Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-06

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: ...and we accepted that as part of the war we were engaged in.  We knew that the racist forces would go to any extent to attack us.  When they bombed after the Church Street attack, when they bombed Maputo they also bombed - they actually bombed the jam factory which they thought was the house that we lived in.

MR VISSER: Well so you say but do you have any evidence of that?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: It is stated in the documents.

MR VISSER: Ja, stated by you.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes.  If I can find that ...(intervention)

MR VISSER: It's a mere allegation, it's not proof.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: No there is proof of that.  If people went to Mozambique, and that was shown there is a British diplomat who is on record as having testified that a jam factory was hit and that innocent Mozambican civilians were killed.

MR VISSER: I was actually asking you about London.  And I want to suggest to you - I heard what your reply was but I want to suggest to you that one could be forgiven if you came to a different conclusion having read what the ANC wrote and said about that attack afterwards.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Mr Chairperson ...(intervention)

MR VISSER: They were full of condemnation, isn't that so?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes, yes.

MR VISSER: Yes.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: But we bled and we buried our dead courageously.

MR VISSER: But there were no people - sorry Mr Ismail no person was either injured or died in that attack.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: In London?

MR VISSER: In London.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes.  And when the apartheid forces killed Dulcie September in France ...(intervention)

MR VISSER: No, no, I am not talking about Dulcie September.  There wasn't a car bomb placed before her home and she was blown up.  I am talking about - please, I am talking about the London office, please.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes.

MR VISSER: Thank you.  There were no people killed or injured in that attack.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: But it was bombed nevertheless.

MR VISSER: Yes.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Despite the fact that it was in a civilian area, in civilian surroundings disregarding whether or not other people in the area could have been injured or not, is that not so?

MR VISSER: No, no, no no you are wrong you see because the result speaks louder than words.  Nobody was injured or killed because that is how it was planned.  But that's not how you planned the Church Street bomb Mr Ismail, that's the point I am trying to make.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes.

MR VISSER: That's not how you planned the Church Street bomb.  You planned the Church Street bomb to kill as many people as possible and you weren't concerned how many of them were going to be civilians and you weren't concerned with the fact that you were in fact hitting a soft target.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Mr Chairperson I have stated before.  We aimed to strike at military personnel and that that is what we were doing. We did not have disregard for civilians.  We struck at a particular time.  We did not then choose to bomb in the morning.  We did not choose to bomb at a different area in the city, it would have been dead easy.  There are guards at all places but we didn't choose that.  We struck where the military target was, where military personnel were.

MR VISSER: Yes.  And if you wanted to be less callous, I am putting to you, less callous, you would have attacked, as one would expect from a soldier, attacked a hard target of which there were many to choose from in and around Pretoria, not so?  Speskop, you know about them - 44 Parachute Brigade, such like, why didn't you attack a place like this?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Mr Chairperson we were not waging a conventional war.  We did not have the means, we did not have the capacity to engage in conventional war.  We did not have the resources of the State, didn't oppress the masses in carrying that out.  We struck where we could strike.

MR VISSER: So you engaged in a terrorist war?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: No we were not engaged in a terrorist war. Terrorism is State terrorism that was in this country that struck at the people of this country.  Terrorism is when the State forces went and killed those children at Soweto.

MR VISSER: Yes, we'll come to that in a moment.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: I ask myself if those children in Soweto were even armed, were they?

MR VISSER: You see Mr Ismail had you attacked a hard military target of course they would have defended themselves not so, because they would have had weapons and the wherewithal to defend themselves, isn't that the reason why you didn't attack a hard military target?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Mr Chairperson we attacked Vortrekkerhoogte, that's a hard target.

MR VISSER: Yes.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: It's the heart of the military might.  They were not even able to respond to that attack.

MR VISSER: What happened to the attackers did they all ...(intervention)

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: They survived. All of them withdrew.

MR VISSER: Yes.  And it was an attack by mortar if I am not mistaken not so?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes with  ...(intervention)

MR VISSER: From some four kilometres distance?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes.  Those are military means.  All militaries use them.

MR VISSER: And I am saying to you Mr Ismail that there's a marked difference between that attack and this one in the case of the Church Street bomb.  That's what I am suggesting to you but you obviously disagree with me.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Militaries use various weapons at different times.  We struck - because the means at the end of the day, the objective in a war situation is to strike at the personnel and that is what we were doing.

MR VISSER: Did your reports, your reconnaissance inform you whether the personnel that frequented that building were armed or not?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: They may not be armed in the way that other conventional forces may be ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: The question was did the recce, reconnaissance report to you that they were armed or not?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Well the recce did not indicate that they were armed, but that is not the issue here.  The issue is that we were striking at military personnel.  Those same military personnel at other times could be put under arms to strike and fight against us, and we were simply striking at those military personnel.

MR VISSER: I am sorry.  You are saying that the people that you targeted were people who could be put under arms to fights against you, is that what you are saying?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes.

MR VISSER: On what basis do you say that?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: They were soldiers.

MR VISSER: Is that something which you know or is that something which you assume?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: They were there in uniform.  Uniformed people are in the military, in the Defence Force, in the Police.

MR VISSER: Well let's just get that straight Mr Ismail.  You see a lot is bandied about about what this building really contained.  It was the Nedbank building do you know that, the building is called the Nedbank Building and it housed civilians as well as personnel of the South African Defence Force.  I want to make it quite clear, administrative personnel, as well as Air Force personnel also in the administrative defence force.  So there were no Police there.  Not as far as we are aware anyway, but we stand to be corrected.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: But there were defence force members.

MR VISSER: Yes, administrative personnel, yes.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: I have stated before Mr Chairperson that administrative personnel as well as senior military officers are part of a headquarters.  And one has got to be very clear, all of those were seen as legitimate targets.