Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-10-06

MR DEHAL: Mr Chairperson, whilst it seems evident that my learned colleague is endeavouring to establish what the ANC's policy approach was on this issue, namely that which is termed Magoo's bar/Why Not operation, perhaps it would be prudent at this stage to have regard to a ...(indistinct) my learned colleague does not have and which contains the policy on this issue pertinently, and this is the Security Force hearings on page 57.  It's a document that I have.  I don't know whether the Evidence Leader gave it to me.  I presume that the Honourable Members have them as well.  In it the Magoo's bar issue is dealt with and Mac Maharaj, Mr Mac Maharaj says the following
"I thought I had indicated that the enemy forces were often located in commercial or civilian areas.  In this particular case whatever was the actual outcome (by particular case he means the Magoo's bar issue), in this particular case whatever was the actual outcome, the fact of the matter was that the comrades who acted on this target had intelligence, tactical intelligence, suggesting that the Security Forces when on or off duty congregated at this venue.  So that was the basis on which they had acted.  And if they had acted on that basis, then they were in line with the practical problems that I had outlined, that we were facing in the country."

CHAIRPERSON: We don't have that, Mr Dehal, but ...  Mr Richard?

MR RICHARD: I do have it by the by.

MR DEHAL: I'll make that available, I'll make copies of that page available.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR RICHARD: Now once upon a time a book was written entitled "Till Babylon Falls".  Now who wrote that book?

MR MCBRIDE: You had the book with you yesterday, Sir, it's Brian Rostrin...(indistinct).

CHAIRPERSON: What's that name, the surname?

MR MCBRIDE: Brian Rostrin.

MR RICHARD: Do you know him?

MR MCBRIDE: I've met him, he's interviewed me whilst I was in prison.  I've met him subsequent to that.

MR RICHARD: Now when he interviewed you was it ...(intervention)

MR MCBRIDE: He interviewed me while I was on death row, fighting for my life.

MR RICHARD: For how long did he interview you?

MR MCBRIDE: While I was still on death row when he finished interviewing me.

MR RICHARD: Was it one interview or was it many interviews?

MR MCBRIDE: Many, many, over a long period of time.

MR RICHARD: Now - and while on death row he would discuss various parts of the book and debate them with you and obtain information from you, wouldn't he?

MR MCBRIDE: I suppose so.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you read the book?

MR MCBRIDE: Yes, yes, I have read it.

CHAIRPERSON: Then perhaps if you can just get to the point instead of asking about the interviews and ...

MR RICHARD: Now the point is he wrote the book on information supplied by you.

MR MCBRIDE: Amongst other people, yes.

MR RICHARD: What purpose was the book written for?

MR MCBRIDE: I don't know, you should ask him that.  Maybe an interesting story of an interesting South African.

MR RICHARD: Now when at page 184 of the book the author states
"It is at this point that Gordon resigned from Special Operations.  At least that is what he later claimed at his trial.  The reason he said was 'because of my intense disagreements with Rashid'.  On trial usually facing the death penalty, members of Umkhonto are told they can put any blame they like onto their Commander abroad, fighting to save their lives.  Therefore this evidence cannot be taken as gospel.  However, Gordon told the Court that on a trip to Botswana with Robert, in March 1986, Rashid his Commander in Special Operations, instructed him to place a car bomb in Durban.  Gordon refused.  That was not, he objected, the policy of the ANC."
Are you aware of that paragraph?

MR MCBRIDE: I might have read it, yes.  I think it's self-explanatory.

MR RICHARD: In what sense?

MR MCBRIDE: Well he was being charged for murder, for his life and the same situation I was in my trial and it's his duty to survive and stay alive.  For the same reasons I've outlined earlier to you, while there was no moral imperative on us to be truthful with the apartheid Courts.

MR RICHARD: Now I use another quote, but before I do let me identify the person.  Who is Allan Pearce?

MR MCBRIDE: Allan Pearce is one of the co-applicants in this case and has not been involved in any of the operations in which you are being instructed on.

MR RICHARD: Now how would this quote help anyone in any particular case, and the quote goes at page 131
"Allan Pearce was an unemployed plasterer.  He had come to stay with his grandmother in order to get away from the life of a gangster.  He had been a member of the Woodstock Vultures and had been both shot and stabbed."
Now would that help who?

JUDGE PILLAY: Mr McBride, before you answer that question, is that what you told that author?

MR MCBRIDE: I never ever claimed it at any stage that that is what I told the author.

JUDGE PILLAY: Mr Richard, does the book say that that comes from McBride?  If not, how can you expect him to answer that question?

MR RICHARD: Now who gave the author information regarding Matthew Lecordier?

JUDGE PILLAY: Before we carry on, Mr Richard, I asked you a question.  Will you please deal with that.  That book - the quote that you put to Mr McBride, where is that purported to come from?

MR RICHARD: I asked a number of questions as to how the book was written ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, just before you proceed.  I don't know the book, Mr Richard, is it an autobiography or a biography about Mr McBride, or is it a general book on various aspects of the struggle?

MR RICHARD: It's a book specifically about Mr McBride and the matter that we're debating, the matters, to stress it.
	Now I understood when I was questioning Mr McBride as to how the book came together, it would be tedious to go through the formal - but clearly, I go back to the next question - and I'm sorry, Judge, I've lost my thread as to your question.  I beg your pardon.

JUDGE PILLAY: All I wanted to know is, you made a - you quoted out of that book and you followed it up with a question as to how that helped a gangster or something to that effect, all I want to know is the validity of putting that kind of question to this witness if he is not the source of that information.  Are you in the position to say that he is the source that has to explain it or not?

MR RICHARD: My first line of questioning was quite simple, did the witness, Mr McBride, know the author.  The answer was they consulted for many hours together and interacted in the writing of the book ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps if you can just ask him.
	You've read the book, Mr McBride.

MR MCBRIDE: Yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Is everything contained in that book derived from information given by yourself to the author?

MR MCBRIDE: Certainly not, I'm probably a minority source there really.  Mr Rostrin spoke to my lawyer, who was at the trial, he spoke to Indire, he spoke to Wentworth residents, he spoke to Matthew, he spoke to Greta.  Their photographs are there in that book, the same book Mr Richard had yesterday, probably still has today.  So it derived from a variety of sources.  I had limited visits on death row, limited visits, reserved for my family mainly.

MR DEHAL: I just want to go on record to confirm what Mr McBride has said and that parties including myself were interviewed.  I also want to place on record that in response to Judge Pillay's pertinent question, there's nothing tangible in the answer in the response to show that the question put was based upon any authoritative recording that McBride is the author of that paragraph.