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know sir. I don't know anything about that, I was at the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that you came to the hostel approximately the middle of July 1992?

MR NOSENGA: That is a mistake sir. I arrived at the hostel in 1991.

MR STRYDOM: And that is the reason why you don't know this person everybody points out as a key kingpin in this Boipatong attack, because he was arrested before you arrived at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, no, that is not true.

MR STRYDOM: You keep on saying that you came to the hostel in 1991. I want you to have a look at your statement on page 18, the statement to Mr Kjellberg, the first paragraph reads -

"... until January 1990 or 1991 I lived with my father at 671 Newman Road in Everton."

What I want to put to you is that you are not even certain when you came to that hostel, you say it is either during 1990 or 1991, so there is some uncertainty in your own mind about when you arrived at the hostel, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: No sir, that is a mistake. I arrived at the hostel in 1991 and I was not staying with my father at Newman Road. I grew up at my uncle's place in Everton.

MR STRYDOM: Yet again then, something that is totally wrong in this statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I don't know about that. The address is correct 671 Newman Road, Everton.

MR LAX: Sorry, do I understand that that is your uncle's address, not your father's address, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: This is my uncle's address, it is true. My father stays at Everton as well, but that is my uncle's address.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Nosenga, do you know a person by the name of Holi Bajozi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I know Holi.

MR STRYDOM: And do you know a person by the name of Oupa Moloi?

MR NOSENGA: I am hearing that name for the first time. I am not hearing that name for the first time.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know him or don't you know him from the hostel days?

MR NOSENGA: No sir, I am saying I am not hearing that name for the first time, it has been a long time since I saw him, but yes, I am not hearing the name for the first time. But Holi is from Zone 7, I know him.

MR STRYDOM: The second person I mentioned, Oupa Moloi, his nickname is Kgobi? Do you know him? It seems to me that you are saying the name rings a bell, but I want to know do you know Kgobi Oupa Moloi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I know him. Yes, he was not my friend, he was a member of the IFP, but he was not my friend.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know a person by the name of Eugenius Mxiti?

MR NOSENGA: No, I am hearing that for the first time.

MR STRYDOM: Eugenius Mxiti?

MR NOSENGA: No, no, I am hearing that name for the first time. I would be telling a lie. I do not know some of the people, there were many of us.

MR STRYDOM: Yes. The last person I want to ask you about is Teresa Mafokeng, do you know her?

MR NOSENGA: No, no I don't know Teresa Mafokeng.

MR STRYDOM: What I want to put to you about them, is that they testified at the criminal matter as accomplices, that testified for the State and their evidence were used to convict the accused or the applicants. These people testified that Mr Mkhize was the leader that led, or he was the person that led the attack onto Boipatong, do you deny that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that.

MR STRYDOM: I also want to put to you that these witnesses testified that - well excluding Teresa Mafokeng, but the first three people - that they were part of the attack and they saw no Police vehicles at any stage, during the course of this attack.

MR NOSENGA: They are making a mistake. There were casspirs at the time of the attack. Some people of Boipatong survived the attack.

MR STRYDOM: As far as Eugenius Mxiti is concerned, I want to put to you that halfway through the criminal trial, he was brought to the State Prosecutors by the ANC, and ...

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat?

MR STRYDOM: Mr Mxiti was brought to the criminal trial and was handed over to the staff of the Attorney General by or through connections of the ANC.

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that.

MR STRYDOM: And he testified that he did not see any Police vehicles during the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is a mistake sir. I would not implicate the Police falsely, they participated during the time of the attack.

MR STRYDOM: So what I am putting to you is that you are the only person that claims that he was part of the attack, that state that the Police was also involved in this attack.

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. I was present at the time of the attack, and the Police were present, using their casspirs. They were present using casspirs.

MR STRYDOM: I want to suggest to you that the reason why you are implicating the Police, is to get back at the people that tortured you?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not true. I am not implicating them falsely for the purpose of revenge for the torture that I suffered, no.

MR STRYDOM: Did you forgive them for the way they tortured you and mishandled you, manhandled you?

MR NOSENGA: They were doing their job sir, it was their job that they tortured me.

MR STRYDOM: So you didn't feel bad for what they were doing to you? That was just their job, that is fine if they do it?

MR NOSENGA: No. I am talking about something that happened, I have no grudge against them.

MR STRYDOM: Why did you go to Ulundi?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that I went to Ulundi out of my own volition, to attend the Inkatha conference.

MR STRYDOM: You were a youngster from the township, was there any other reason why you as a person who had never been to Ulundi before, went on this specific occasion?

MR NOSENGA: No, I wouldn't know, but I did go to Ulundi.

MR STRYDOM: All the people from the kwaMadala hostel that went to Ulundi for that conference, did they go in that vehicle of Damara, driven by Darkie? They went in one vehicle, only that group of people that went?

MR NOSENGA: I said I went to Ulundi in a kombi that was driven by Damara Chonco.

MR STRYDOM: Oh sorry, driven yes, sorry, I've got it wrong way around. Was Mr Vanana Zulu also in that kombi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: When you got to Ulundi, did you see other people from the hostel that was not in that kombi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see them. They had come, using their private vehicles.

MR STRYDOM: I want to refer you to a document, Exhibit Z, unfortunately not - the second part of that document, I want to refer you to page, it is marked page VI, Chairperson, I see there has unfortunately been a portion cut off, but I will read from the original. Now I am going to put to you minutes that were taken and you must tell me if you agree with these minutes or not. On the 18th of July 1992, I think that was on a Saturday.

MR NOSENGA: I don't recall, but we left on Friday, early in the morning.

MR STRYDOM: Did Mr Zulu report back to the congress goers...

MS CAMBANIS: We can't follow the pagination.

CHAIRPERSON: I think it, is it VI, is it?

MR STRYDOM: VI, the page is marked VI.

CHAIRPERSON: I think it is the second - I think it is about the fifth page.

MR BERGER: It is page 17 of Exhibit Z.

MR LAX: That is correct, I've numbered mine, and it is 17.

MR STRYDOM: I am not going to mark the original. The question I want to ask you before I read this portion to you, did Mr Vanana Zulu get onto the stage to report something to the people there?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom, we have gone through this. I mean if you want to put the minutes to the witness, put the minutes to the witness and let's see what he has to say.

MR STRYDOM: As it pleases you, Chairperson. According to this minutes, Mtwana V. Zulu reported about Madala incidents. Would that be correct?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR STRYDOM: So according to you he never spoke at all, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR STRYDOM: According to the minutes, I will read them then to you, he said that on Tuesday somebody came, a person of an age of 17 years, the man was coming to Madala from the township. He pointed out that the man is round, and he was not forced to come to Ulundi. Do you have any comment so far?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that. I don't know who this 17 year old is.

MR STRYDOM: The name of the guy is Matanzima, he said that he was sent by ANC members to work after members of the IFP in Madala hostel. He was ordered to monitor the movement of the five members of the IFP. He mentioned that Mbatha is the man behind this. If anyone refused to do what he is instructed to do, he will be sjamboked to death. He also mentioned that he was also instructed to take number plates for the members of the IFP and then it carries on with something else, Mr Twala reported on the conference about the MK and their task since 1960. You deny all this?

MR NOSENGA: No, that is not true.

CHAIRPERSON: You say you did not hear Mr Zulu speak at the conference?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did say at the beginning.

CHAIRPERSON: did you hear someone saying the things that Counsel has just read to you?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not. I am hearing this for the first time here, I did not hear him say that. I am hearing this for the first time here, now that he is reading it.

MR STRYDOM: Do you or did you know a person with the name of Mbatha?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know Mbatha.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Nosenga, I just want to also put to you seeing that this Exhibit W and Exhibit X were handed in, that according to this cell registers, Mr Keswa was not in the hostel on the 15th of June 1992 and he was not in the hostel on the 17th of June 1992. What do you say about that?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know anything about that. I cannot say he was present on the 15th of June 1992, when the people were being attacked at Sebokeng, I don't know.

MR STRYDOM: So according to you he did not take part in the drive-by shootings on the 15th of June, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I was with him, together with Ndlandla Ndlovu and Xindi. He was released now and then from prison, so I cannot say really.

MR STRYDOM: But you can't give any explanation why you did not see your friend, Victor Keswa from the 17th when you saw him during the course of the day, that you did not see him thereafter, is that right?

CHAIRPERSON: What possible explanation can he give you other than he did not see him then? If he didn't see him, he didn't see him.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, maybe - I want to rephrase. When did you see him again from the time you saw him on the 17th, during the course of the day?

MR NOSENGA: I said I saw him for the last time during the day, he was in the company of Peens. I did not see him in the evening of that day.

CHAIRPERSON: Thereafter, when did you see him thereafter? Did you see him thereafter, after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not. I saw him for the last time on the 17th.

CHAIRPERSON: You last saw him on the 17th, during the day?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. You never saw him again?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LAX: So in your whole life, you never saw him again after that day, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: I said I did not see him even on the 18th.

MR LAX: What we are saying is, you are being asked this and you must listen carefully, I know you have been giving evidence for a long time, the question you are being asked is, after the 17th, did you ever see Victor Keswa again at any time? Not just on that day, on any other day or any other week or any other month?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying no sir.

MR LAX: Thank you.

MR STRYDOM: If I mention the name Moses Mthembu, will you be able to identify that person?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR STRYDOM: Have you heard the name Moses Mthembu before?

MR NOSENGA: If I am not mistaken, I think I heard about it before. If I am not mistaken.

MR STRYDOM: But you can't say if he was a person with a position in the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: I would be lying, I do not know.

MR STRYDOM: Well, I want to put to you that Moses Mthembu is the person in control of the hostel, he is an employee of Iscor and in that capacity he is the person who will hand out rooms and deal with all hostel affairs.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know that. I will not dispute it. All that I am saying is that I was issued a room by Mtwana Zulu.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that if you were in the hostel since 1991, you would have arrived there at a stage when Moses Mthembu had been there before you and you would have stayed with Moses Mthembu for a long period, and you would definitely know him. Can you give any explanation why you don't know him?

MR NOSENGA: What I want to say is that I did not know many people from Natal who were employees of Iscor.

MR STRYDOM: I am not going to belabour the point, all I can tell you is that Moses Mthembu has been in the Vaal and working for Iscor for many years, and he has been in the hostel since the beginning when that hostel opened or when it was reopened.

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that he was residing at the hostel, because there are many people there.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, just give an indication till what time you want me to carry on. I think I've got half an hour's questions left.

CHAIRPERSON: (Microphone not on)

MR STRYDOM: One question? Maybe I said something wrongly without thinking, but I've got one issue which I want to deal with and that is the happenings on the 18th.

CHAIRPERSON: (Microphone not on)

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I will try to be quick. It is difficult to say, it depends obviously on the answers, I want specifics about what happened on the 18th and the reason obviously to find out if the witness was there on the 18th.

CHAIRPERSON: Haven't we canvassed that?

MR STRYDOM: I have specific knowledge that was not canvassed that I want to put to this witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay. We will adjourn at this stage, we will resume on Monday at nine o'clock.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

10-05-1999: Day 6

Application No: Am2778/96

Matter: Boipatong Massacre

ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Strydom?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (still under oath)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: (continued) Thank you Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, you testified last week that you fired many shots, what happened to the cartridges of the bullets that were fired?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know sir.

MR STRYDOM: So these cartridges must have stayed behind on the various scenes?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: The following day, that is the day after the attack, after you got up during the course of the morning, was there any trouble that you can remember or any threats or any strange thing that happened?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question?

MR STRYDOM: On the day after the attack, during the course of the morning at the hostel, was there any threats from any one for instance people that wanted to attack the hostel or things like that, that you can remember?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that evidence was led already by the applicants that the following morning there was a threatening attack from people from Boipatong on the hostel and the hostel dwellers went out and before the parties could meet more or less in the vicinity of the robots, the Police sent the people from kwaMadala back and sent the people from Boipatong back? So you have no knowledge of that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that.

MR STRYDOM: On that following day, could you leave the hostel at any time if you wanted to?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR STRYDOM: Why not?

MR NOSENGA: I was afraid of going to the township or going to town.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but apart from being afraid, if you wanted to, could you leave the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No. I did say earlier on that I was afraid because these people were abducting us.

MR STRYDOM: On the 19th of June 1992, that is two days after the attack, could you leave the hostel if you wanted to? Apart from being afraid, say for instance you were not afraid, could you walk out of the hostel if you wanted to?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question leaving the hostel going to town or to the township?

CHAIRPERSON: The question is if you had wanted to leave the hostel, apart from being afraid of the people who might kidnap you, could you go out of the hostel and go anywhere?

MR NOSENGA: No, I maintained that I was not able to walk freely.

CHAIRPERSON: What were you afraid of?

MR NOSENGA: I was afraid of the people of the Vaal.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the only reason why you couldn't leave the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is the reason.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see the Police arriving at some stage after the attack, at the hostel, that is on the days following the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I say I did not see them inside the hostel, I said I saw them outside the hostel, I did say that. I did say that at the beginning of my statement.

MR STRYDOM: Do you remember when you saw the Police outside the hostel for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: On the 18th, if I still remember very well, they were outside the hostel. I saw them on the 18th, outside the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Do you remember approximately what time of the day did you see them for the first time outside the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall.

MR STRYDOM: After the Police arrived, could you still go outside the hostel if you wanted to?

MR NOSENGA: No, I would not. I have already stated that I would not be able to leave the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Were you - let me ask you this, did you see if the Police searched the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did even though I cannot say exactly when. They came into the hostel at night, they came in to search and some people were arrested.

MR STRYDOM: On the next day, the day after the attack now, was ntelezi used again?

MR NOSENGA: Ntelezi was used on the 17th, in the evening, when we came back from Boipatong, we used it, not on the 18th.

MR STRYDOM: And according to you, on the 18th, was there any singing and dancing or anything of the kind in the hostel by the hostel dwellers?

MR NOSENGA: No, that happened on the 17th, in the evening. MR STRYDOM: Am I correct in saying that according to you, on the 18th nothing extraordinary happened, it was just an ordinary day in the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, except that Themba Khosa came. I am saying the one person who came on that day was Mr Themba Khosa, he came to fetch the firearm. I cannot remember anything happening that day.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that there was towards the afternoon after four o'clock, there was some sort of dance and ntelezi was used and the people sang songs, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't know about that, I don't know anything.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that a video tape was made by the Police on the 18th, did you see that, filming the people of the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Maybe it happened, but I saw the Police outside the premises of the hostel, I cannot dispute that, but I am saying I saw the Police outside the premises of the hostel on that day.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you if one looks at that video, it is clear that there was singing, some sort of dancing and ntelezi was thrown over the singing people, but you didn't see that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that. I only know of the meeting of the 17th, when we came back to the hostel.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, could I just intervene at this stage. We believe that there was such a video and it was an Exhibit in the criminal trial, and we have been trying to get hold of that, we were told that the Exhibits have all been lost, I don't know if my learned friend has recovered that video, and if so, we would like to see it.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Nosenga, to end off, I just want to put to you that you were not in the hostel during the attack and some time after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I was at the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson, I haven't got further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR STRYDOM

CHAIRPERSON: Who is the next person?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairperson, my name is Riaan du Plessis, I am standing in on behalf of Adv Hannes Botha, I will take the cross-examination of the witness, if it pleases the Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: On behalf of who?

MR DU PLESSIS: I am acting on behalf of Pedro Peens, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LAX: Mr Du Plessis, sorry, I didn't catch your initials?

MR DU PLESSIS: R du Plessis, Mr Lax.

MR LAX: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Du Plessis?

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Nosenga, when first did you meet Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that it was before I went to the hostel. He once arrested me for a car offence.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is when did you meet Mr Peens for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: He arrested me for the first time ...

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know when that was? When?

MR NOSENGA: I was arrested in Vereeniging.

MR LAX: What year, what month, do you remember?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember sir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you tell us what happened when Mr Peens arrested you?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying Peens arrested me and he took me to Frogadien, Frogadien I am not sure if the word is correctly pronounced, in Vanderbijlpark.

MR DU PLESSIS: This place, is it an office, can you just tell us what kind of building this would be?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, it looks like it is a place that they used to use for assaulting and torturing people.

MR DU PLESSIS: Were you assaulted during interrogation by Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, he assaulted me.

MR DU PLESSIS: What did he do to you?

MR NOSENGA: He applied electric shocks on me and he covered my face with a tube and he administered some things on my fingers, I don't know what they are.

MR DU PLESSIS: If you say he administered electric shocks on you, can you just give us an explanation how did he do this?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying he put some wires on my fingers and I cannot explain how it worked, but it used to affect me.

MR DU PLESSIS: Were you blindfolded when this incident occurred?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because the tube had covered my eyes as well as my nose.

MR DU PLESSIS: How do you know that he administered wires on your fingers? Did you see the wires?

MR NOSENGA: I saw these wires before he actually covered my face.

MR DU PLESSIS: And when were you released after this incident?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember, but yes, I was released ultimately, but I cannot recall when.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was it on the same day of your arrest, two days later, a month? Can you give us any idea?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I am saying I cannot recall because I was taken to the Police station where I was locked in.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you remember whether you were released on the same day or the following day, can you remember that as well?

MR NOSENGA: I think I spent a week if not two, I am not quite sure.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you ever appear in a court of law during that two weeks?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall. No, I did not appear before the Court. They just assaulted me and kept me for two weeks at Vanderbijlpark.

MR DU PLESSIS: And where were you released?

MR NOSENGA: In Vanderbijlpark.

MR DU PLESSIS: At the Police station?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Before the meeting two weeks before the Boipatong massacre, did you see Mr Peens again?

MR NOSENGA: I saw Peens on the 17th and during the week, the two weeks prior to the attack, meeting.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, I have asked you before the meeting that took place two weeks before the Boipatong massacre, did you see Mr Peens again?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him on the 17th, during the day, he was actually giving Gatiza some money and I also saw him at Boipatong in the evening.

MR DU PLESSIS: So after the first arrest and the meeting, you never saw him again?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, after your first arrest by Mr Peens, and before the meeting that took place two weeks before the Boipatong massacre, you never saw Mr Peens again, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: At this meeting, two weeks before Boipatong, are you sure that Mr Peens was present at this meeting?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am sure. I am certain I saw him at that meeting two weeks prior to the attack, that is the meeting of the 14th.

MR DU PLESSIS: How do you know this, that it was Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that I was not seeing him for the first time, you will remember you asked me when I met him for the first time, I told you how he arrested me. I was not seeing him for the first time at the hostel. It was the same Peens who was working for the Murder and Robbery Unit, he is the one who attended the meeting two weeks prior to the attack in the company of Themba Khosa.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why do you say the person who arrested you was the same person who was at the meeting two weeks before Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I know Peens, it was Peens, he is the one who arrested me. He was also present at the hostel two weeks prior to the attack. He attended that meeting, so I knew him.

MR DU PLESSIS: At this meeting, did Mr Peens at any stage address the people present at the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall sir. I cannot recall whether he addressed the crowd.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember what he did at the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember him doing anything in particular, except that he was standing there with Themba Khosa.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you know the purpose why Mr Peens would allegedly be at this meeting if he said nothing and he did nothing at the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember who Chaired this meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that it was Gatchene as well as other induna's.

MR DU PLESSIS: In your statement, Mr Chairman, Exhibit R on page 19, paragraph 5, the second sentence starting with "Themba Khosa", and I will read it out to you -

"... Themba Khosa and Mr Peens, a member of the Murder and Robbery Squad in Flora Gardens, Chaired the meeting."

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that, I only said that Themba Khosa as well as Peens were present at the meeting.

MR DU PLESSIS: So this is not correct, Mr Peens did not, and Mr Khosa did not ...

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is not correct. I am simply saying they were present at the meeting, but the person who spoke was Gatchene.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you remember if a person by the name of Danie was present?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember Danie, I only remember Peens. I only saw Danie for the first time during the attack on the 17th, in the evening.

MR DU PLESSIS: Who is this person by the name of Danie?

MR NOSENGA: Danie is one of the Police working for the Murder and Robbery Unit. I just know him to be Danie.

MR DU PLESSIS: How do you know his name?

MR NOSENGA: I used to hear people when they were talking, calling him Danie.

MR DU PLESSIS: Now, I refer you to paragraph 7 on page 19, the second sentence and I will read it out to you -

"... Peens and Danie also said that they would supply Rooikop with weapons and he should give them to Themba Khosa, who would bring them to the hostel ..."

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, can you remember who took down this statement from you?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall. I did indicate that several people came to take statements from me.

MR DU PLESSIS: If I put it to you that Mr Kjellberg took this statement from you, what would you say about that?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot dispute that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you know Mr Kjellberg?

MR NOSENGA: No, I am hearing the name for the first time.

MR DU PLESSIS: Have you ever consulted with Mr Kjellberg?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I cannot recall, there were many of these people who came to me.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you know a person by the name of Jan?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR DU PLESSIS: This statement was supposed to be taken by Mr Jan Ike Kjellberg, do you know if there is any reason why he would put down all of this information, which he didn't get from you?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying the person who was interpreting for me, was not doing a good job, and I had difficulty communicating.

CHAIRPERSON: What language was this person speaking who was interpreting for you?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying he was speaking Zulu, but he was not fluent, because he was a Sotho speaking person.

CHAIRPERSON: Did the Interpreter - wait, just listen to the question before you answer it - the person who interpreted for you, what language did he speak to you?

MR NOSENGA: He was communicating to me in Zulu, but his Zulu was not fluent, he was not fluent in the language.

CHAIRPERSON: Where does the Sotho come in then?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying he said to me he is a Sotho speaking person, he was going to try as much as he could to speak Zulu.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you request for a Zulu speaking Interpreter?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did. I told them that I am not Sotho speaking.

CHAIRPERSON: And you say that you corrected this person on a number of occasions?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. I was telling him often times to rectify mistakes in the statements and he would say he his sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you correcting his interpretation of what you had said to him?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Yes, I would hear him saying something different.

CHAIRPERSON: This is what he was telling the person who was taking down the statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LAX: If I may Chairperson, you say you would hear him saying something different, what language was he saying something different in?

MR NOSENGA: He was speaking this broken Zulu.

MR LAX: No you were speaking Zulu to him, he was speaking broken Zulu to you, you said to us you would hear him saying something different, he must have then been translating what you had said, to the person taking the statement, isn't that so? Yes or no, plain and simple?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes sir, I cannot dispute that.

MR LAX: So the question is then, what language was he talking to this other person in?

MR NOSENGA: He was speaking this English, I don't know and he would come back to me and he would speak in Zulu.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know the difference between English and Afrikaans?

MR NOSENGA: They were speaking English. He was speaking English.

MR LAX: I thought you told us earlier that you don't understand English?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes, but they were speaking English.

MR LAX: Well, then how did you know that he wasn't telling that person what you had told him?

MR NOSENGA: The legal counsel used to look at the statement at the end of taking it, and verify it with me through the Interpreter.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the position that the statement was read back to you?

MR NOSENGA: He would ask me each time he was writing, whether it was correct, whether the statement was correct or what he was writing, is correct, and I would rectify him or rectify the statement along the way when the need arose.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the position that after you had spoken, this was interpreted to the person who was taking down the statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And then you would be asked by the person who is taking down the statement, who would read back what he has just written down, to confirm whether in fact this is what you had said?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I would give him the information and it would be interpreted, written down and verified.

CHAIRPERSON: And this happened from the beginning to the end of the statement?

INTERPRETER: May the question please be repeated? May the question please be repeated?

MR LAX: Chairperson, they are asking you to repeat the question, the Translators, sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, what was the question, I can't even recall. MR LAX: They were talking about repeating the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, you have been telling us that the person who was taking down the statement, after you had spoken, this person would confirm with you by asking you whether in fact that is what you had said?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: That happened throughout the statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And as you were going along, was the statement being corrected?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What I want to find out is whenever you made corrections, were these recorded down?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I would see the person scratching out what he had written before.

CHAIRPERSON: So he would scratch what is down, and write something else?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And would he confirm whether that is in fact what you had said?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And what would you say, would you confirm that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because he would scratch out some things, I would see him scratching out some things.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, now when you told us that you corrected the Interpreter on a number of occasions, correcting his interpretation, is that what you were referring to?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because the Attorney asked me if the statement was as I told the Interpreter.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Nosenga, can I assume then that you reject the statement that Mr Peens addressed the meeting on that day?

CHAIRPERSON: Has he not told us that that is not correct, hasn't he told us that?

MR DU PLESSIS: Excuse me Mr Chair. In your evidence in chief, according to my notes, Mr Nosenga, you said the following, I don't know if you can remember -

"... Peens said he will supply weapons, Gatchene was interpreting ..."

Can you remember that you testified to this extent?

MR NOSENGA: No, I said the person who addressed the meeting was Gatchene.

MR DU PLESSIS: So this is not correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, it is not correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember if a person by the name of Chaka was present at this meeting?

MR NOSENGA: No sir, I did indicate that he was not present.

MR DU PLESSIS: Once again sir, in my notes, in your evidence in chief, you testified that Chaka accompanied Peens to the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: No, I said he was not present.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you wish to change your testimony now?

MR NOSENGA: I said Chaka was not present, I only met him on the 17th.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, let's move on to the day of the massacre. You said you saw Mr Peens again on that day, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I did not say that I saw Mr Peens on the 18th.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir on the day of the massacre, the day but before the massacre took place, did you see Mr Peens again?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him during the day on the 17th at the Iscor parking lot.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was he alone?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I saw him, just him.

MR DU PLESSIS: So nobody accompanied him, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I only saw Peens handing money over to Gatiza.

MR DU PLESSIS: How do you know that Mr Peens handed money over to Mr Keswa? Did you see this money?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see the money.

MR DU PLESSIS: How much money was it?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know.

MR DU PLESSIS: How did you see that it was money, sir?

MR NOSENGA: I was close to them when he handed the money over.

MR DU PLESSIS: How close sir?

MR NOSENGA: I was close, from where I am sitting it would be myself and Victor and Mr Peens. The applicant pointed to his legal representative and Mr Strydom.

MR DU PLESSIS: So you could hear, if there was any conversation between Mr Peens and Mr Keswa, you would be able to hear it, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not hear them.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was there no conversation between them, or you didn't hear them having a conversation?

MR NOSENGA: They did have a conversation, but I didn't hear what they were saying.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, why couldn't you hear what they were saying?

MR NOSENGA: They were speaking in English therefore I did not hear what they were saying.

ADV SIGODI: You did not understand what they were saying?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did not understand them. Yes, I did not understand what they were saying.

ADV SIGODI: Were you part of this what shall I call it, the group or was it you, Gatiza and Peens together when Peens was giving Gatiza the money because as you described it, you were quite close together, was it the three of you together?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there were three of us at the parking lot.

ADV SIGODI: Where did Peens, did Gatiza know that he was going to meet Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know whether he knew.

ADV SIGODI: Did you go together with Gatiza to Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I was with Gatiza at the parking lot, we were just outside the hostel at the Iscor parking lot. That is where Peens came to.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair. This meeting between Mr Peens and Mr Keswa, would you describe it as a private, secretive meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I would not know. I do not know whether it was private or not.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, if you were there, you would have known how the parties would act, would they act as if there was a secret between themselves, or didn't they care who saw them meeting with each other?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know sir, I have already stated that they met outside the hostel at the Iscor parking lot. I do not know whether it was private, secretive or not.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why did you join the meeting sir?

MR NOSENGA: I was in the company of Gatiza.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did he invite you to the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: He just told me that we should go to the parking lot.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did he tell you why you were going to go to the parking lot?

MR NOSENGA: No, he did not tell me. I just went along because it was my friend.

MR DU PLESSIS: And now when you met Mr Peens, the Police Official, did you recognise him as the Official who assaulted you previously?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did recognise him, he was the same Peens who had arrested me, whilst I was still staying at the township.

MR DU PLESSIS: And you stayed with that meeting, you didn't go away?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I remained there until Peens left.

CHAIRPERSON: When Peens first arrested you, were you still staying in Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I said. He arrested me in connection with a vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: And that is when you were detained for approximately two weeks from what you ...

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, and the next time you saw him, was at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, during the day and in the evening of the 17th.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Nosenga, this money, was it handed over in a purse, in a bag or just from one hand to another, can you remember?

MR NOSENGA: Peens removed it from his pocket and handed it over to Gatiza, but I do not know how much it was.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember if you saw the denominations of the money, was it ...

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not know how much it was, I just saw that it was cash.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you see if it was R50 bills, R100 bills, R20 bills, anything, can you remember anything about the money?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see a R50 note.

MR DU PLESSIS: Only one?

MR NOSENGA: It was rolled up in a bundle, so I don't know how much it was, or how many R50 notes there were.

MR DU PLESSIS: So then there were more than one R50 note, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I don't know, I am not in a position to know, because it was rolled up so I cannot say whether there was just one R50 note or more than one. He just handed the money over in that fashion.

MR DU PLESSIS: It is still your submission or evidence that at the meeting present was yourself, Mr Peens and Mr Keswa, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Nobody else?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not see anybody else.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, then I refer you to page 20 of your statement, paragraph 10 the first sentence and I will read it out to you.

"... I also saw Peens coming to the hostel on the day of the attack together with his colleague Chaka ..."

Now what is your evidence, was Chaka with Mr Peens or was he not with Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I stated before that I only saw Chaka on the evening of the 17th.

MR DU PLESSIS: So you reject this sentence which I have read to you?

MR NOSENGA: You questioned me on who was present at the parking lot and I told you the people who were present.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, except for yourself, Mr Peens when he assaulted you the first time, or when he assaulted you, you saw him at a meeting and then you saw him this time, were these the only times that you saw Mr Peens before the night of the attack at Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Then sir, I refer you to paragraph 10 again, the last sentence in which you said -

"... I often saw Peens meeting Victor Keswa and I am sure that he got money from Peens."

Do you reject the statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do. Victor Keswa received money from Peens on the 17th, that is at the parking lot but I do not know about the fact that he often used to receive money from him.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, if I put it to you that Mr Keswa was in custody on that day, what would you say about that?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. As I said before, I last saw Victor Keswa on that day, I do not know what happened to him.

CHAIRPERSON: On what day is that?

MR DU PLESSIS: On the day of the meeting, the same day as ...

CHAIRPERSON: The 17th?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, then I put it to you that it is my instructions that there never was a meeting on the 17th between Mr Peens, yourself and Mr Keswa, you are welcome to answer if you want to.

CHAIRPERSON: Just before he answers that, are you putting it to this witness that on the 17th of June, Mr Peens was in custody? Mr Keswa, I beg your pardon?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Keswa, that is correct yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, okay, all right.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. I will just not implicate Keswa and Peens falsely. I did see him on the 17th.

MR DU PLESSIS: How late in the day did this meeting take place?

CHAIRPERSON: Which meeting now?

MR DU PLESSIS: The meeting which you allege took place between yourself, Mr Keswa and Mr Peens, at what time of the day did it take place?

MR NOSENGA: It was during the day, I cannot say exactly what time it was.

CHAIRPERSON: We have canvassed this point, this meeting, he has denied it and you put it to him that such a meeting didn't take place, what else is there to cover now?

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I will move on. When did you see Mr Peens next after the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: Which meeting are you referring to?

MR DU PLESSIS: The meeting between yourself, Mr Peens and Mr Keswa?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him in the evening of the 17th when we went to attack Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: How late did you see Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question.

MR DU PLESSIS: How late did you see him?

MR NOSENGA: It was in the evening, I don't know what the time was.

MR DU PLESSIS: How many hours after the alleged meeting between yourself and Mr Keswa and Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall. I saw him at the parking lot and thereafter I only saw him in the evening when we went to Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: Where did you see Mr Peens in the evening?

MR NOSENGA: At the veld in Boipatong, that is near the bridge, that is on your way to Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: Where did you find him in the veld?

MR NOSENGA: There is a main road towards Sebokeng and there is a veld nearby there, that is just before you come to Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was he alone?

MR NOSENGA: I said he was in the company of other Police Officers, he was not alone.

MR DU PLESSIS: How many other Officers did you see?

MR NOSENGA: I saw four casspirs, but I cannot be certain of the number of the Police Officers. I only knew the people who were in my casspir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was Mr Peens in or outside one of the casspirs when you saw him, when you met him?

MR NOSENGA: He was standing outside the casspir. The casspirs were stationary and they were standing outside. I could see because there were lights in the vicinity.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was he the only Official, Police Official standing outside the casspir or were there people joining him?

MR NOSENGA: I saw Peens and others like Rooikop.

MR DU PLESSIS: Anybody else?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there were, but I do not know their names.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you see a person by the name of Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see him.

MR DU PLESSIS: So now you remember that Chaka was present?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he was present when people were attacked and killed in Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: When you arrived in the veld in the casspirs, did Mr Peens say anything to you?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why did you, what happened then when you met and everybody got together, what happened then, what happened next?

MR NOSENGA: As I stated before, Gatchene said we should get onto the casspirs and I climbed onto the one that was driven by somebody else in which Peens was also a passenger. Other people walked on foot.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you get into the casspir before Mr Peens or after him?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall sir, but we were in the same casspir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you describe to us, for how long were you in the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was this the first time you had been in a casspir?

MR NOSENGA: I was with other residents of kwaMadala hostel, it was not just me who went into the casspir.

MR LAX: The question was and just listen to the questions please, was this the first time you were in a casspir, yes or no? Was this the first time you had been in a casspir, yes or no, just answer the question.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it was the first time.

MR LAX: Carry on.

MR NOSENGA: It was not the first time, I first rode in a casspir when I was being investigated for some other crimes, and then I rode in a casspir again when we went to Boipatong.

MR LAX: You have given two totally different answers here, your first answer was yes, this is the first time you had been in a casspir, now you are saying no, this is not the first time you had been in a casspir, you were in a casspir before when you were being investigated for some other crimes. Please explain.

MR NOSENGA: I first rode in a casspir when I was investigated for those other offences and then the second time I went into a casspir, was when I rode to Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Du Plessis we know that he had been in a casspir before, let's move on.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, for how far were you in the casspir, can you remember how far the casspir drove before you got out?

MR NOSENGA: As we entered the township, we got off on the first street and took cover and other casspirs went into other streets. We took cover on the first street and went into the first house.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you give me an estimate if it was 100 metres, one kilometre, how far did you drive in the casspir?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, can you recall how far had you been in the casspir before you got out of the casspir? If you can remember say so, if you can't, tell us.

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair. Was there any specific reason why you had to board the casspir, did anybody tell you why you had to board the casspir?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Du Plessis, the evidence from this witness as I recall it, is to the effect that it is Gatchene who issued instructions that they should get into the casspirs.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I would just like to know if there was any reason why they had to get into the casspir.

CHAIRPERSON: We know from this witness that Gatchene was in charge of the group, they listened to him, he said they must get into the casspir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Nosenga, when you got off the casspir, did you see Mr Peens, what he did then?

MR NOSENGA: Mr Peens did not go into the houses. What they did was to shoot at people in the street, we are the only people who went into the houses.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you keep constant eye contact with Mr Peens whilst you were on the ground?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he did not get into people's premises or into the houses. He was just, he just remained on the street.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you know if he wore any protective clothing?

MR NOSENGA: No, I just saw him in his private clothes.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember if he was camouflaged or if his face was camouflaged?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they wee camouflaged. They had painted some substance on their faces and they were wearing balaclavas as well.

MR DU PLESSIS: Then sir, how did you know that it was Mr Peens that was on the ground, from the casspir? Could you distinguish between the Police Officers?

MR NOSENGA: I did see him.

MR DU PLESSIS: How did you know it was Mr Peens, was there any distinguishable marks that you can know it was Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I could see him.

MR DU PLESSIS: Please explain how you could distinguish Mr Peens from the other Police Officials.

MR NOSENGA: He was wearing a white shirt.

MR DU PLESSIS: What else?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him wearing a white shirt and a pair of jeans.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was he the only person wearing a white shirt and jeans?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, other people were wearing pants, slacks and some were wearing jackets.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, I refer you to page 21 of your statement, paragraph 20 and I will read it out to you -

"... Peens also shot people, he shot from the casspir. I do not know what kind of weapon he used, but I do not think he used his Police firearm."

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, the casspir was driving very slowly and he was able to get of the casspir and shoot at people in the street.

CHAIRPERSON: The casspir was moving slowly?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it was moving slowly.

CHAIRPERSON: So Peens would alight from the casspir, shoot at people, go back to the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I am saying. After we had left the casspir, they remained in the casspir, but they would get off and shoot at people in the street.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Du Plessis wants to clarify from you is the statement that Peens shot from the casspir. Do you understand what that means?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that statement correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, it is not true. The truth is that he would get off the casspir and shoot at people in the street.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you see if Chaka was around?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see him.

MR DU PLESSIS: What did he do?

MR NOSENGA: He was also shooting at people.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did he also get off the casspir or was he on the casspir when he fired shots?

MR NOSENGA: The Police would get off the casspir, I did not see them shooting from the casspir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you see Mr Chaka get off the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: I stated before that Chaka also fired at people, you questioned me on Peens and I explained that he would get off the casspir, shoot at people and then climb on the casspir again.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, did you see what kind of firearm Mr Peens used?

MR NOSENGA: No, it was a small gun, but I do not know what type if was.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was it a handgun or was it a pistol or - excuse me, a firearm, a rifle, anything an AK47, an R1, anything can you give a description, or didn't you see?

MR NOSENGA: I said it was a small gun, I do not know what type it was.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, it is my instructions and I will put it to you that Mr Peens was never at a meeting two weeks before the Boipatong massacre.

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I say he was present. I would not implicate Mr Peens falsely.

MR DU PLESSIS: It is also our instructions that there was no meeting between Mr Peens and Mr Keswa on the day of the Boipatong massacre.

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I said I was present at that meeting of the 17th, that is during the day.

MR DU PLESSIS: As a matter of fact, no such meeting did take place on that day?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that.

MR DU PLESSIS: And thirdly and lastly, Mr Peens was not involved in any way with the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: He did play a role, he was involved in the shooting of people in Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Is there anyone, who is the next?

MR DA SILVA: I have no questions, Mr Chairman.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DA SILVA

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, I am sure you are tired and you want to get out of the witness box, but I am going to ask you please to listen carefully to my questions and to concentrate on them.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

MR BERGER: Do you remember when you were at Leeukop prison, there was a Prisoners' Organisation there that looked after the interests of prisoners?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall.

MR BERGER: If I give you the name of a person, Mr Efrahim Nkosi, does that ring a bell?

MR NOSENGA: No. No, I cannot remember very well.

MR BERGER: I am talking about the time at the beginning of 1996, approximately January 1996, you were at Leeukop at that time, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: There was this organisation, as I say, and this Mr Nkosi was a member of that organisation, a representative of that organisation in prison with you at Leeukop? Sorry, you said something?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I hear that.

MR BERGER: And you approached Mr Nkosi for some assistance with your position, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is possible, I cannot deny that, it is possible I went to him for help.

MR BERGER: You see, because this Mr Nkosi telephoned Mongezi, that is Mongezi Tshongweni and he told Mongezi that there was a man at Leeukop by the name of Mr Nosenga who needed assistance. Now Mongezi was at that time, the Head of the ANC's Truth and Reconciliation Desk.

MR NOSENGA: It is possible but I do not know him.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, let me just explain to you how it worked at the ANC very briefly, there was a TRC desk, in other words there was an office in the ANC that was set up to assist people who wanted to apply for amnesty and at that time, it was to assist ANC members who wanted to apply for amnesty. Mongezi was the Head of that department, do you understand?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

MR BERGER: Then after Mr Nkosi had spoken to Mongezi and Mongezi said yes, he would talk to you, then you called Mongezi, do you remember that?

CHAIRPERSON: What is the question? I beg your pardon?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it is possible I called him.

ADV SIGODI: You say it is possible, but do you remember it? Do you remember calling Mongezi?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying yes, it is possible, but I cannot remember when.

MR BERGER: Let me try and help you Mr Nosenga. There was a telephone in prison that you could use, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And you needed a phone card to use that, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR BERGER: And you didn't have to have too much money on your phone card, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Correct.

MR BERGER: And so you phoned Mongezi at the ANC, asked him to assist you, but you couldn't speak very long and he said he would get back you to after he took your prison number, isn't that right?

MR NOSENGA: Correct.

MR BERGER: And then ...

CHAIRPERSON: Do you now remember that you telephoned Mr Mongezi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I remember now that he is explaining me and refreshing my memory.

MR BERGER: And you asked Mongezi to come and see you at Leeukop prison because you wanted his assistance, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And indeed, Mongezi came to see you at Leeukop prison am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And you told Mongezi when he saw you at Leeukop, about the fact that you had been convicted for killing people in Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And you also told him when he visited you then, that you had participated in the Boipatong massacre, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: You also told him that you had been forced to confess to the Sebokeng killings?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And we are talking now about January 1996, in that period?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible.

MR BERGER: And then what you also told Mongezi was that you wanted to apply for amnesty for Sebokeng and for Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And also you will remember that you said to Mongezi that you wanted to appeal against your conviction for Sebokeng? Do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR BERGER: But at that time, Mongezi said to you he needed to find out from the ANC if they could assist you because you were not a member of the ANC, you were a member of the IFP?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And he promised that he would come back to you with a decision.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Then a little while after that, Mongezi came back to you at Leeukop prison, in other words he came to visit you again?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I think he came, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Speak up so that we can hear.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am saying it is possible he came.

MR BERGER: Well, let me try and refresh your memory if I can. When Mongezi left you after the first visit, he was going to find out whether the ANC would be prepared to assist you in your application for amnesty for Boipatong and Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And he was going to find out whether the ANC would assist you in appealing against your conviction for Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: I am sorry Mr Nosenga, then after Mongezi left, you phoned him again to find out what was happening and whether the ANC was going to assist you, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is possible I called him.

MR BERGER: And he said that the ANC would assist you, he would assist you and he would come back to see you.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Now, when Mongezi came back to see you, he was accompanied by a woman, a white woman, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible. I am saying yes, it is possible he was in the company of a white lady even though I cannot recall the name.

MR BERGER: Her name is Caroline Nichols, she came to see you with Mongezi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible sir.

MR BERGER: And you told Mongezi and Caroline about your involvement in the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I want to object at this stage, my learned friend is putting the one leading question after the other. Normally that is the right of a person that cross-examines, I will concede that, but if the cross-examiner shares an interest with the witness, so what he wants to hear is Police complicity, and under those circumstances, he cannot put leading questions. I haven't got authority with me, but I am aware of certain authorities that state exactly that. I will go a little bit further by stating that it has been placed on record that my learned friend, consulted with this witness, and under those circumstances, I will also say that he won't be entitled to put leading questions to him.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Berger.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, do you want me to argue? Chairperson, I don't share an identity of interests with this witness. I represent certain victims of the massacre, this witness has been cross-examined on a statement that he made to Mongezi, statements which are before the Commission and I am attempting to ask the witness whose memory has been shown to be faulty, whether he agrees with certain evidence. If he agrees with it, then there is no need to lead that evidence. If I need to refresh his memory as is obviously the case, I submit I am entitled to do so. I am not badgering the witness in any way, I am simply asking him in a very calm and ...

CHAIRPERSON: The objection is that you cannot just read to him everything and get him just to say yes, yes, to everything. I think that is the basis. What do you say to that? Because you might as well just hand him the statement and ask him to confirm that.

MR BERGER: If there is something that he disagrees with, then he will say so. My learned friends, when they cross-examine the applicants for example, when Adv Pretorius cross-examined some of the applicants led by Adv Strydom, put leading questions to the witness, isn't that so, and there was no problem with that?

CHAIRPERSON: You just have to respond to what has been said to you. Very well, no objection was taken to the others, here there is an objection.

MS TANZER: Chairperson, isn't it my place as the legal representative to object, whether the leading question is not being placed fairly to the applicant or not? I haven't raised such an objection and I don't think, as the legal representative, I submit the question should be continued.

CHAIRPERSON: What is your response Mr Strydom to what Mr Berger has said?

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson my response is that Mr Berger, or the people he represent, does share to some extent identity of interest and the basis of my objection is that if there is an identity of interest, then a cross-examiner cannot just put leading questions. That is the first leg and the second leg, although he didn't get to that stage and I would probably object at a later stage if that is going to happen, if he is going to put certain things that happened during a consultation he had with this witness, but at this stage the objection is that, what I put is that there is in fact an identity of interest in that the family wants to show, to prove that the Police were involved, and this witness is saying exactly that in his evidence, and therefore I would say leading questions would not be allowed. Chairperson, can I just add something ...

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom, we are mindful of the fact that the witness is being led, we are mindful of his answers to these leading questions, it seems to me that that is a matter that should affect the weight to be attached to that kind of evidence.

MR STRYDOM: Yes Chairperson, if I can just add one thing and that is that if certain allegations can be put now, what happened during consultation when Caroline Nichols was present, this objection will be the same because Caroline Nichols is a partner of the firm that represents the witness.

CHAIRPERSON: We are mindful of the background to this case. We are aware of that.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, could we take the adjournment now?

CHAIRPERSON: Have you finished covering this point?

MR BERGER: No, I haven't finished.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, just finish this point first before we adjourn.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, it relates to the objection taken by Mr Strydom, could we please have an adjournment at this stage?

CHAIRPERSON: What is the purpose of the objection Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: The purpose of the objection?

CHAIRPERSON: The purpose of an adjournment, because I am giving you the opportunity now to round up the point that you have just canvassed so that by the time that we take the adjournment, you can move on to another point. Unless you are telling me you don't know whether to continue with the cross-examination or not?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I just want to consider a position at this stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we will take the adjournment and come back at half past eleven.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION:

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, it has occurred to me that Mr Mey who appears for Mr Chaka and the Police Officer known as Rooikop, was not given the opportunity to cross-examine the applicant. What we propose doing is to allow him the opportunity to do so once the victims' representatives have finished their cross-examination. You may continue Mr Berger.

MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson. Chairperson, we have considered our position during the break and we considered our position over the weekend as well, and we have also taken advice from certain senior Counsel as well, the allegations made by our learned friends for the applicants against us as legal representatives, are very serious although at this stage ... (tape ends) ... and it places us in a very difficult position. It means Chairperson in our view, that we have to put a version to Mr Nosenga, our version on what happened, he can either agree with it, he can deny it, but either we must put the version Chairperson, or else we must get legal representatives for ourselves to put that version. Our learned friends have not once come to ask us what is our version, what do we say about these allegations.

CHAIRPERSON: This statement you are making, what am I supposed to make with the statement that you are making?

MR BERGER: It is in response to the objection from ...

CHAIRPERSON: I have ruled on that objection, but that the question is allowed, and that you will continue.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, also in your ruling you said that it will affect the weight of the evidence at the end.

CHAIRPERSON: Everyone knows that leading questions, if you put leading questions, whether in chief or anywhere, it is a matter which affects the weight to be attached to that evidence. That is how one assesses the evidence.

MR BERGER: Yes Chairperson, but I tried to outline the particular peculiar circumstances in which we find ourselves.

CHAIRPERSON: I understand that Mr Berger, and I have ruled that you can continue cross-examining this witness.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BERGER: (continued) As you please Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, I want you to try and think back, I know it is difficult, to the time when you were in Leeukop at the beginning of 1996. Do you remember how many times Mongezi came to see you?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember very well. Yes, he did come.

CHAIRPERSON: In order to help us go through this effort much more easier, just answer the question that Mr Berger is asking. If you remember say yes, I do, if you don't remember, say I don't remember. If you know that he came more than once, tell us that he came there more than once, but I can't tell you how many times. If you know he came more than two times, tell us. No one is going to hold you onto giving us the details of these visits, how many were they. What you are being asked is mainly did he come there once, twice or how many times, do you understand the question, do you understand what is required of you now?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

CHAIRPERSON: Put the question again.

MR NOSENGA: I think he came to me twice. I think he came twice, if I am not mistaken.

CHAIRPERSON: He was there twice?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, at Leeukop.

MR BERGER: You see, what I want to suggest to you Mr Nosenga, is that he came more than twice, he came a number of times. Let me tell you what I mean.

CHAIRPERSON: Let us get a response to the first part first. What Mr Berger is saying to you is this, you say if you think, if you remember very well, you think he came twice, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Yes, I understand that.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Berger is saying is that Mr - this is Mr Mongezi right - Mr Mongezi came to see you on more than two occasions, what do you say to that?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot dispute that, it is possible.

MR BERGER: Chairperson his full name is Mongezi Tshongweni. The first time he came to see you, was after you phoned him.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Then he came to see you with Caroline Nichols?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is possible, I cannot dispute that.

MR BERGER: At that meeting you discussed your role in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And in brief terms, I don't want to rehash everything that has been gone through before, but at that meeting with Mongezi and Caroline, can you remember what you told them about Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I think I did tell them something, even though I cannot remember exactly what. I am saying yes, I remember I told them something.

CHAIRPERSON: Please speak up. Do not swallow your last words.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand sir.

MR BERGER: Do you remember talking about the involvement of the Police to them?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I told them.

MR BERGER: And do you remember talking about the involvement of Themba Khosa to them?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I told them that Themba Khosa came to the meeting, the meeting that was held two weeks before the attack and he was in the company of Peens.

MR BERGER: And then do you, or let me ask you this, your application for amnesty which is from page 1 to page 7 of Bundle R, I know you can't read, but ...

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I cannot read.

MR BERGER: That application was completed also in 1996, do you remember who helped you to complete that application?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't want to tell a lie. I cannot remember.

MR BERGER: If I tell you that it was Mongezi who helped you to complete that application, what would you say to that?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot dispute that. I cannot dispute that.

MR BERGER: That was Mongezi's third visit to you? And then Mongezi visited you a fourth time, I don't know if you remember Mongezi coming with another man?

MR LOWIES: Sorry Chair, the response to the third visit was not interpreted.

MR LAX: What do you say to what Mr Berger said that this form was filled out during the third visit by Mongezi Tshongweni to you?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I cannot dispute that, it is possible.

MR BERGER: And then a fourth visit when Mongezi came with a man, a white man?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, if you don't remember, you must say you don't remember, but let me try and assist you. This man came from the - hang on - came from the Special Investigation Unit in Pretoria and he accompanied Mongezi to come and visit you also in 1996?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, you keep on saying it is possible.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it is possible, even though I cannot remember, I don't know who he was.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you remember that or don't you remember?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say I remember that, I am saying it is possible that Mongezi came in the company of this white person because many people came to visit me.

MR BERGER: Now Mr Nosenga, I know that lots of forms and statements have been filled out from you, but I want you to try and focus on what I am going to say to you now. Remember you told the Committee last week that you applied for amnesty long ago. Do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I remember.

MR BERGER: And that when you saw Victor Mthembu on television, it was long before that that you had applied for amnesty, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Now what I am trying to establish is what is your application for amnesty, and I will show you what I mean. There is a bundle of papers there, Exhibit R, and I want you to look at the first ten pages. Pages 1 to 7 are the pages which Mongezi helped you to fill out and then you signed at the bottom of page 6, do you see that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can see that.

MR BERGER: And that you did in front of a Commissioner of Oaths at Leeukop prison, in other words there was a prison official who was present when you signed at the bottom of page 6? Do you see that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can see that.

MR BERGER: Do you remember the circumstances around which you signed this document, it would have been in 1996, September 1996?

MR NOSENGA: We went to Medium C, Leeukop, that is where this was completed.

MR BERGER: Yes, you are correct, that is exactly what happened. You see that on page 7, certainly. Now in this document, you gave certain details and when you were asked for the acts, omissions or offences for which you seek amnesty, you gave details of the killing of ANC supporters in the Vaal Triangle, at the bottom of page 2, sub-paragraph 4. I will read it to you and it will be translated for you, Mr Nosenga, you say -

"... I together with people mentioned in the document, I think it is annexed hereto, were involved in killing ANC supporters in the Vaal Triangle."

Is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did say that. I referred to the Sebokeng incident.

MR BERGER: You say there ...

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I did mention that, referring to the Sebokeng incident for which I was convicted.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: Now also in that sentence you see there is talk of "a document annexed hereto." Do you know what document was annexed?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall very well.

MR BERGER: Right, then you say -

"... the first incident was in a shack which was next to a road, ANC supporters were known to frequent that place. We shot at people outside the shack in Everton."

MR NOSENGA: Maybe there was a misunderstanding. I am saying we started at Zone 12 and proceeded right through to Everton.

MR BERGER: Yes, you have said that last week

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And it goes on to say -

"... the second incident was in Sebokeng, Zone 12 where we shot at people who were waiting for busses and taxi's (drive-by shooting) ...",

what you told us last week is that the second incident was first, and the first incident, was second? In other words it was first Sebokeng and then Everton, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, we started in Zone 12 to Zone 13, we shot people and we proceeded towards Sharpeville where we also shot at a taxi. We proceeded to Jomo's Place in Everton.

CHAIRPERSON: When it says here the first incident was in a shack, this was not the first incident, the first incident was the one that occurred in Zone 12 in Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: The first one happened in Zone 12 Sebokeng.

MR BERGER: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: The second one happened just as you leave Zone 12, we came across a taxi that we shot, and we went to Jomo's Place, a shebeen in a shack area. That is in Everton.

MR BERGER: Okay, so there is talk here about two incidents, but the order is wrong, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible.

MR LAX: No, it is not a question of being possible Mr Nosenga, you are being asked a direct question about is the order wrong of these two incidents, it is not a matter of whether it is possible, it is either yes or it is no.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, from Sebokeng right through to Small Farm and then Everton. That is the sequence.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, that is why I have asked you please just try for a little bit longer to concentrate.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

MR BERGER: And both of these incidents from Sebokeng to Small Farms to Everton, they all happened on the same day?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: On the 15th of June 1992?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And then you see there is another sentence here which I will read to you, it says -

"... details of other incidents attached herewith."

Now, it is there, you can believe me that it is there. Remember I asked you what was in the annexure and you said you didn't know?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I said I don't know.

MR BERGER: Okay, but what I want to ask you is this, you have spoken about the incident in Everton, I beg your pardon, you have spoken about the incident in Sebokeng, Zone 12, you have spoken about Small Farms and Everton.

MR LOWIES: I have to object against the Small Farms incident, it was not discussed, or he didn't say that as it is put. Small Farms was not ...

MR BERGER: He did.

MR LAX: He just spoke about it now Mr Lowies, two seconds ago.

MR LOWIES: Sorry Chair, the way I had it is as follows, let me just clarify my objection. My objection is he did not state Small Farms in his application form, and it is suggested to him that it was, and that is the nature of the objection.

MR BERGER: Well, let me ask you Mr Nosenga, what happened at Small Farms?

MR NOSENGA: People were shot in a taxi that was pulling a trailer, I am also serving a sentence for that offence.

MR BERGER: And in Everton?

MR NOSENGA: People were shot at a shebeen.

MR BERGER: And in Sebokeng it was taxi's again?

MR NOSENGA: No, at Sebokeng people were shot at a taxi rank, where they were waiting for taxi's.

MR BERGER: Now in this sentence it says ...

CHAIRPERSON: Let me just get this straight, at Small Farms, is it Small Farms, you say people were shot at?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they were travelling in a taxi.

CHAIRPERSON: They were in a taxi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And a caravan?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying this taxi was pulling a trailer.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, now at Everton?

MR NOSENGA: I shot people at a shebeen, called Jomo's Place.

CHAIRPERSON: And then at Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: That is where we shot people who were standing at a taxi rank, waiting for taxi's. It is a place between Zone 12 and Zone 13.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR BERGER: So Mr Nosenga, in this last sentence on page 3, paragraph 9(a)(iv), it says -

"... details of other incidents attached herewith."

Now, do you know what these other incidents were?

MR NOSENGA: No, I only know of the incidents for which I am service a sentence, including the Boipatong incident.

MR BERGER: Yes, you see ...

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I only know of the incidents to which I have referred, not some of the incidents included here.

CHAIRPERSON: You only know those that are mentioned here?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I only know of the incidents pertaining to Sebokeng at a taxi rank, and Small Farms, the shebeen incident, and now you are asking me about additional incidents that are written here, I am saying I don't know anything about that. Except for the Boipatong incident, I don't know of any other incidents.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: You see Mr Nosenga, what you have just said is what I was going to put to you, that the other incidents include the Boipatong massacre, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, I know about that incident. I also submitted an application for amnesty pertaining to that incident.

MR BERGER: Yes, and then at the bottom of page 3, paragraph 10(a) it says "state the political objective sought to be achieved" and you say -

"... we were instructed by a Mr Zulu who was the Head of IFP at Madala hostel, Vanderbijlpark, to destroy ANC comrades. He armed us with AK47's and pump guns."

MR NOSENGA: Are you referring to the Sebokeng or the Boipatong incident?

MR NOSENGA: No, I think this refers to Sebokeng, isn't it?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, he did instruct and he commanded that we should go out, but we did not get the firearms from him, instead Darkie Chonco is the one who gave us the firearms.

CHAIRPERSON: He also gave you pump guns?

MR NOSENGA: I can still remember the AK and small guns.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot say much about pump guns, because I don't know it.

CHAIRPERSON: It says here -

"... he armed us with AK47's and pump guns."

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot talk about the pump gun.

MR BERGER: And then it says -

"... details attached herein."

In other words what that means is that there is an annexure to this application. I will leave that then. You see, remember I asked you about the document which was annexed to your application form, which you said you don't know what was annexed?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: What I want to tell you is that the document at pages 8, 9 and 10, which is the statement which was taken from you by Caroline Nichols and Mongezi Tshongweni during their visit, that statement is at 8, 9 and 10 and that is the annexure which is referred to at page 2, 3 and 4 of your amnesty application. Do you understand what I am saying Mr Nosenga, or do you want me to repeat it?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question.

MR BERGER: What I am saying to you is the following, I am saying when Caroline and Mongezi saw you at Leeukop, Caroline took a statement. This is the statement, 8, 9 and 10, this is the statement. When Mongezi came afterwards in September, to help you with your application for amnesty, this statement at 8, 9 and 10, was annexed to your application form so that when you applied for amnesty, your application was for both Sebokeng and for Boipatong. You are nodding in agreement, what do you want to say?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What is like that?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I applied for amnesty pertaining to Sebokeng as well as Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: The statement, the unsigned affidavit at pages 8, 9 and 10, it is put to you that that statement, that affidavit represents a statement which was taken from you by Ms Nichols, I think it was, is that right, yes, Ms Nichols, what do you say to that, do you know that or do you don't?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say I know it, the lady came to take the statement, I have forgotten the name, yes, I cannot dispute it, but yes, it was taken.

CHAIRPERSON: ... is a statement that you made to her?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And you see, I will just explain it to you a little further Mr Nosenga, that statement was typed up in June of 1996, right June, then when Mongezi came to you in September, about three months after that, he had this statement with him which he never asked you to sign, you are quite right on that.

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR BERGER: He put the two statements together so that you could apply for amnesty for both Boipatong and Sebokeng? What I want to tell you is the one is the statement and the other is the form for amnesty, your Attorney will show you what I am talking about. That is the form, that is the statement and they were put together in September of 1996 and submitted as your application for amnesty to the TRC in Cape Town.

MR NOSENGA: I cannot dispute that.

MR BERGER: Let me ask you this Mr Nosenga, when Mongezi left you for the last time, what did you understand that he had done for you?

MR NOSENGA: I understood that he was assisting me to submit my amnesty application to the TRC.

MR BERGER: Amnesty for what?

MR NOSENGA: Because I killed people at Sebokeng as well as Boipatong.

MR BERGER: Okay. Then I want to move Mr Nosenga, I want to move from 1996 to last year, 1998. In 1996 you were at Leeukop?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And where were you in 1998?

MR NOSENGA: I was at Stofberg.

MR BERGER: At Groenpunt prison?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is the one.

MR BERGER: Here in the Vaal?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, here at the Vaal or in the Vaal.

MR BERGER: When you were at Stofberg, did you know what had happened to your amnesty applications?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't want to tell a lie.

MR BERGER: When was the first time that you realised that the Boipatong amnesty applications were under way?

MR NOSENGA: If I remember very well, Mr Brian came to visit me in the company of Mr Berger saying that they had been sent by Mongezi to inform me that the application is in process.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, I want you to think very carefully now. You were sitting at Groenpunt prison, Stofberg?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And something happened which made, which informed you that people were giving evidence in relation to the massacre?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. I am saying Mr Brian informed me, I am saying Mr Brian informed me that my amnesty application is in progress.

CHAIRPERSON: What are you saying? Mr Brian came to you in prison?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he came to me in Stofberg to inform me that the application is in progress, that is what I can remember. They told me that they had been sent by Mongezi.

CHAIRPERSON: Who accompanied Mr Brian?

MR NOSENGA: It is Mr Berger.

MR BERGER: Before that Mr Nosenga, before you even saw Mr Brian and Mr Berger, you were at Stofberg?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Did you see something which informed you that something was happening?

MR NOSENGA: I don't want to tell a lie, I cannot recall. I cannot recall what happened?

MR BERGER: I want to remind you about your evidence last week, about seeing something on the television, on the news.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was in Stofberg.

MR BERGER: All right, now what did you see on the news on television?

MR NOSENGA: I heard Victor Mthembu testifying to the effect that a snake gives birth to another snake and that these snakes must be killed.

MR BERGER: And you realised that he was giving evidence about what?

MR NOSENGA: About the Boipatong massacre.

MR BERGER: And how did that make you feel?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying there were Police when Boipatong was attacked, and I was involved. They were not mentioning the Police.

MR BERGER: Let me rephrase my question. You are sitting at Stofberg and you are watching television and you see on the news that Victor Mthembu is testifying in his application for amnesty in relation to the Boipatong massacre, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And you know that you have applied for amnesty for the Boipatong massacre, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: But you are not there where it is happening, Victor Mthembu is there, but you are not there, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: So what did you do Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: After Victor Mthembu had rendered his testimony and when the TRC was sitting here at Iscor Club, I came here but - after Victor Mthembu had rendered his testimony, I cannot remember whether it was on a Tuesday or Wednesday, I came here but I did not come to this venue. I think I spent most of my time outside. I think I was outside in a Police kombi, that is where I spent the whole day.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, it was at this Iscor Club where you spent a day in the Police van, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: But Victor Mthembu didn't give evidence here, you see, he gave evidence at the Sebokeng College of Education, it was on a previous occasion.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am saying he did not render his testimony here at Iscor Club, but at Sebokeng, I was not present there, I only saw that on television.

MR BERGER: Right. Now, what I am asking you is you see that the amnesty hearings are taking place without you, did you wonder to yourself why am I not there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I wondered.

MR BERGER: And what did you do as a result of that wondering, that is what I am asking you, did you speak to someone, did you call someone? What did you do to get yourself before this Committee?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I phoned and I enquired because the Committee of the TRC was meeting at Boipatong and yet I was not part of the proceedings.

MR BERGER: Who did you phone Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: I phoned Patience if I still remember correctly.

MR BERGER: Patience worked with Mongezi at the ANC Truth Desk?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: You were trying to get hold of Mongezi, were you not, to find out why you were not before the Committee?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: But Mongezi wasn't working there any more, was he?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was told that he had been transferred, I think he had been sent to Cape Town.

MR BERGER: And who had taken over from Mongezi, Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it was Brian whom I was made to believe had taken Mongezi's position.

MR BERGER: You are quite right, it was Brian Mr Nosenga. What did you tell Brian over the telephone?

MR NOSENGA: I found Mongezi, he actually phoned me back and informed me that he was going to send Brian and Brian came.

MR BERGER: But what did you tell Brian over the telephone when you spoke to him?

MR NOSENGA: I told him I had submitted an application for amnesty pertaining to the Boipatong massacre because I was now concerned, the person who was handling this matter was Mongezi and now I was getting worried, it was somebody else.

MR BERGER: And did you tell Brian that you had seen on the television that the hearings were under way and that you were not there and you were worried about the fact that you were not there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, I told him so.

MR BERGER: What did you ask Brian to do?

MR NOSENGA: I spoke to him and I expressed my concerns to him seeing that I had submitted my application for amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is what did you ask Brian to do?

MR NOSENGA: I requested him to come over to me and he promised, indeed he came. He came if I still remember very well.

MR BERGER: So, you asked Brian to come and see you at Stofberg, is that what you say happened?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. Because he told me that he had been informed by Mongezi about my application.

MR BERGER: And when Brian came to see you at Stofberg, he came with me, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And who else did he come with?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember, except for Mr Berger.

MR BERGER: How many of us were there who came to visit you?

MR NOSENGA: I only remember Mr Berger and Mr Brian.

MR BERGER: Do you see my colleague sitting here, Ms Cambanis? She is putting her hand up?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can see her.

MR BERGER: She was with us when we came to visit you, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes, it is possible, but I can only remember Mr Berger as well as Mr Brian. Maybe I just didn't notice her presence.

MR BERGER: You say it is possible, but you don't remember that she was there?

MR NOSENGA: I can only remember Mr Brian as well as Mr Berger very well.

MR BERGER: And did I tell you who I represented?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember very well.

MR BERGER: You don't remember that I said I acted for the victims of Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember very well.

MR BERGER: And did I ask you if you had a lawyer? Do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I don't remember. There are many things that we discussed, because Brian was also talking as well.

MR BERGER: If I were to ask you now who was your lawyer at the time that Brian and I and Ms Cambanis came to visit you, who would your lawyer have been?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it was Mr Brian, because he had been referred to me by Mongezi.

MR BERGER: And what did we ask you about?

MR NOSENGA: I think you asked me questions pertaining to Boipatong.

MR BERGER: Do you remember if we had your statement with us?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember very well.

MR BERGER: Do you remember what we asked you about Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I think you asked me as to what happened at Boipatong and I explained, mentioning the presence of the Police as well.

MR BERGER: Isn't it that we asked you about the Police specifically?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, if I remember very well, yes, you did ask me that question.

MR BERGER: And we asked you about Themba Khosa specifically?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And we said to you that we did not want to ask you any questions about your specific involvement that night, what you did in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I remember. I cannot dispute that.

MR BERGER: What did you tell us that you wanted to happen, what did you say you wanted?

MR NOSENGA: I think if I still remember very well, as I was talking to Mr Brian, I indicated that I too wanted to appear before the TRC because I was involved in the Boipatong massacre, but I was not arrested.

MR BERGER: And what did Mr Brian and I say we would do?

MR NOSENGA: I think if I still remember very well, Mr Brian indicated that he was going to inform me as soon as the hearing on Boipatong assumes. I asked him or should I say I indicated to him that I would like to come before the Commission, because I was also involved in the Boipatong massacre where the Police were involved, and Mr Brian said he was going to get back to me.

MR BERGER: Mr Brian's full name is Brian Kupedi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I think that is the one, but I just know him as Brian.

MR BERGER: And he came to see you with me and Ms Cambanis, it was on Monday the 10th of August 1998.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I said that is correct, because Brian came in the company of Mr Berger.

MR BERGER: Do you remember that we told you when the Boipatong hearings were going to start again?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember.

MR BERGER: They were starting the next day, the Tuesday, the 11th of August 1998.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand that, but I cannot remember.

MR BERGER: Okay. And do you remember that we promised you that we would give your details, your particulars and your statement to the Amnesty Committee the next day so that you could be called to come here to be an applicant?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember very well, so many things were discussed, I cannot remember very well really.

MR BERGER: Well, when we left you, what did you think was going to happen?

MR NOSENGA: I thought something was going to happen, I was hoping to be represented by Mr Brian because he had informed me that Mongezi had been transferred to Cape Town.

MR BERGER: You were hoping that after we left you, somehow you would come as another applicant together with the other applicants, before this Committee where Mr Brian would represent you, is that what you were hoping?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that