Inquest into 1993 Highgate Hotel massacre to resume next month
This is one of the cases referred to the NPA by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) for further investigation and potential prosecution.
The inquest ran from January 27 to February 7, continued from March 24 to March 28 and reconvened from Monday to Wednesday this week.
The final session is scheduled for September 1 to September 5.
The NPA said that to date, more than 20 witnesses have testified before judge Denzil Potgieter at the Special Tribunal in East London.
'They include the investigating officer from the Hawks, survivors, families of the deceased, ballistic experts, former police officers, commanders from the Azanian People's Liberation Army and private investigators appointed by affected families,' said NPA spokesperson Luxolo Tyali.
The court has also conducted an inspection in loco at the scene of the incident.
The inquest stems from a decision by the Eastern Cape director of public prosecutions Barry Madolo to establish whether anyone can be held criminally liable for the attack.
On the night of the massacre, during the tense period leading up to the 1994 democratic elections, armed assailants opened fire at the Highgate Hotel's bars in East London.
Stanley Hacking, Douglas William Gates, Royce Michael Wheeler, Deon Wayne Harris and Deric John Whitfield were killed. Seven other people were seriously wounded, suffering permanent injuries and disabilities.
'Three survivors and two family members of victims testified during the TRC hearings. No amnesty applications were made by suspected perpetrators,' Tyali said.
While the attack was initially attributed to the armed wing of the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), subsequent investigations could not confirm this.
'The NPA also notes with concern allegations made by some witnesses against certain of its officials. These will be addressed during the inquest to ensure that both the individuals concerned and the organisation are cleared of any unfounded claims.'
Tyali said the NPA hoped this inquisitorial process will help provide much-needed closure to the victims' families, survivors and the broader public.
Depending on developments in response to the presiding judge's directions issued on Wednesday — calling for anyone with information about the circumstances leading to the deaths to avail such information to the court — four more witnesses are expected to testify when proceedings resume in September.
TimesLIVE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
10 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Parliament sued for letting corrupt MPs off the hook
Hundreds of #UniteBehind supporters sat in a marquee outside Parliament on Tuesday. Imam Rashied Omar told the protesters that they were gathering as citizens who love their country dearly and will not stand by while 'corruption robs our children of their future'. He said that Parliament's code of conduct is a 'shield for corruption'. Activist group #UniteBehind, which protested outside parliament on Tuesday, has taken parliament's registrar and joint ethics committee to court, challenging the legislature's new code of conduct. In 2022, the group laid complaints in terms of parliament's code of conduct against six ANC MPs who were implicated in state capture, including grand-scale corruption at the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Prasa). They were Fikile Mbalula, Mosebenzi Zwane, Joe Maswanganyi, Dikeledi Magazi, Sfiso Buthelezi and Dipuo Peters. In April 2023, #UniteBehind started litigation against the committee for failing to act 'diligently', accusing the committee of 'an unreasonable, and unexplained, delay in handling the complaints'. The organisation amended its notice of motion in February this year after discovering that an amended code of conduct had been adopted. #UniteBehind claims this was done without public participation and without alerting them. The case was heard on Tuesday before a full bench in the Western Cape High Court: Judge Lister Nuku, Judge Hayley Slingers and Acting Judge Jonker. Gregory Solik, the advocate representing #UniteBehind, told the court the new code of conduct was unconstitutional, since it was introduced during the course of the litigation. #UniteBehind argued that it constituted an 'attempt to circumvent judicial scrutiny'. When the group prepared and filed its final affidavit, it was not informed by parliament that the code of conduct had been amended and implemented. Solik also argued that if the challenge to the code of conduct is dismissed, then the court should declare the 'no-jurisdiction clause' invalid. This new clause allows MPs to resign to avoid disciplinary action against them. The amended code states that the Ethics Committee does not have 'jurisdiction' to consider a complaint if the member ceases to be an MP. Also, if the committee is considering a complaint against a former MP, then it may not proceed with the complaint and 'must close the complaint file'. Solik argued that making this clause invalid would ensure that former MPs implicated in corruption can be held accountable by parliament — parliament could still complete investigations and refer matters to the National Prosecuting Authority. 'It may be a small measure of justice, but that justice can still be enforced,' said Solik. #UniteBehind further argued that the 'secrecy provisions' of the new code of conduct should be declared unconstitutional. This includes a clause that 'all documents, evidence and information in the possession of the registrar must … remain confidential', as well as another clause stating that meetings considering 'the recommendation report of the registrar will be closed to the public and non-committee members'. But the respondents argued that #UniteBehind was trying to 'revive a case that was dead', said advocate for parliament Zinzile Matebese. About 100 #UniteBehind supporters marched from the Cape Town Civic Centre to parliament in support of the organisation's court case. Several hundred more people joined the protest at parliament. In an answering affidavit, Anthea Gordon, the registrar of members' interests in parliament, said that #UniteBehind's amendment to its notice of motion, challenging the new code of conduct, was 'disingenuous' and 'an abuse of the court process'. Parliament asked the court to reject #UniteBehind's request. The respondents argued that the process to amend the code started in 2022 and culminated with the adoption of the amended code by the National Assembly in May 2024. They added that it 'was never adopted in haste as suggested by the applicants', nor was it kept secret. Matebese argued that confidentiality of the information clauses was important as it 'might result in unintended consequences for the whole committee' if it were removed. The confidentiality clauses were necessary to protect MPs' information and the information of their spouses' affairs, which is protected under other legislation such as the Protection of Personal Information Act. In his closing statement, Solik noted that the initial complaints were made because of the 'total abdication of responsibility by Parliament' to address the rot at Prasa. He encouraged the court 'not to lose sight of what the complaints were about', which is that people are 'subject to violence on a daily basis when they use public transport'. Judge Nuku reserved judgment.
The Herald
15 hours ago
- The Herald
DA pushes for ad hoc committee on police to get down to business
The DA says it sees parliament's ad hoc committee that will investigate allegations of political meddling and corruption in the police service as a vital and rare opportunity to confront and root out the rot in the top levels of the service. DA spokesperson on police Ian Cameron said on Friday the committee has considered robust terms of reference to ensure full and proper investigation can take place. He said the c ommittee hopes to adopt the terms of reference by Monday. The DA had proposed and secured a number of key terms which had been included in the terms of reference, he said. These included the use of sworn testimony and obtaining documents and evidence from all relevant witnesses, including those implicated in political interference, corruption and organised crime infiltration of the police service. Other terms of reference are i nvestigating political interference in policing, including the disbandment of the political killings task team (PKTT) and the freezing of key crime intelligence vacancies, investigating allegations involving senior politicians, law enforcement officials, prosecutors and judges and investigating the 121 missing dockets removed from the PKTT and examining the integrity of SAPS crime intelligence operations. 'Once adopted, the ad hoc committee must get down to business' Cameron said. Cameron said the DA would ensure the committee leaves no stone unturned. 'We will demand testimony from every relevant and involved person and documents that evidence every critical weakness in the SAPS. South Africa cannot tolerate delays when the integrity of its policing and justice systems hangs in the balance.' TimesLIVE
Mail & Guardian
21 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Saint or statesman? In India Madiba walked his own path
Prisoner-turned-president: Nelson Mandela's life and South Africa's struggle for freedom bore similarities to India's independence from the British colonial yoke and Mahatma Gandhi's role in its transition to a democracy: Photo: File As South Africa and the world observed International Mandela Day on 18 July, my thoughts returned to Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela — the man, the myth, the miracle. A moment etched in my professional and personal memory is how, during his 1995 state visit to India, Madiba diplomatically declined India's subtle efforts to canonise him as a 'saint' in the moral tradition of Mahatma Gandhi. I was among the South African media corps travelling with Mandela — one of his earliest diplomatic journeys as South Africa's first democratically elected president. It was a trip rich in symbolism and sentiment, coinciding with India's own Independence Day on 15 August — the day in 1947 when it broke free from British colonial rule. On that humid day in New Delhi, Mandela stood alongside the then prime minister, PV Narasimha Rao, at the Red Fort, attending the flag-hoisting ceremonies, parades and patriotic festivities. He listened attentively as Rao addressed a nation of more than one billion people. India, with its traditions, freedom struggle credentials and global democratic stature, was welcoming in many ways a kindred spirit. But the Indian media, swept up in the aura of Mandela — prisoner-turned-president, peacemaker-turned-legend — began to invoke saintly comparisons with Gandhi, their own apostle of peace and nonviolence. Gandhi, after all, had lived and worked in South Africa for two formative decades, where he pioneered the nonviolent resistance movement known as satyagraha. Mandela, who studied Gandhi's writings while incarcerated on Robben Island, had long acknowledged the influence of satyagraha on the ANC's strategy. After his release, as he navigated the treacherous road from armed resistance to reconciliation, it was Gandhi's legacy that offered a moral framework for South Africa's negotiated transition. Yet Mandela, ever the realist and self-effacing statesman, politely stopped short of accepting the spiritual elevation that Indian commentators — and some officials — seemed eager to offer. 'I am no saint,' he said during a press conference in Ahmedabad, where he paid homage at Gandhi's ashram. 'Unless you think of a saint as a sinner who keeps on trying.' The most memorable moment of the visit came when Mandela stood at Gandhi's ancestral home in Gujarat and said: 'You gave us Mohandas; we returned him to you as Mahatma.' It was a moment of diplomatic poetry and historical reflection. Gandhi had come to South Africa as a young lawyer, and it was there — facing institutional racism, fighting for the dignity of Indian indentured workers and learning the discipline of protest — that he was spiritually and politically transformed. When he returned to India in 1915, he was no longer just Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. He had become the Mahatma, the 'Great Soul'. Mandela's acknowledgment of Gandhi's South African apprenticeship was more than a tribute, it was a recognition of the moral traffic between the two nations. India, in turn, had supported the ANC since its banning in the 1950s, offering the party a semi-diplomatic mission in New Delhi, well before the world fully rallied behind the anti-apartheid cause. India was the first country to cut trade and diplomatic ties with apartheid South Africa. Long before Mandela became a global symbol, Indian leaders such as Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi had extended solidarity to Oliver Tambo, Yusuf Dadoo and other leaders of South Africa's exiled liberation movement. India had even raised apartheid as a crime against humanity at the United Nations in the 1950s — a bold act of principled diplomacy. But in 1995, amid the adulation and symbolism, Mandela pushed back — gently but firmly — against the idea that he was Gandhi's reincarnation. In the sweltering heat of Ahmedabad, cradled in the philosophies of satyagraha, Mandela was met with reverence. Yet behind the protocol and pageantry, Indian officials quietly suggested that although they honoured Mandela, they saw him as his own man, not merely a disciple of Gandhi. This was not disrespect — far from it. It was a nuanced diplomatic gesture to honour Madiba's unique path, to recognise that although Gandhi's influence loomed large, Mandela had carved his own legacy. Unlike Gandhi's unwavering nonviolence, Mandela had once led uMkhonto weSizwe, the ANC's armed wing, in a strategic turn toward sabotage and resistance. He had walked a harder path — from armed revolutionary to peacemaker, from political prisoner to president. And he was human. Three marriages. Twenty-seven years behind bars. Flaws and scars. That was Madiba. Gandhi too, was no flawless saint. He too was complex and controversial. But in the theatre of international diplomacy, India's reluctance to canonise Mandela was a tribute in itself: to let him be a statesman, a father of his nation, without forcing him into another's shadow. The visit to India stirred echoes of another assignment I had undertaken — retracing Mandela's final moments as a free man before his 1962 capture by apartheid police. Disguised as a chauffeur, he was travelling near Howick in KwaZulu-Natal when he was intercepted — allegedly tipped off by a CIA operative stationed at the US consulate in Durban. That arrest would lead to the Rivonia Trial, life imprisonment and nearly three decades of silence. Now, in 1995, that same man stood in the Red Fort, feted by the Indian state and embraced by the Indian people. It was a powerful metaphor: from hunted fugitive to honoured guest, from revolutionary to revered elder. His journey mirrored Gandhi's, but it was also distinctly his own. This year marks 30 years since that unforgettable state visit. Mandela's presence in India was not just about diplomacy, it was about kinship. The emotional bond between the Indian National Congress and the ANC, forged in the fires of colonialism, apartheid and exile, had matured into state-to-state relations between proud democracies. Madiba's gratitude was evident. He often said India was the first place where he felt the ANC was treated as a government-in-waiting. He knew that South Africa's freedom was not only the result of domestic struggle, but also of international solidarity. And India had been there — early, steadfast and unapologetically committed. Mandela died in 2013, bearing 250 global honours including the Nobel Peace Prize. But during that 1995 visit to India, he left behind something more lasting: a diplomatic legacy rooted in shared values, mutual respect and an understanding that true heroes don't seek canonisation. Saint or not, Mandela walked his own path. Marlan Padayachee is a veteran political, foreign and diplomatic correspondent from South Africa's transition to democracy. He is a freelance journalist, photographer and researcher.
