Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-09-29

MR RICHARD: Chairperson, I will be less economical with my questioning.   Let's look at that paragraph in which the reference to the Magoos bar appears.  It starts
"... gathering tactical Intelligence was the responsibility of the units on the ground.   This was exceptionally difficult, given the conditions in the country.   At times, attacks which appeared to be aimed at civilian targets, were nothing of the sort.  The cadre may have had information to the effect that an SADF or SAP group would be present at a particular railway station or hotel or restaurant, at a particular time, but due to a range of difficulties ranging from faulty Intelligence to devices which malfunctioned and go off the wrong time, an explosion occurs apparently senselessly in a civilian area.  The Magoos bar falls into this category as indicated in our First Submission to the TRC."
	It is a question, not a proposition.  It would appear and I ask whether it is so, that this paragraph and section of the document, is describing the Magoo Bar attack as the ANC styled it in this document, it is not my words, as one of the ones that were either erroneous or not in line with policy or a mistake or attributable to some other malfunction in the system, yes or no?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Mr Chairperson, I think the answer to that question is really in that paragraph itself, and it says that
"... the gathering of tactical Intelligence was the responsibility of units on the ground, and this was exceptionally difficult given the conditions inside the country.  It says at times attacks, which appeared to be aimed at civilian targets, were nothing of the sort.  The cadre may have had information to the effect that an SADF or SAP group would be present at a particular railway station or hotel or restaurant at a particular time, but due to a range of difficulties ranging from faulty Intelligence, devices which malfunctioned, go off, an explosion occurs apparently senselessly in a civilian area.  I think that speaks for itself."

MR RICHARD: The next question is the Magoo Bar attack, was it the result of faulty information or a device that went off at the wrong time, or what was the case, what is implied, what is meant by that?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Mr Chairperson, as I understand that this operation was carried out on the basis of Intelligence that Security Force personnel frequented the Why Not.  If it falls into that category, that is the answer to it.

MR RICHARD: So ...

JUDGE PILLAY: Mr Richard, why do you suggest that something was wrong with that attack, that it was a result of faulty Intelligence or such like?

MR RICHARD: Judge, with respect, it flows as the witness has said, from the language of the paragraph.  Why is the Magoos bar attack put into the category of a mistake?  My question is why, what was the mistake?

JUDGE PILLAY: I am not too sure whether it is properly categorised in your interpretation.

MR RICHARD: I won't repeat the question, but I will phrase it differently.  What category is the Magoos bar attack being put into?  The sentence reads
"... the Magoos bar attack falls into this category."
	My question is what category is being referred to?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: The category of where the gathering of tactical Intelligence was the responsibility of units on the ground, where there may have been difficulties, where perhaps intended targets were not present at the time when it may have occurred, but that in itself, does not prove anything, because I do not know, I have not had the opportunity or do not have the information of the people that were there at the time, and perhaps that can be gone into.

MR RICHARD: Now, I am aware of what you have said about your personal participation in the preparation of this document, but where would I get access to the information that they prepared it from?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Well, I am sure you can question Mr McBride, because he was the person that actually acted on the ground.

MR RICHARD: However, and it is possibly argument, but I put it to you the ANC's own documents concedes that the Magoos bar fell into a special category?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Perhaps because of the outcome, but it seeks to explain what was intended and perhaps what the outcome of it was.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, is my learned friend putting to the witness that there were no Security Force personnel present at the time that the bomb went off?  Is he putting that as a fact?

MR RICHARD: It is a matter that I have checked repeatedly with victims and with the Investigating team relating to the prosecution, the statement is that it is denied that there were any Security personnel at the time.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, that is not the same as saying that there were no Security personnel.  I am asking if my learned friend is putting as a fact on his instructions, that there were no Security personnel present at the time the bomb exploded?

MR RICHARD: I will then put it in the assertion, there were no Security personnel.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: However, Mr Chairperson, the - Mr McBride has stated that these were places that he thought or has understood that Security Forces would be there, he had reconnaissance or Intelligence information to that, in that regard and I think when he is on the stand, perhaps that needs to be taken up with him.

MR RICHARD: Quite correctly, yesterday you stated that you did not make any effort whatsoever to verify or ascertain the basis of what Mr McBride's beliefs were, as to - you accepted his ipso dixit?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes, his assertion was that, his information was that Security personnel frequented that place.  I accepted that, that is what I have stated.

MR RICHARD: Now on the next page, and unfortunately I can only guess where it will be, there is a paragraph which begins "maintaining discipline in guerrilla and conventional armed forces"...

CHAIRPERSON: Page 15, third last paragraph on the left hand side of the page.

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: I have it, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps if you want to carry on reading it, just for the record purposes, Mr Richard.

MR RICHARD: Thank you Chairperson.   It reads
"... maintaining discipline in guerrilla and conventional armed forces is also fundamentally different.  In the case of a guerrilla force, discipline flows from a thorough understanding of the political objectives of the armed struggle, not from the threats of court martial or punishment."
	Is that a statement with which you agree?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes.

MR RICHARD: And it was the objective that you sought to achieve and the ideal that you sought to live up to?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes.

MR RICHARD: Now, it would flow that it is correct to say that the consequences of a mistake of bombing civilians as opposed to legitimate targets, would be understood by the operatives?

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Yes.

MR RICHARD: Now, it appears from the numerous papers before me, that at the time, rightly or wrongly, certain opinions held in America and Britain were to the effect that the ANC was not a freedom organisation, but a terrorist operation?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, what is ...

ABOOBAKER ISMAIL: Chairperson, that needs to be treated with contempt.  Those very same people in Britain and America at the time, were people that collaborated with the apartheid State.  They were the ones that actually shared information with the racist regime at the time, they were the ones that said the ANC was a terrorist organisation.  Those are the same people who today, hail South Africa and the ANC as being leading the democratic principles in the world, as having a constitution which is amongst the best in the world, founded by this government, led by the ANC.  I put it to you that whatever they said then, has no basis because they basically were founded on a principle that they would oppose people fighting for the liberation of their country.