AMNESTY HEARING

--------------------------------------------------------------------------ON RESUMPTION:

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. We apologise for the late start in this matter today. The reason being was that a number of the applicants did not arrive on time.

Is Mr Mohlaba here?

MS MTANGA: Yes Mr Chairperson, he is around, but I think he is not aware that we are starting now.

ADV DE JAGER: He has been warned that we start at ten o'clock. Actually we should have started at nine.

MS MTANGA: He is aware of that Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mohlaba, we said we would start at ten, we have been sitting here doing nothing, not for very long, but the fact is we have been here since ten. Is there any reason for the late delay in today's proceedings and yesterday's proceedings, the missing of yesterday, except for Mr Maluleka's application?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. I first wish to apologise for today's delay.

CHAIRPERSON: We get the feeling that it is almost intentional, the delays have been done to irritate us. Is there an explanation, proper explanation given?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. Certainly not, the delay was not intended to irritate the Committee.

Yesterday's delay was as a result of the apparent misunderstanding between the TRC in Cape Town and a letter which was sent to one of the applicants, who in turn went around and told the co-applicants that the proceedings have been adjourned until February.

It was not very easy to get in contact with the other applicants, but ultimately we did, and I did not myself, consult with Mr Toka, being the second applicant here, who we had scheduled a consultation for Sunday, but as a result of the message sent to him that the proceedings will be adjourned until February, he decided to go back to Mafikeng without contacting me.

I, when he came in this morning, after getting lost, he could not locate the venue with ease and after he came in, I stole this moment just to have a brief consultation with him and I was not aware that - I was in the consulting cubicle when the proceedings started.

ADV DE JAGER: I see you've got a watch, so you could have seen, you have requested us to delay it until ten. We have granted you that privilege and you were even being late and coming in after ten?

MR MOHLABA: Certainly Chair, I should believe that my watch has misled me, because the moment Mr Mohema came for me, it was indicating a minute to ten, and my apologies in that regard.

CHAIRPERSON: I think Mr Mohlaba, we have lost a great deal of time in this application. If we can in future, now commence proceedings timeously and also if we can handle these applications as efficiently as possible.

Mr Molefe, I believe that you are now representing some of the applicants. Would you mind coming forward and just getting to a microphone to place yourself on record please.

MR MOLEFE: My surname is Molefe, initials M.M. and I will be appearing on behalf of George Mathe and Johannes Maleka. Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Molefe. Yes Mr Mohlaba?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. I am ready to commence by leading the evidence of the second applicant, being Rodney Abram Moeketsi Toka.

CHAIRPERSON: The application appears or commences on page 9 of the papers.

MR MOHLABA: That is correct Chair.

RODNEY ABRAM MOEKETSI TOKA: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mohlaba?

EXAMINATION BY MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. Mr Toka, you are the applicant in this matter?

MR TOKA: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: You were born on the 17th of April 1963 in Mamelodi, Pretoria, is that correct?

MR TOKA: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: For record purposes, what is your occupation presently?

MR TOKA: I am a Captain in the South African Police Services.

MR MOHLABA: You are applying for an amnesty in respect of several offences, which appear in paragraph 9(a)(v) of the application form, and I refer the Committee to page 10 of the paginated documents. The offences, it is an AK47 raid, grenade attack and a bomb blast, you mention bomb blast again, and a bomb blast Proes Street, bomb blast Atteridgeville Municipality building, grenade attack at Mveke's place, grenade attack at a house in Mamelodi East, grenade attack at Ronald Molauzi and a bomb blast at Lion Bridge, Pretoria and escaping from lawful custody, is that correct?

MR TOKA: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: The basis on which you ... (intervention)

ADV DE JAGER: Isn't he applying for murder and attempted murder?

MR TOKA: I think, what happens in my application is that it is generally stated and are not specifically stated. Like the AK47 involved the murder of three policemen in Atteridgeville. That is what I am applying for.

Mamelodi East grenade attack, it involves the murder of a one year old baby, and that is what I am applying for as well. The attack at Sterland and Wimpy Bar and Juicy Lucy, Proes Street, Vermeulen Street, I think they also involve some injuries there and attempted murder. That is what I am applying for. It is just that they are not specifically stated.

CHAIRPERSON: I think if you take a look at paragraph 9(a)(i), it does say murder for the Mariana Street, Atteridgeville incident, an attempted murder, an attempted murder and murder for Mamelodi East, etc. It is there.

MR TOKA: That is exactly right.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. You are applying for amnesty in respect of these offences because they were committed with a political motive, is that correct?

MR TOKA: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: Did you during the currency of this offence, during the time of the commission of these offences, were you a member of any political organisation?

MR TOKA: Yes.

MR MOHLABA: Can you tell the Committee the name of the organisation?

MR TOKA: I was a member of the African National Congress and its military wing, Umkhonto weSizwe.

MR MOHLABA: Can you explain to the Committee in full details how and when did you come to join the African National Congress and the roles which you were playing?

MR TOKA: I joined the African National Congress in - I left the country in October 1985, I joined the African National Congress on the 21st of October in Botswana.

How I joined the African National Congress, it is because I started first in the youth movement in the country. I was a member of the (indistinct) organisation, which was formed in 1984 with a view of the International Youth Year in 1985.

Through my political activities in this youth organisation, I had the courage to go further in my political beliefs and join the African National Congress, but except that there is also some other things that influenced me in my life to join the African National Congress.

MR MOHLABA: You told the Committee of having joined the African National Congress in Botswana. Can you take us further until to the moment when you came back to the country if you ultimately did, and the roles you played in the African National Congress and its military wing, Umkhonto weSizwe inside South Africa?

MR TOKA: Yes, after joining the African National Congress in Botswana, I think I spent about 14 days in (indistinct) settlement, somewhere in Botswana, where our passports were organised and then we were taken to Zambia. From Zambia we were then taken to Angola where I went for military training in a camp called Kibashe.

My training was basically a general Commanders' course which takes about six months and from this course, I was taken for another three months at Bangu camp in Angola, for specialising in Engineering, that is Military Engineering. I was taken back from Angola to Lusaka, then I think from Lusaka we were then transported into Botswana and we entered South Africa on the 2nd of July 1987.

When we entered South Africa, it was me and my Commander Mishack Maponya. When we entered the country, our mission from exile was simply a four worded mission, it was recruit, train, arm and lead our people to battle. That was our basic orders from exile.

We came into the country, we stayed in the country.

ADV DE JAGER: Sorry, could you kindly repeat that, recruit, train?

MR TOKA: Arm and lead our people to battle.

ADV DE JAGER: And lead the people to?

MR TOKA: Battle.

CHAIRPERSON: Continue please.

MR TOKA: Then from there, our main aim was to recruit people to join Umkhonto weSizwe and then from there, we had to arrange with Lusaka to send in our arms cache, give the people training. From there, give them orders to attack whatever target we found that was appropriate at the time.

Amongst this people that we recruited, the other applicants who have made the applications here like Francis Pitsi, Ernest Ramadite, George Mathe, Johannes Maleka. That was in Atteridgeville and in Mamelodi we recruited Peter Maluleka, we also had the late Stanza Bopape. We recruited Reginald Legodi, Reuben Khotsa and James Kgase.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you in fact recruit all the other applicants that are appearing in this particular hearing?

MR TOKA: That is correct, My Lord.

CHAIRPERSON: Amongst other people you say, amongst others?

MR TOKA: Can you rephrase your question?

CHAIRPERSON: Were these the only people you recruited?

MR TOKA: No, there were other people that we recruited as well.

CHAIRPERSON: There were other people, yes.

MR TOKA: Yes sir. Then from there, after we recruited, we trained them in the usage of different arms like hand grenades, AK47's, limpet mines and after we felt that they were fully trained, we gave them orders to attach the mentioned places in this application Your Worship.

MR MOHLABA: You have stated in paragraph 7(b) of your application, that is page 9 of the paginated bundle where you were requested to state the capacity which you served the organisation, you have indicated that you were a soldier, Commissar and Commander.

Can you explain to the Committee what were your duties as a Commissar or what was expected of you?

MR TOKA: My duties as a Commissar was just to give the political objectives and aims of the organisation, and it was generally to look at the welfare of the men on the ground and to make it a point that at all times, the morals were boosted and they understand exactly what the organisation requires out of them.

MR MOHLABA: And your responsibilities as a Commander?

MR TOKA: My responsibilities as a Commander is to see to it that the (indistinct), to see to it that soldiers are carrying out their orders as expected from them, and again to see to it that you give out the necessary orders.

MR MOHLABA: So in other words, you were giving orders to your subordinates, is that correct?

MR TOKA: That is correct Your Worship.

MR MOHLABA: I want to take you through the relevant offences which you are applying amnesty for.

I want you to tell the Committee about what you call an AK47 raid. Is that the incident where three police officers were killed in Atteridgeville?

MR TOKA: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: Can you in full details explain to the Committee how this raid was planned, ordered and executed?

MR TOKA: Yes. You see, what happens on the ground is that an individual soldier would see a target and he would bring it over for a discussion and we will look at the political side of that target.

Normally what you do is that you look at the hardware that your men will need to execute the order and you give them the necessary training. From there, you give them the go ahead to carry out the mission.

So generally the men in charge of this (indistinct), Mensday Maponya, who was the Commander and he brought the matter to me, we discussed it with him. He told me that this Unit had this target that they wanted to attack and that the three policemen were known to be very notorious, they were known to be amongst those that were petrol bombing our comrades' houses in Atteridgeville and other areas there by Atteridgeville. The whole thing was well motivated in a way that a go ahead was given for that raid to be carried out.

The raid was carried out and three policemen died in this way. Some people who were there, were caught in a crossfire.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Toka, the policemen were the targets specifically identified, the policemen, or were they just any policemen would be the target in this raid?

MR TOKA: Your Worship, in this case, those policemen were specifically target because this were amongst the group of policemen who were identified as amongst those that were petrol bombing our comrades' houses in Atteridgeville and other neighbouring townships.

CHAIRPERSON: When I mean specifically identified by name, we are going for policemen X, Y and Z?

MR TOKA: Exactly Your Worship.

ADV DE JAGER: Can you recall the names of the policemen?

MR TOKA: I can recall only maybe two of them. One was Barney Mope.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you just repeat that?

MR TOKA: Barney Mope. The other one was, I don't know, the surname was Mphahlele and the last one was, I have forgotten the last one Your Worship, but I think it was something like Phenyane.

ADV DE JAGER: Were you charged with the murders?

MR TOKA: We were charged with the murders.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Mohlaba, can't you refer us to the names, haven't you got a copy of the judgement or the charge sheet?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. Could the policemen in question, Mr Toka, could that be Samuel Mope?

If the Chair could bear with me one second, I have a copy of the judgement which details the victims and if the Chair could bear with me.

ADV DE JAGER: What page is it at?

ADV SANDI: I think it is 72, right?

CHAIRPERSON: Page 72 I think Mr Mohlaba.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. Mr Toka, could the three victims be Barney Mope, Andrew Mphahlele and Nelson Phenyane?

MR TOKA: Correct yes.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you. Can you explain to the Committee where was this attack carried out, what was the venue? Was it a police station, was it a private house?

MR TOKA: It was a private house.

MR MOHLABA: And were you present when this attack was carried out?

MR TOKA: I was not present.

MR MOHLABA: So you did not yourself participate in this attack, is that correct?

MR TOKA: That is correct, yes.

MR MOHLABA: And you - did you give instructions or orders to somebody, to some of your subordinates to carry out this attack?

MR TOKA: Yes Your Worship.

MR MOHLABA: Can you explain who was given the orders to attack and specifically the - and explain to the Committee with details, the specific orders that were given to them.

MR TOKA: The specific orders given to them was simply that they were given the go ahead to attack that place and that the people who were given the orders were Francis Pitsi, George Mathe and Ernest Ramadite.

There were no clear, specific orders given, except that the target was recommended for attack.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Toka, who was the third person, Ernest?

MR TOKA: Ramadite.

CHAIRPERSON: He is not an applicant here?

MR TOKA: I think because of some, he is not fit to stand trial Your Worship, I think so.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MOHLABA: After this raid was carried out, did you have an opportunity to sit with the people who carried out the attack and discuss how the mission was successful or not, did you have that opportunity?

MR TOKA: Yes, it is normal course that after the soldiers have carried out an operation, the Commanders must sit down with them and view the whole thing and see it as a success or a failure.

At that stage, we took it as a successful operation.

ADV DE JAGER: They reported back to you after the operation? Did they report back to you after the operation?

MR TOKA: Yes. Not immediately after the operation, I think the following day after the operation.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Mohlaba, I just want to get one point cleared before you proceed Mr Toka.

Did you as the Commander or Commissar there, have autonomy, in other words once a target was identified like these three policemen, did you or your Commander, have to refer that to Headquarters or somebody elsewhere to get approval of the target before the operation or were you autonomous, could you decide and if you decided that it was an appropriate target, carry it out without reference to any other person in the organisation or movement?

MR TOKA: Yes, normally that would be the procedure that any target, a senior person like our immediate Commander in Botswana, will have to be told about it so that he can give the overall order, to carry out such an attack.

There was, normally it would depend on the type of target that is there. If it is a target which is purely, which you will see that it is there and you cannot wait for another two weeks or so, it might move out of place, then you can take a decision on that.

CHAIRPERSON: In this particular incident, the attack on this house in Mariana Street where these policemen were, did you get that outside approval or was that done just within your group?

MR TOKA: No that one, we had to contact the Headquarters for its approval, via our command structure in Botswana.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, and in the full disclosure here, who did you contact and who gave the approval?

MR TOKA: Our immediate Commander in Botswana was Nalede Molefe, he passed away, he died in an SADF raid in Botswana in 1988.

Above him in Lusaka, our immediate Commander was the late Chris Hani.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. You may proceed.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. Were you responsible to reply the necessary, you called it hardware, for this particular raid?

MR TOKA: Yes, I was responsible together with Mensday Maponya.

ADV DE JAGER: Sorry, this Mr Maponya you are referring to, was he also known as Odirele?

MR TOKA: Odirele Maponya, yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Thank you.

MR MOHLABA: Is it your case Mr Toka, that the elimination of these three police officers would have enhanced the objective of your political organisation?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

ADV SANDI: Sorry Mr Mohlaba, just one thing which is not very clear to me about these three police. Were they staying in the same house or separate houses?

MR TOKA: They were not staying in that house, they were staying in separate houses.

ADV SANDI: When they were attacked, were they ...

MR TOKA: They were in the same house, in the same location.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

MR MOHLABA: With regard to this specific raid to the three police officers Mr Toka, do you have anything to add to the Committee?

MR TOKA: I don't think so, nothing.

MR MOHLABA: I want you to take us through the grenade attack which you mentioned in paragraph 9 of your application. Where did this grenade attack happen?

ADV DE JAGER: Were there several grenade attacks?

MR MOHLABA: I want you first to take us ...

CHAIRPERSON: This is the grenade attack in Mamelodi East.

MR TOKA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: If you look it is paragraph 9(4)(iii), read with paragraph (9)(a)(i)(iii).

MR TOKA: This grenade attack took place in a place called Mamelodi Gardens, in Mamelodi township in which an one year old baby died.

Actually what was happening in this attack is that the father to that child, I don't know if he is still a policeman, but he was a policeman and he was amongst our targeted policemen in that area.

The intelligence conducted on that house in Mamelodi, it went to the extent that he would be home by about the time when this attack was carried out. I can no longer remember exactly what time he was supposed to be home.

It was later learnt that actually the attack in itself was earlier and the baby and its mother, were caught in a crossfire because of this attack. But mainly the attack was not against the child or the mother, it was mainly against the father who was a cop at that time, and who was amongst our targets.

ADV DE JAGER: But at the hour when the attack was planned, wouldn't the baby and the wife in any event have been in the house?

MR TOKA: You see Your Worship, what happens normally is that you have an intelligence group that works mainly on the reconnaissance and the intelligence gathering of a specific target, and you mainly depend on the report of that intelligence group.

It is the one at the end of the day, that will tell you what time to attack the place, what time to carry out the attack. And you have a problem as a foot soldier, that when you attack that area, you solely depend on the intelligence.

Normally it will put you in a fix, sometimes people are caught in a crossfire because of that.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, no this catching in a crossfire, let's get down to that.

Was your intelligence that this child and the mother wouldn't be in the house at that time, when the attack took place?

MR TOKA: That is - you see, I am not clear on that, but I do not remember it stated that the mother and the child were somewhere within the vicinity.

ADV DE JAGER: Wasn't this attack carried out regardless as to whether the mother and the child would be present?

MR TOKA: I think it would be, if I have to be human enough, I think it would be very unhuman for anybody to throw up a grenade where he knows that there is a small child, because of the - if you look at the effect that the grenade causes. It has got splinters on it, and a well trained soldier, you know the shockwaves, you know the movement of the splinters, and I think it would be very unhuman for anybody to do that.

That is why I am saying it was not clear in our intelligence, whether the mother and the child would be there.

ADV DE JAGER: If that is the position, could you kindly give us the names of the people who informed you who would be present at the time when the attack would take place, your intelligence people?

MR TOKA: Yes, our intelligence people, Your Worship, was Webster from East Rand, he died after our arrest.

CHAIRPERSON: You say his name is Webster?

MR TOKA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, is it correct that the one year old child who was killed in the incident, was called Patience Kalele?

MR TOKA: Exactly Your Worship.

MR MOHLABA: If I can take you back to what you were, you have just said after you were asked certain questions by the panel, I want to take you back to, you have mentioned that the foot soldiers get given instructions and this instructions are - or orders, are based on the intelligence which you have accumulated or captured.

Can you explain to the Committee whether you explained to the foot soldier the nature of the intelligence, or it is only when you are satisfied that this target according to our intelligence, could be hit appropriately at this moment, that you tell - my question is so longwinded, let me try and rephrase it. What I want to know is, the orders which you normally give to the foot soldiers, did you give them orders with specific details of your intelligence or you only mention to them that there is a target at position (a) which must be attacked at six o'clock?

MR TOKA: You see, like I started from the beginning, some of the targets themselves will be brought in by the foot soldiers themselves after a certain policeman has been targeted.

From there, it would be the work of the intelligence team to see to it what time can this be carried out, and whatsoever, and what appropriate means of attack can be used in such an attack.

From there, it is then that they will come, Webster will come and see the command structure, and discuss the whole thing. When the command structure is happy about the whole thing, then it is then that it goes to the foot soldiers.

You see the problem with our structures is that the first rear from behind, will never know the sixth one from behind him, you see. It was a matter of different units will only know the command structure, but they only know each other.

MR MOHLABA: If I understand you correctly, the foot soldier who was told, who would get given orders to execute a particular mission, no reasons are furnished to him, he must just carry out the order as given, is that correct?

MR TOKA: Yes, and the reasons that are given to him as a soldier is that there must be a political briefing given to him. He must know exactly what is the organisation going to benefit, if it is going to benefit the liberation of the country, if it is going to enhance our aims and objectives or the organisation, he must know that before he carries out the mission.

He will also be told on the details of the target that is there.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you. Taking you back to the details of this raid, can you explain to the Committee the part you have played in the attack where Patience was killed and how this whole exercise was planned?

MR TOKA: As I said, at that time I was - okay it was after, yes, I was the Commander at that time, and the part that I played, was that I approved of the attack at that place.

I also, the other role that I played, I discussed with the role players in the whole attack.

ADV DE JAGER: Was this attack also approved by the Commander in Botswana?

MR TOKA: Your Worship, it is proper that for every attack, the leadership must know.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, who were the operatives in this attack?

MR TOKA: Here it was Joseph Nkosi and Bernard Mkonyana.

ADV DE JAGER: Applicant number 6, Joseph Nkosi, is that correct?

MR TOKA: Exactly Your Worship.

CHAIRPERSON: And Bernard who?

MR TOKA: Mkonyana. I think maybe the idea is that he was acquitted by the Court of law.

CHAIRPERSON: Just before you move on Mr Toka, was a person Rose Mary Muzwaheni also injured in that attack?

MR TOKA: (Indistinct) is the charge sheet.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I am going on the charge sheet, page 73. There is an attempted murder charge for the 10th of May and the victim was Rose Mary Muzwaheni.

MR TOKA: Correctly Your Worship.

CHAIRPERSON: Would you ...

MR TOKA: Yes, she was injured in that attack.

CHAIRPERSON: And also, just sorry, just while we are on this point, just go back to the previous attack on the police house in which the three policemen were killed. Were Ananias Nkoane and Tickey Maleka also injured in that attack?

MR TOKA: That is correct Your Worship.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Mohlaba?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you. So you were not involved in the attack itself, is that correct?

MR TOKA: I was not, yes.

MR MOHLABA: After this attack was carried out, did you have an opportunity to meet with the operatives to discuss how it, whether it was a success or a failure?

MR TOKA: Yes, we had that opportunity to discuss with the operatives and we felt that it was not that successful because only the baby and its mother got in the crossfire and not the supposed target.

MR MOHLABA: Do you have anything to add with regard to this attack where this child was killed?

MR TOKA: I've got nothing to add.

MR MOHLABA: I would want now to move to the bomb blast ...

ADV DE JAGER: Sorry, were you very surprised that a child was injured and a woman injured in that house?

MR TOKA: Yes, as I said Your Worship, I think it is only someone who is (indistinct), who will jubilate over such a thing.

ADV DE JAGER: No, I don't think whether you jubilated about it, but this man was staying in a house and usually if one is staying in a house, there is a family staying with you?

MR TOKA: That is correct Your Worship. I cannot say we were surprised, it is just that we were not happy about the thing.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, and didn't you feel that you didn't in fact do enough to prevent this, an innocent child of a year old, being killed?

MR TOKA: Yes, I think we - that is generally our unhappiness into the whole thing that not the target was actually effected.

ADV SANDI: Sorry Mr Mohlaba, Mr Toka, did you go back to this - you mentioned, was it Webster who gave this intelligence information, did you go back to Webster to say why did you not tell us that there was a woman and a child staying there?

MR TOKA: Yes, I think we discussed it with him, but there was no appropriate answer given after that, because you see the problem with myself and my Commander, myself and my Commissar, Liverpool, at that time it was Godfrey Makobe, we discussed it with him, and we felt not quite happy about it, because in his intelligence nothing of that nature was indicated.

It happens just like any other military attack where civilians are caught in a crossfire and it is not the aim of the man behind the barrel to start shooting at the civilians, that is the whole thing.

ADV DE JAGER: The Commissar was Godfrey?

MR TOKA: Makobe.

ADV DE JAGER: Makobe?

MR TOKA: Makobe, yes.

ADV DE JAGER: He is not one of the applicants either?

MR TOKA: I am sorry, he passed away.

ADV SANDI: Did you do anything Mr Toka, that is before you approved of this operation, did you do anything to satisfy yourself that no such people as Patience and this woman would be caught up in the crossfire?

MR TOKA: You see, normally as a Commander or as MK operatives, you go for different trainings, and this Webster that I am talking about, he has been in the Soviet Union Special Agent in intelligence and I could not doubt his integrity to collect intelligence information on that.

ADV DE JAGER: But when he reported to you this, he said I've kept this house under surveillance, this policeman is staying there. Didn't you ask him is there any family staying with him?

MR TOKA: I think I did ask him.

ADV DE JAGER: No Mr Toka, you repeatedly say I think. Did you or did you not?

MR TOKA: You see Your Worship, here we are talking about incidents that happened 10 years back. You may not know what was your appropriate answer at that time, because nobody knew that today I will be standing here, explaining these things.

Unless if I knew, then I think I could have kept a diary and tell you exactly what I said.

CHAIRPERSON: You say you are not sure whether you asked whether there were family members besides the policeman himself, in the house?

MR TOKA: Yes, normally when somebody comes with a private house, an attack on a private house, you will generally ask for the occupants of the house, is there any other occupant in the house? Can we have some people suffering injuries, which we did not plan for?

It will depend on the guy who is conducting the intelligence, on the answer that he is going to give you and if he says in my intelligence, I think the whole operation will go smoothly, that is what we take from him.

CHAIRPERSON: Because one would imagine that if the intelligence was that there were family members such as a one year old child and a mother in the house, then wouldn't one then not just hurl a hand grenade through a window, you would kick the door open and go in with your guns rather, and select your victim?

MR TOKA: You see, Your Worship, in this case, we talk about a one year old child, and if one really knew there was a one year old child in the house, then you see, it is not only the shrapnels that can kill that child, but also the shock waves can still do it.

And I don't think whether that child is in another room whatsoever, I don't think that any clever man would carry out such an attack. That is why I am saying it was not clear from our intelligence that there was a child and a woman in the house.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mohlaba?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. You have mentioned the person who was doing the intelligence. Can you explain to the Committee the relationship in so far as it relates to the chain of command between yourself and him?

Was he naturally supposed to report to you or he was only involved with the intelligence and that was his department?

MR TOKA: Yes, the way the structure was, I was the Commander and Godfrey Makobe was the Commissar, that was the second in charge, and Webster was our intelligence man. Webster was generally involved not only in the intelligence gathering of a target, he was as well involved in the screening of new recruits.

If we wanted to recruit somebody, it was the work of Webster, to go into the biography of this person and see if he was good to be recruited whatsoever. Then from there, he would then come back to me and report and say whether this is a good guy or a bad guy.

MR MOHLABA: When it relates to intelligence gathering, Webster's word was final, you trusted him because that was not your domain, is that correct?

MR TOKA: Correctly.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you going on to the bomb blast?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair, yes. Can we move over to the bomb blast? You have mentioned if I can show it to you, I am always reading it, does this bomb blast relate to the Juicy Lucy bombing?

MR TOKA: Yes, at Vermeulen Street, yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Could we just structure this? The first incident at Mamelodi, would cover if you look at the charge sheet Mr Mohlaba, page 72, that would cover charges 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and maybe 8?

CHAIRPERSON: No, not 8.

ADV DE JAGER: It is on the same date?

CHAIRPERSON: No, it is the 18th of March, 8 is the 10th of May.

MR TOKA: Only up to charge 6.

CHAIRPERSON: It is the second incident.

ADV DE JAGER: Oh 8 is also relating to the second incident, charges 4, 7 and 8, that would relate to the second incident?

CHAIRPERSON: 4, 7 and 8 relate to the incident in which the attack was made on the policemen

MR TOKA: 4, (indistinct)

MR TOKA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And the other ones mentioned earlier, were the first attack, the one in Marian Street, is that right?

MR TOKA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And then the bomb blast that you are referring to now, if you take a look just so that we don't get confused, is that charges 26, 27, 28, page 79, and 29 and 30?

MR TOKA: Correct Your Worship.

CHAIRPERSON: The 26th of May 1988?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Okay, 26 to 30 inclusive. Yes, Mr Mohlaba?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. This bomb blast, it is what is normally referred here as the Juicy Lucy bombing, is that correct?

MR TOKA: Correct.

MR MOHLABA: Can you take the Committee through that incident, how this bombing was planned and executed?

MR TOKA: According to our intelligence at that time, it is that I think the National Party on that day was celebrating 40 years in power and according to our intelligence from Juicy Lucy, there is a military building which is about plus minus 400 meters and that is now according to our intelligence is that the soldiers that were working in that building, that is where they used to have their lunch.

If that limpet mine was properly placed in that area, then those soldiers that were having their lunch in that area, will be effected by that blast. We looked at the intelligence, we analyzed it, we discussed it and it was true that just next to that area, there is about a military installation there and we then went to Atteridgeville, myself and Liverpool and we discussed it with the Unit in Atteridgeville, Francis Pitsi, George Mathe and Ernest Ramadite, to carry out that operation.

We gave out orders that that operation should be carried out.

CHAIRPERSON: Where precisely was this Juicy Lucy?

MR TOKA: Juicy Lucy is at Vermeulen Street.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that in the CBD in the centre of town?

MR TOKA: Yes, in the CBD, in the Central Business District, yes Your Worship.

CHAIRPERSON: Please continue.

MR TOKA: And we gave them the order, myself and Liverpool, for them to carry out that operation and we saw it as, politically we saw it as an operation to be carried out for the enhancement of our struggle and that is why the operation was carried out there.

CHAIRPERSON: Was there prior approval given from Botswana?

MR TOKA: As I said before Your Worship, it is the nature of all of us to report back to the leadership in exile to give the final approval.

ADV DE JAGER: And did they approve an attack on Juicy Lucy?

MR TOKA: Yes, they approved it based on the motivation that there were soldiers who were eating there.

ADV DE JAGER: At what time did this attack take place?

MR TOKA: I can't hear you properly.

ADV DE JAGER: At what time of the day did the attack take place?

MR TOKA: I am not sure now, but I think it was around lunch, the lunch hour which might have been between one and two or twelve and one, but it was around those lunch times.

ADV DE JAGER: In central city?

MR TOKA: Yes Your Worship.

ADV DE JAGER: Between one and two in the afternoon?

MR TOKA: Yes Your Worship.

ADV DE JAGER: When all the people come for lunch and visit eating places?

MR TOKA: Exactly Your Worship.

ADV DE JAGER: Mothers, children, everybody?

MR TOKA: Your Worship, once you identify a group of soldiers who eats in a certain place, what is in the mind of a soldier when you place a bomb, is to carry out an attack against those soldiers who are eating there.

He is not carrying out an attack against those people that are passing there.

ADV DE JAGER: Was there a single soldier injured in that attack?

MR TOKA: There was no, according to the report on the newspaper, there was no soldier injured. I don't know, maybe those ladies, if we go back to their backgrounds, maybe they were soldiers. I am not sure, up to now.

ADV DE JAGER: Well, I think they are represented here, they would be able to tell us whether they were soldiers.

MR TOKA: That is good Your Worship.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Toka, if you could just mention, the attack was carried out you say by Mr Pitsi?

MR TOKA: Yes Your Worship and George Mathe and Ramadite.

CHAIRPERSON: Which one, oh yes, the one that is not here. The type of weapon used?

MR TOKA: It was a limpet mine, I think a mini limpet. I don't know what they, it was a mini limpet mine.

CHAIRPERSON: With a time set?

MR TOKA: Yes, with a time delay metal plate, lap plate.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mohlaba.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. You say this attack was carried by the people that you have mentioned.

Are you saying this because you have discussed this issue with them and gave orders to them to carry out this attack?

MR TOKA: Yes.

MR MOHLABA: And do you know whether one of them or all of them, carried out the attack, the actual placing of the mini limpet mine inside the shop, whether it was done by all of them in concert or was it done by one of them, are you aware of that?

MR TOKA: I don't remember exactly who did that.

MR MOHLABA: In placing this limpet mine, you say that the intended target was the soldiers who frequented that shop as opposed to the civilians who were caught in the crossfire? Can you explain whether it was your intention to only attack the soldiers or regardless of the fact that there could be civilians, you gave orders to attack that area?

MR TOKA: When we gave orders Your Worship, we mainly looked at the main target, the soldiers. It is very unfortunate that some people were caught in the crossfire there.

MR MOHLABA: Do you have anything to add with regard to this attack at Juicy Lucy?

MR TOKA: No, I've got nothing to add there.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry just before you move on, Mr Toka. Mr Toka, I had a look at the submissions that have been made by the ANC, they are contained in various documents and when one takes a look, they set out a number of incidents which they say were carried out under the flag of the ANC and then when one takes a look at this list, all the incidents that you have referred to in your applications, when I say you meaning plural, you and the other applicants, are mentioned in this list, save for this Juicy Lucy one, it doesn't appear.

You can take a look at the list yourself, it doesn't appear there, and then in addition, in the submission they give another list, a second list of operations which they call armed actions for which target category and/or responsibility is uncertain, in other words they are not sure whether they were ANC operations, approved operations or not, and also on that list, there is no mention of this bombing in the Juicy Lucy.

Can you give any reason for that, can you give any explanation for that?

MR TOKA: I think the fact is, I don't know exactly what exact reason I can give to this, but you see the whole thing is that the target might relate to Juicy Lucy as a place in the CBD.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I see we are having the tea adjournment just now, perhaps you can take a look at the list yourself, they do it date by date and then a description, and there is nothing for the date on which this occurred.

MR TOKA: Okay, I think in that case Your Worship, I would ask my ... (intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Take a look at it. I am just asking if you've got any reason why it doesn't appear here.

MR TOKA: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Would this be a convenient time to take the tea adjournment and can we take it just for quarter of an hour, and start again at twenty past eleven? Just take a short tea adjournment, we will start again at quarter past eleven.

Mr Mohlaba, you can take a look, I will give you this list here.

ON RESUMPTION:

RODNEY ABRAM MOEKETSI TOKA: (still under oath)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mohlaba?

EXAMINATION BY MR MOHLABA: (continued)

Thank you Chair. Before I proceed Mr Chairman, there was a question which was directed to the applicant with regard to this particular incident, not appearing in the submissions of the ANC.

During this tea adjournment I contacted the national office to clarify the situation, and we spoke to Brian Kopedi of the national office, who indicated to us that it has since come to their attention that the list of these incidents, it is not complete and they are looking into bringing another, further submission in that regard, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mohlaba.

ADV DE JAGER: Sorry Mr Mohlaba, but could he tell you whether this incident would indeed by included in the next list?

MR MOHLABA: All he indicated was that they are aware of this particular incident having been excluded in particular and they said there are some other incidents which are not forming part of their list, and they are looking towards doing an addendum to the list.

I don't know whether it will specifically be included in the next list. May I then proceed Mr Chairman?

Mr Toka, you have mentioned about approval which you normally sought from Botswana?

MR TOKA: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: Can you explain to the Committee how was that done? Was it done telephonically, by writing or did somebody need to go to Botswana for that reason?

MR TOKA: Normally is that one of us, one of the members of the command structure, would have to go to Botswana to sort out an approval from them.

MR MOHLABA: With this particular incident, you have mentioned that approval was sought and obtained from Botswana about this particular incident, can you remember who went for this approval, was it yourself or somebody else if you can remember?

MR TOKA: At this instance, on this particular incident or any other incident, I cannot remember exactly who went there for an approval, but it was either, it would be me or my Commissar going there.

MR MOHLABA: Can you mention him by name?

MR TOKA: As I mentioned at that time, the Commissar was Godfrey Makobe.

MR MOHLABA: So either yourself or Makobe could have gone to Botswana to seek this approval and are you certain that approval was sought and obtained in respect of this attack?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR MOHLABA: And you have mentioned that attacks such as this, were not carried out without such approval, is that correct?

MR TOKA: That is correct.

ADV DE JAGER: In the attacks where you were involved, was there any one where you took local initiative, without approval?

MR TOKA: Your Worship, I think in almost all of our attacks stated here, the approval was got from Botswana, or Lusaka directly.

CHAIRPERSON: We heard yesterday Mr Toka, when Mr Maluleka was giving evidence, that in that particular attack, him and his Commander Mr Maponya, they had a meeting and then the mission was that they would go into town, armed with their limpet mines, and separate once in town, each seek out a target of their choice, which they felt would be an appropriate target, place the mine and then meet back later.

Obviously in an operation like that, they wouldn't have got approval from Botswana in the time that they placed the mine, because they only determined the target once they were in town, they were walking the street and look for a place, they didn't go to a specific target, that is what we heard yesterday?

MR TOKA: Yes, I think to answer that question, I would say Your Worship, if you look at these attacks, there are those attacks that were mainly for military propaganda, where a limpet would be put in an isolated place, where it would just go off by itself, just to register to the people that Umkhonto weSizwe is present in the country and we have such attacks like if you go to the attacks at Proes Street, where an isolated mine blew up a Renault car that was parked there, those were such attacks.

CHAIRPERSON: You wouldn't get prior approval?

MR TOKA: Yes, in such attacks, what we needed only was just the propaganda, the military propaganda and we looked for specifically isolated places where there is no movement of civilians or people whatsoever.

That is where we would place such a mine then it goes off by itself, just to register the presence of the liberation army in the country.

CHAIRPERSON: But where the target of the attack would involve or may involve a killing, then you would seek your approval?

MR TOKA: Then you would seek approval from outside, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you, Mr Mohlaba?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. With regard to this Juicy Lucy bombing as it is know, do you have anything to add to that?

MR TOKA: Nothing at this stage.

MR MOHLABA: With the permission of the Chair, may I move over to the next incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Certainly Mr Mohlaba.

MR MOHLABA: Mr Toka, there is also an application for amnesty in respect of a bomb blast at Proes Street. Is this the bomb which went under a Renault?

MR TOKA: Correctly.

MR MOHLABA: Do you know who was the owner of this motor vehicle?

MR TOKA: No, I don't know the owner.

MR MOHLABA: Can you explain to the Committee how this attack was planned and who carried it out and how it was carried out, if you know?

MR TOKA: This attack was planned in conjunction with the Juicy Lucy attack, and as I said it was quite an isolated place, and we felt that we should register our presence there.

It was planted in exactly the same way, with the same group that carried out the Juicy Lucy attack, that is why both attacks took place on the same day.

That one was a purely military propaganda attack like I said.

MR MOHLABA: So you did not personally carry out this attack?

MR TOKA: I did not.

MR MOHLABA: Do you carry a knowledge who was responsible for placing this device under this car?

MR TOKA: George Mathe.

MR MOHLABA: You say that the justification for such attacks, was to make a statement, that is military propaganda as you called it, and is it your case that such conduct enhanced the aims of the African National Congress?

MR TOKA: It did Your Worship, because it always kept what we at that time called the enemy, on its toes and such attacks were able to draw the enemy to a certain location, where we needed to draw them to.

For instance, if you look into the past history of MK attacks, they were normally in the townships, whatsoever, whatsoever, and drawing them into the cities like one of the orders of the ANC said that we should take the war into the suburbs, such attacks served as propaganda for the movement, and in that case, enhanced our aim of the liberation struggle.

MR MOHLABA: With the permission of the Chair, I am going to move over to the next incident.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Mohlaba, it would greatly assist us if you could link the incidents to for instance the charge sheet and the annexures to the charge sheet.

I see for instance as far as the Sterland one is concerned, where Mr Odirele was killed, there was in fact a person injured at the Sterland complex.

I think perhaps the present applicant, he told us that that was for military propaganda and you wouldn't get prior approval, it is not necessary if it is only for propaganda. But placing a bomb at Sterland, it is a theatre complex, bioscope complex where you've got continuous films being shown, wouldn't that be a sort of situation where you would foresee that people could be injured or killed?

MR TOKA: Okay, but let's get into Sterland, I think what we were discussing was Proes Street and the Juicy Lucy and I am sure, he hasn't gone into Sterland yet.

If that is the case, I would still say that you see, there can be intervals between the cinemas, how they operate, but within that interval, you would find that there is about 30 minutes of where there was no movement, everybody is in the complex at that time. You might find that during that 30 minutes, the device that was used there, a limpet mine, has got different lap plates. There is a lap plate for 30 minutes.

With our weather here in South Africa, it will take you for 30 minutes, there will be another lap plate that will take you for an hour and I think the last lap plate will take you for about 16 hours. It would depend on the man behind the bomb, which lap plate to put there. You might put it there at seven o'clock when the movies is still on, but it might go off at twelve o'clock, at midnight, when there is nobody there.

So you cannot at this stage guarantee that whoever placed that bomb at Sterland, had an intention to kill people there.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, well the evidence in that case was, you were not present yesterday, so you didn't hear the evidence, that they placed it for seven 'o clock, or they timed it for seven o'clock and there was half an hour time device fixed there.

MR TOKA: Yes, and it was clear at that time, that at that time, at half past seven, everybody will be in the movies, because the first movie, I think it was supposed to go out at 20H00, that was according to ...

ADV DE JAGER: And nobody queuing for the next movie?

MR TOKA: That is why even when it went off there, it only injured that man that you said was injured, and it killed my Commander, that is why.

At that time, there was nobody moving around that place?

ADV DE JAGER: Where was he killed, on the sidewalk or in the building?

MR TOKA: Not in the building, about 10), plus or minus 150 meters from the building, yes, on the parking lot.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Mohlaba, you can continue.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. I was trying to guide myself by the sequence in which the applicant has completed his application form, and it was our intention to deal with the Sterland explosion after this sequence in particular, so if the Chair would allow me.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think just carry on as you have been, the next one you are going to then deal with is a bomb blast at Atteridgeville municipality building?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. Mr Toka, this incident of the Atteridgeville municipality building, can you take the Committee through it? How was this planned, who carried out this blast and who gave orders for that?

MR TOKA: Yes, this attack on the municipality building was planned by my Commander, Mensday Maponya, myself and Johannes Maleka, who carried out the operation, and a limpet mine was given to him. I think it was a super limpet mine and it was given to him in Mamelodi.

It was carried over to Atteridgeville and placed in that building, I think in a dust bin if I can still remember well, in that building. It went off I think after an hour, an hour after everybody has knocked off there.

Approval as well was, in this case, we sought the approval from Botswana.

CHAIRPERSON: Was anyone injured that you know of?

MR TOKA: No, there were no injuries.

MR MOHLABA: So the building, the municipality building was identified as a legitimate target for the purpose of enhancing the objectives of your political organisation, is that correct?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR MOHLABA: With the permission of the Chair, I would want to move then to the next incident.

CHAIRPERSON: You don't have to get my permission Mr Mohlaba, you can proceed without it.

MR MOHLABA: As it pleases the Chair. Mr Toka, take us through the grenade attack at Mveke's place, if that is not a duplication of what you have already explained about the, or rather the grenade attack at Mveke's place, is that the place where the child was killed?

MR TOKA: No, it is a different place. Mveke, the owner of that house was a police officer and he was amongst those policemen that were targeted as our targets.

That is why his place was attacked. During the attack, no one was killed or injured and I think it only caused some damage to the house and in this case, this attack was carried by Reginald Legodi, James Kgase and Reuben Khotsa. They did it through the ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry is James Kgase and Alfred Kgase the same person?

MR TOKA: Yes Your Worship.

CHAIRPERSON: You say it was carried out by Reginald Legodi, James Kgase and Reuben Khotsa. I wouldn't specifically say who threw the grenade.

I am no longer certain of that Your Worship.

MR MOHLABA: Was this attack carried out pursuant to orders which were given to them by somebody or yourself?

MR TOKA: Yes, at that time I was the Commander. I mainly carried out the orders given by the command structure in Botswana.

ADV DE JAGER: Could you assist me, the spelling of the victim's name, is it Myeke?

MR TOKA: It is Mveke.

ADV DE JAGER: Was that in Block O in Mamelodi East?

MR TOKA: No, I think it is in Mamelodi West, I am not sure if it is after, I know the place where it is, but I cannot certainly say whether it is East or West.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, you don't know whether it was carried out on the 4th of June 1988?

MR TOKA: I think the charge sheet will help me on that, because I can't remember the dates now.

CHAIRPERSON: You see the charge sheet says that on the 4th of June a Russian F1 defensive hand grenade was thrown into the house of one Simon Myeke of Block O, 8414, Mamelodi East.

MR TOKA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: So the charge sheet is wrong with Myeke?

MR TOKA: Yes, I suppose.

CHAIRPERSON: It is Mveke, it should be a "v" and not a "y"?

MR TOKA: I think according to my knowledge it is Mveke, but I don't know, I have never met him before.

CHAIRPERSON: So it might be Myeke?

MR TOKA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Myeke is the more common name, isn't it, certainly from whereabout I come.

MR TOKA: I am not clear on that Your Worship.

ADV DE JAGER: According to the charge sheet, he and his family were in the house at the time, but nobody was injured?

MR TOKA: All I know is that nobody was injured, Your Worship, I don't know whether he was in the house or not. I only know that nobody was injured in the attack.

MR MOHLABA: You have mentioned that this attack was sanctioned by ANC in Botswana. You were also given orders to pass them down to the operatives?

MR TOKA: Yes, on the ground, yes.

MR MOHLABA: Can you mention who gave you those orders?

MR TOKA: The orders from Botswana at that time were either given by Mr Joe Karre.

MR MOHLABA: Sorry to interrupt, I am not referring to the orders from Botswana, the person who communicated those orders to you, because the way I understood you is that you did not get it from Botswana personally, there was somebody in the middle, is that not so?

MR TOKA: Can you come again?

CHAIRPERSON: I think Mr Mohlaba, he said that either himself or his Commissar would personally go to Botswana and get the authority from Botswana, but he can't remember in which incidents he or the Commissar went.

MR TOKA: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair. So you are however certain that these met the sanctions of Botswana, is that correct?

MR TOKA: Yes, our headquarters in Botswana yes.

ADV DE JAGER: And the Commander in Botswana at that time, you said Joe?

MR TOKA: The Commander in Botswana at that time, it was one Joe Cheo...

CHAIRPERSON: Is this a battle name, (indistinct) type name?

MR TOKA: Yes.

MR MOHLABA: So you mentioned that the orders as they came from you to the operators, were given to the names you have mentioned. You are not certain who actually threw the grenade, is that correct?

MR TOKA: Yes, I think I knew at that time, but now, since it is a long time, I have forgotten that.

MR MOHLABA: May we now move over to, you talk of a grenade attack, that is in your application form, a grenade attack at a house in Mamelodi East (Ndala's house).

Can you take us through that incident?

MR TOKA: Yes, what happened is that in our intelligence, we received intelligence that Ndala was a police agent at that time, and that being an informer, an attack on him would enhance our revolutionary goals because if you look at most of the incidents on how our people got arrested, it was through these informers, whatsoever.

It was one of our objectives as operatives, to see to it that informers were attacked, as they were part of the system as we used to call it in the past.

The attack was planned by myself, my Commissar and the Unit that was involved, it was the same Unit that was involved in Mveke's house. We discussed it, we sought the permission for that house to be attacked and the permission was given to us. We passed it over to the Unit members, and they carried out that attack.

As I remember well, even in that attack, no one was injured. It is that the grenade actually did not even went into the house, it just blew up outside the house and no one was injured.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes according to the charge sheet, Mr Toka, I refer to page 85, paragraph (vii), it says that a hand grenade was thrown at the house of Mr Ndala in Mamelodi East and that his house, as well as a Toyota kombi was damaged.

MR TOKA: Exactly Your Worship.

ADV DE JAGER: This Unit, what was the name of the Unit or how did it become known, was it also known as the Maponya Unit?

MR TOKA: Actually all this structure was known as the Moses Mabida structure.

MR MOHLABA: May we now move over Mr Toka, to the grenade attack which you say, it looks like Ronald Molauzi.

MR TOKA: Molauzi, yes. That attack was carried out on Ronald Molauzi's property because Molauzi was amongst those policemen that we have targeted and he was known to be very notorious because at that time I think he was working in Mamelodi West at the police station there, and we felt that we have to carry this attack on him, and the same Unit that attacked the two houses, Mveke and Ndala's house, were given the orders to attack the Ronald Molauzi's house, and again in this operation, no one was injured or killed.

CHAIRPERSON: Was it the same Unit who carried out the attack as Mveke and Ndala attacks?

MR TOKA: Correctly Your Worship.

MR MOHLABA: And can you explain what happened, was a grenade thrown into his house, or can you explain the nature of the attack which was carried out here?

MR TOKA: I think the way the structure of that house was, it fell in between, there was a passage and it fell in be tween the two houses, there was like what people would normally term a (indistinct) house and the main house, and it fell somewhere there.

That is why it did not injure anybody.

CHAIRPERSON: These, if one just takes a look at all this evidence, these attacks on houses with grenades, were absolutely useless? I mean you killed a one year old baby, when I say you, the Unit. The Unit killed a one year old baby in four attacks, that is all they did? It didn't hit one target?

MR TOKA: You see Your Worship, it depends on how you look at them. Military one would say, yes, they were not good, but politically they made an impact. Because politically people were aware of the presence of an MK Unit in Mamelodi.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I understand that, but the objective of the attack was to remove nominated targets and they got nowhere near that?

MR TOKA: Normally that would be the objective, but you see when you carry out an objective, you have two goals into it.

You have normally what you would call your absolute goal and you will also have what will be a secondary goal. A secondary goal will be a political goal.

CHAIRPERSON: Just a propaganda type, we are here?

MR TOKA: Yes. Some people used to just stand on the road and start shooting an AK into the air, not trying to kill anybody, but just to remind the people that we are here.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I just mentioned that as an aside, they weren't successful, wholly successful operations.

MR TOKA: I think so Your Worship.

MR MOHLABA: Can we now move over Mr Toka to, you have mentioned a bomb blast (Lion Bridge Pretoria). Can you take the Committee through that incident?

MR TOKA: Yes, that is the bomb blast, I initially said that it was carried out as a military propaganda, that is why an isolated spot was chosen in town.

That one was carried by Peter Maluleka and after he dropped me and Mensday at Sterland, and he carried out that attack.

MR MOHLABA: We have already heard Mr Maluleka's evidence with regard thereto. I would like now to move to ...

ADV DE JAGER: Could we, before moving on there, was Lion Bridge targeted as a target by your committee?

MR TOKA: Your Worship, I have said it that there were some attacks that we did not need like for instance sanction from the military structure in Botswana.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, I am happy with that part.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr De Jager, before you proceed, not being a local person, Lion Bridge, is that the same as Van Aswegen? Is Van Aswegen at Lion Bridge?

MR TOKA: yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Lion Bridge, yes. But you have considered it and you have chosen it as a target locally?

MR TOKA: You see, what is happening is that, this is what we used to call reconnaissance on the spot, or reconnaissance by fire, where you go into a situation, you are carrying out a military propaganda structure, you find a place which is isolated, you immediately put that limpet there, then it goes off.

You do not sanction a specific place, you do not say go and bomb that house there, go and bomb what. You say get any isolated area, so long as it is in Pretoria, place it there for our propaganda's sake. That is what normally happens.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, so in this instance, Van Aswegen and Lion Bridge was not targeted beforehand, before you went down?

MR TOKA: No, it was just a thing that happened on the spot, it was not targeted, yes.

ADV DE JAGER: And you say you accompanied Mr Maponya?

MR TOKA: To Sterland, yes.

ADV DE JAGER: To Sterland?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

ADV DE JAGER: So you were present when the incident occurred?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR MOHLABA: May you Mr Toka, take us through the incident at Sterland where Mr Maponya died?

MR TOKA: Like I said in Sterland, like generally on that night, we said that we were simply on a mission of conducting reconnaissance on the spot mission.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, to interrupt Mr Toka, was this a Saturday night, or Friday night?

MR TOKA: It was a Friday night, Your Worship. That is why we went to place that bomb at Sterland and then in the process of that bomb being placed, Mr Maponya was killed there.

Normally, as I said before, we were generally on a mission to make the people aware, especially because Pretoria, at that time, was considered as the belly of the apartheid regime, we thought it was appropriate to have our propaganda carried out right in Pretoria, so that those who are in the hierarchy of apartheid, should know that we can also hit them where they don't expect us to hit them.

In the process, Mensday Maponya was killed in that attack.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you in his company?

MR TOKA: I was in his company.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you get injured?

MR TOKA: I did not get injured.

CHAIRPERSON: Did it go off while you were on your way to the target, because you said earlier you were about 150 meters from the complex?

MR TOKA: No, it didn't go on while we were on our way to the target, because where it went off, that is where we had decided to put it.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh.

ADV SANDI: Sorry Mr Toka, just for my clarity, this bomb, was it in the hands of Mr Maponya when it went off?

MR TOKA: Exactly Your Worship.

ADV SANDI: How far were you away from him?

MR TOKA: I was about five to six, plus minus ten meters from him. You see the problem is that the way that that parking area is, it is amongst some big trees there. There were trunks of trees.

Possibly, because during the process of placing that bomb there, there was like another person that was crossing by the street, and Maponya felt that I should disturb that person, so that he doesn't see what he is doing there, and while I was waiting with that guy, just behind the trunk of a tree, that is when it went off. I am sure that is why me and the guy that I was waiting with at that stage, we never got injured.

ADV SANDI: You have referred to this place as Sterland.

MR TOKA: The Sterland complex.

ADV SANDI: I must apologise, not being too familiar with Pretoria, what sort of place is this?

MR TOKA: It is on the corner of Beatrix and Pretorius Street.

ADV DE JAGER: It is a cinema complex, bioscope and shopping and restaurant and different shops?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR MOHLABA: So the area where this device was to be placed, is an isolated area and it was not intended for ...

MR TOKA: For movie goers, no.

MR MOHLABA: With regard to this very blast, Mr Toka, do you have anything to add?

MR TOKA: Nothing, except that I think there was a car that was damaged there.

MR MOHLABA: Were you ever arrested for these offences that you have mentioned?

MR TOKA: Yes.

MR MOHLABA: And did you stand trial?

MR TOKA: I did not stand trial, the trial was just in its initial stage, when we escaped from Modabi prison.

MR MOHLABA: Is that the reason why you are also applying for amnesty for escaping from lawful custody, is that correct?

MR TOKA: Correctly.

CHAIRPERSON: When did you escape?

MR TOKA: I think it was on the 18th of February 1990.

CHAIRPERSON: 1990?

MR TOKA: 18th of February.

CHAIRPERSON: 1998?

MR TOKA: 1990.

CHAIRPERSON: 1990?

MR TOKA: Yes.

MR MOHLABA: Were you the only person who escaped from lawful custody or did you have other people who escaped with you?

MR TOKA: I had other people who escaped with me, we escaped, the nine of us. It was myself, Francis Pitsi, Johannes Maleka, Ernest Ramadite, George Mathe, Joseph Nkosi, Reginald legodi, Reuben Khotsa and James Kgase and myself.

ADV DE JAGER: Were you assisted in the escape?

MR TOKA: Yes, we were assisted by our underground structures inside the country and the movement outside.

ADV DE JAGER: And the warders?

MR TOKA: No one from the prison authorities helped us to escape.

CHAIRPERSON: Was anybody killed or injured in the escape?

MR TOKA: According to my knowledge, no one was injured or killed in that escape, except, unless if one will call minor bruises, injuries. Because I think during the scuffle with the prison warders, all of them might have suffered minor bruises.

But there was not really a scuffle.

MR MOHLABA: Do you have anything to say to the Committee or the victims in conclusion, in reference to these applications?

MR TOKA: Firstly let me say to this Committee that I am very happy that I have been given the opportunity to come and explain my role in these attacks, and give my motivation and extend a hand of apology to the victims and their loved ones, and all those that have suffered through our attacks.

I think it has been a great moment for me to be here, because I always felt that there is a need in this country, a clear and genuine reconciliation. Given enough time, I think one will have time to sit with the victims and embrace them and that they should know that these attacks on them, were not personally against them specifically.

We did not have a single grudge against them, it was clearly a political thing. That is all I can say.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair, that will conclude the evidence of Mr Toka.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mohlaba. Mr Molefe, do you have any questions to ask the witness?

INTERPRETER: The speaker is too far from the microphone.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Molefe, the Interpreter has indicated that he is not picking you up. There is no microphone? I think we will have to try to make some sort of arrangement here, whereby people can have access to microphones. Thank you Ms Mtanga.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MOLEFE: Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Toka, you explained that this whole structure was what you referred to as the Moses Mabida structure. Can you just elaborate on that.

This structure, were they Units, were the Cells, if so, how many were they and so forth?

MR TOKA: Yes, this structure was known as Moses Mabida, that was in dedication to comrade Moses Mabida who was a member of the Communist Party who have passed away sometime and the structure was named after him, and like I said from the beginning, this structure, our orders were recruit, train, arm and lead our people to battle.

It was true that order, that there had to be Cells, the people operated like Cells. There was first the command structure which consisted of me and Mensday, after Mensday it was me, Liverpool and Webster, that was the command structure.

From there you had a Unit like in Atteridgeville, that carried out the AK raid there, which was a Unit on its own, and we had a Unit that carried out the grenade attacks in Mamelodi, being a Unit on its own.

Having another Unit in Mamelodi that carried out the grenade attack on the house that killed the one year old baby, as a Unit on its own. You had Peter Maluleka, being a one man Unit, so it was all different Cells and different structures.

MR MOLEFE: The way you were operating, did one Unit for instance, let me see, Peter Maluleka's one man Unit, did it necessarily know what the other Units are doing or have done?

MR TOKA: These Units only came to know one another, after our arrest. Before our arrest, one Unit never knew what the other Unit was doing.

They worked as separate Units, it is only us in the command structure, that knew what different Units were doing.

They had never met each other, until during our detention. That is when they met each other and saw that they were all members of one structure.

MR MOLEFE: Thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Have the legal representatives for the victims worked out or determined who is going to cross-examine first or is there any problem?

MR MOKONE: I only have one question.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that Mr Mokone?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MOKONE: That is correct. Mr Toka, I am informed that ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I think before you cross-examine, Mr Toka, Mr Mokone is appearing for the Mope family, is that correct?

MR MOKONE: Mope and Mphahlele.

CHAIRPERSON: Mope and Mphahlele families.

MR TOKA: Okay.

MR MOKONE: I am informed that the applicant who executed this killing of the policemen, were known. The policemen and the applicants knew each other very well. Did you satisfy yourself that there was no any other motive for the killing, except a political motive?

MR TOKA: I did satisfy myself that there was no other motive except a political motive.

MR MOKONE: How did you do that?

MR TOKA: You see, normally it is like I said, when a Unit comes with a target, we look at that target, it goes through that stage of analysing the target, of assessing it, and of looking into the motivation why that target should be attacked.

Upon that, that is when we give our approval for that target to be, after we have contacted our leaders from outside, it is then that we give out an approval for the target. We would never at any stage, allow any member of our Unit to attack a target based on personal grudges or any other thing, except a target that will have, that will enhance our political struggle.

MR MOKONE: Are you very sure?

ADV DE JAGER: Just, before you leave, the persons who were targeted to kill these two policemen, were they the same people who brought the information to you that these two, should be considered as possible targets?

MR TOKA: I will say yes, and I will say it is because, you see, if you are a Commander, you are not directly involved in a situation.

You don't know who is notorious in this area, and who is notorious in that area. It depends on the people on the ground to say you know, there is a problem with the community here, that this policeman and this policeman are considered notorious, what do we do with them?

It is then that we look at it, and we start discussing it as a team, then you make recommendations and you wait for approval from outside.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, but if I've got a grudge against Mr X, and I would come to you and say listen Mr X is an informer or a notorious policeman, and my reasons for saying this is I have seen him in the vicinity of the police station or whatever information I could give to you, would you independently investigate whether I am speaking the truth or not?

MR TOKA: Normally in that situation what would happen is that we would have contact with a few activists that are known in that area, who must confirm your story and you see, because if you look into the whole thing of the struggle, you know, if we were not careful of doing that, then a lot of people could have suffered falsely because somebody hates them.

That is why it was necessary that for any target that has been brought in, it is discussed thoroughly to see to it that no political grudges or any maybe religious grudges are involved in this. No personal grudges, yes.

ADV DE JAGER: So if Mr, say for instance Mr Pitsi would give you certain information, you will discuss it and you will ask other activists whether he is speaking the truth, whether he is telling the truth?

MR TOKA: Yes, normally it is proper that you gather some kind of opinion and yes, it will be proper to do that, because I wonder how many people came to me and told me that this one is an informer.

You say if we were operating in that fashion, then we would have a list of 200 houses bombed, because everybody will come and say that man is an informer and some people are not informers.

So you had to do your thorough investigation.

ADV DE JAGER: Now why didn't you corroborate Mr Webster's information?

MR TOKA: No Mr Webster's information, you see, it depends, here it is a Unit of people that has never been trained in intelligence who brings in the information, it is different when that information is brought by somebody who has specifically been trained in that.

Webster was specifically trained in intelligence. I was never, I did MCW, which was our basic intelligence training, but Webster went to a more advanced intelligence training in the Soviet Union.

That is why we all relied on him. You see, we all had our own speciality. This one is specialised in this, this one in this.

ADV DE JAGER: I understand it, I believe you had no reason to doubt Webster's ...

MR TOKA: Intelligence capacity.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes. What happened to Webster?

MR TOKA: Webster, I don't know what happened to him, because were arrested together, then the next thing, we were informed that he was placed under Section 31, which was at that time used for State witnesses.

At a later stage, after - by the time we escaped, we had never seen Webster, so we don't know what happened to Webster up to now, we haven't heard anything about him.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mokone, do you have any further questions?

MR MOKONE: (No audible reply)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Monyane, do you have any questions to ask? Ms Monyane, appears for the victim, Mrs Phenyane, if the pronunciation is correct?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MONYANE: Mr Toka, you mentioned that the foot soldiers will come to you with the name of the specific targets. In this instance, these three policemen, who specifically came to you with the names?

MR TOKA: That will be very difficult, because to say at this stage, because it was a Unit of three people.

MS MONYANE: So it could be the three, those three people came to you with the names?

MR TOKA: Yes.

MS MONYANE: Who are those people, are they the people who carried out the attack?

MR TOKA: Yes, I think I have mentioned the names of the people that carried out the attack, I said it was Francis Pitsi, Ernest Ramadite and George Mathe.

MS MONYANE: Thank you Chair, that is the only question I had.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Dreyer or Mr Joubert, are you going to cross-examine now.

MR JOUBERT: I am ready Mr Chairman. I don't know whether my colleague wants to proceed, I've got no problem.

MR DREYER: As the Court pleases, thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Just for Mr Toka's knowledge, is it correct you are appearing for Ms Prinsloo, Mrs Ferreira and Mrs Claasen?

MR DREYER: That is correct Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: The victims in the Juicy Lucy bombing?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DREYER: That is correct Mr Chairman. Mr Toka, I am quite sure that you appreciate the gravity and the importance of this proceedings?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR DREYER: May I enquire whether you have been indemnified, applied or have been indemnified, in respect of any one of these acts that you described before the Committee?

MR TOKA: If I was not indemnified for any of these acts, I don't think I would still be in exile by now, because that was the only way you could be repatriated into the country. You had to be indemnified first, so I was indemnified for all of them.

MR DREYER: So you were indemnified for all of them?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR DREYER: Now once again, I suppose you appreciate that if you have been indemnified in respect of any one of these particular instances, you are then indemnified in respect of criminal and civil claims against yourself in respect of those incidents?

MR TOKA: You see, what normally an applicant does, he only applies for indemnity concerning the acts that he has committed and those people who indemnify him, whether criminal or civil liabilities, I don't know about that. I just know that my indemnity has been approved.

MR DREYER: The purpose of my question is simply this, if you have been indemnified in respect of any one or all these acts, criminally and civilly, what is the real purpose of your application for amnesty?

MR TOKA: I think the purpose of the application for amnesty was that we were advised by our organisation, that whether at one stage you were sentenced to prison for a certain act that was committed, you still have to appear before the Truth and Reconciliation Commission because you see, at the end of the day, there were victims in these attacks and it will be proper for those victims to know exactly what happened and why they were caught in the attacks.

That is why I applied for the TRC amnesty.

ADV SANDI: I am sorry Mr Dreyer, perhaps whilst you are there, sorry Mr Toka, this question you are asking, yesterday I had occasion to look at, it would seem that in terms of Section 48(3) of the Act, even if one was previously granted immunity or indemnity, he would still have to apply for amnesty?

MR DREYER: Mr Chairman, I merely requested the applicant to give us his viewpoint of the purpose of his application. I would direct legal argument if necessary, at the end of the proceedings in that regard, as the Court pleases.

Mr Toka, would you agree with me that the whole issue of disclosing as fully as possible, relevant facts, stand very central to the proceedings before this Committee in so far as even the legislative considered it and deemed it necessary to refer to that twice in the Act. First of all in Section 31(b) of the Act which spells out the objectives of the Commission, and states that it shall be to promote national unity and reconciliation in a spirit of understanding which transcends the conflicts and divisions of the past by and then specifically stating facilitating the granting of amnesty to persons who make full disclosure of all the relevant facts relating to the acts associated with a political objective and comply with the requirements of the Act.

And then once again, that is reiterated in Section 20(1)(c) of the Act, which says that if the Committee after considering an application for amnesty is satisfied that (a) application complies with the requirements of this Act, (b) the act, omission or offense to which the application relates, is an act associated with a political objective, committed in the course of the conflicts of the past, in accordance with the provision of subsections (2) and (3) and then (c) once again, the applicant has made a full disclosure of all relevant facts.

On that basis, would you agree with me, that the principle and the requirement of making a full disclosure, is important in these proceedings?

MR TOKA: Yes, that is important and I am also wondering if you are doubting my disclosure that I have done, because I think what I have done here, is a full disclosure as pertaining to what those two Acts are saying there.

MR DREYER: Yes, now in regard to what I have just said and with specific reference to your written application, as it transpires from pages 9 and onwards of the papers that I have been furnished with, would you consider the information contained in that, to be full disclosure of the relevant facts pertaining to these particular incidents?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Dreyer, is there any point to that, because obviously and why I raise it, it happens in just about every single application we deal with, for instance if one takes a look at page 11, bomb blast, Proes Street. We don't expect and it doesn't happen ever, that you are going to get in the application form, that on such and such a date, I together with so and so, and so and so, got into a motor car, went to Proes Street, put it under a Renault car. Is that, are you suggesting that because they haven't got that, it is not full disclosure?

MR DREYER: Mr Chairman, I am merely putting the question, because it is part of my instruction that one of the two bases upon which the application for amnesty is being opposed by the particular victims that I represent, is specifically the point, as I have pointed out at the outset, that there was not full disclosure of the relevant facts.

I will not take ...

CHAIRPERSON: If we take a look at it now, with the evidence of the applicant, we don't just confine it to here and say well look, his application form only made reference to an incident, therefore despite, forget what he said here, we are not going to give him amnesty.

We have dealt with amnesty applications where applicants have literally been involved in three, four, five hundred incidents, and it is just impossible to put the full detail. You would have volumes and volumes on the application form. Anyway, you may proceed.

MR DREYER: I take note Mr Chairman, I will not proceed on that line. I merely put it on record as I said, in view of my instructions.

Mr Toka, if I take cognisance of your evidence, it is quite clear that you received extensive training outside of South Africa, in Botswana and so forth in respect of the activities as a member of MK and an operative and a Commander, is that correct?

MR TOKA: You see, in this case, I wouldn't understand what you really mean by extensive. What would it mean, what would it involve, because I simply said the training I received, I only went for a general Commander's course, which took about six months.

From there, I went for a drilling course in Engineering, which took about three months, and I think if you look into for instance the regular army, they go into training of two years. So will you consider my training an effective, quite an extensive training, that is where I don't get it really.

MR DREYER: Mr Toka, I am not suggesting that I consider your training to be extensive, I said that if I referred to your evidence, it is clear that you have been trained over a period of time, it is not as though you had been sent on a crash course over a weekend, because obviously you served as a Commander and a Commissar, so you must have been better trained than the normal foot soldier, or don't you agree with me?

MR TOKA: Yes, in that way I would agree with you.

CHAIRPERSON: Just on that, sorry Mr Dreyer, you said when you gave evidence, that when you went for training, your first course, the six months course, was a Commander's course?

MR TOKA: A general Commander's course.

CHAIRPERSON: Why were you selected for a Commander's course and not other people for instance?

MR TOKA: No, I was not specifically selected for a Commander's course. You see, generally all members of Umkhonto weSizwe, the first six months in the camp, they will undergo what we call the general Commander's course.

Because we believed that every member of Umkhonto weSizwe at the end of the day, is a Commander. The idea was based on the fact that if you look at the past armies like for example the British Army, where you find you have one Commander, immediately an attack is carried out and the Commander is killed, then the army goes into disarray and that was why it was decided that all members of Umkhonto weSizwe should be trained as Commanders.

That is why we had the general Commander's course so that if the Commander dies in battle, the next person next to him, takes over. That is exactly what I mean.

MR DREYER: Mr Toka, even if we accept the fact that everyone as you put it, is trained in this particular way, fashion, the point is that eventually you served in a commanding capacity, in a decision making capacity as a Commander and a Commissar, isn't that so?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR DREYER: Yes, and then obviously you were not on the level same as that of a normal foot soldier or operative?

MR TOKA: That is obvious, because I was the Commander.

MR DREYER: Yes.

MR TOKA: I wouldn't be on the same level with my foot soldiers.

MR DREYER: Yes. For the next couple of questions, I would like to direct them with reference to the August 1996 statement to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of the African National Congress of which I have been furnished a copy of.

With reference thereto and more particularly page 9 thereof, it is indicated that at the CABO conference of 1985 which is prior to this particular incident which you refer to as the Juicy Lucy bombing, there was a consensus reached on the approach to military action, and it was reaffirmed that the ANC policy was clearly directed towards legitimate targets.

Then on page 9 thereof, it is indicated that during mid-1980 certain attacks on targets occurred with no apparent connection to the apartheid State. Once again, because of that occurring, the ANC took action to assert policy with regard to avoidance of civilian targets, which could have been confused with the need to intensify the struggle.

Do you take note of that, are you aware of that?

MR TOKA: I have, I think I have said in my submission that all orders to carry out attacks, some attacks like the Juicy Lucy, we received our orders from outside, from Botswana and Botswana would normally get an approval from Lusaka.

And that is what you said before you went to the second one, you talked about if it is legitimate, then it is not me to make the target legitimate, but upon approval by Lusaka, then it becomes clear that the target is legitimate.

MR DREYER: Mr Toka, would you agree that on page 8 of the very statement, it is specifically and expressly stated that even after the so-called Sharpville incident, there was a paper or a policy adopted under the heading Adoption of Armed Struggle, and at that stage already Umkhonto weSizwe emphasised the supremacy of politics over narrow military activity, in other words as you have always put it throughout your evidence, that all military actions were in fact carried out in accordance with a political and a prevailing policy, the political policy of the ANC?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR DREYER: Yes. On what I have said prior to before you gave the answer, I wanted to point out that on the 8th of January 1987, there was a public statement clearly on this very issue, by MK to the following effect that the members of the Umkhonto weSizwe, the military wing of the ANC, must continue to distinguish itself from the apartheid death forces by the bravery of its combatants, its dedication to the cause of liberation and peace and its refusal to act against civilians, both black and white.

MR TOKA: Yes.

MR DREYER: Now I want to stress that that was a statement by MK on the 8th of January 1987, the relevance of which is the following and I would like you to comment on that.

According to the own admission of the ANC, during the mid-1985's, certain attacks occurred which I have indicated, with no apparent connection to the apartheid State, as a result of which this statement was made on the 8th of January 1987 and the particular incident that we refer to here, namely the Juicy Lucy bombing, occurred in 1988, do you agree?

MR TOKA: I agree.

MR DREYER: So that was obviously subsequent to the very clear policy statement by MK?

MR TOKA: I think I have said in my submission that when we placed that, when that limpet mine was placed at Juicy Lucy, it was not aimed at the people that were injured there.

There is a military structure just next to Juicy Lucy and according to our intelligence, we were told that soldiers are eating in that place, and that explosive that was placed there, was mainly placed for those soldiers that are there.

Are you going to say if you, for instance, if you put a bomb blast into a restaurant where a lot of soldiers eat in there, are you going to say it was inappropriate because it was a restaurant, or are you going to say it was appropriate because soldiers died there? That is exactly what I am trying to say, the Juicy Lucy attack, it was not against those people that were injured there.

It was mainly against those army personnel that came from that military structure next to Juicy Lucy.

MR DREYER: Mr Toka, I am moving up to that point, if you would just be so kind as to just answer the question that I have raised, and that is simply the fact, nothing more and nothing less, that the so-called Juicy Lucy incident occurred after the very express policy statement by MK that was made, that I referred to.

That is the only question, you agree with that?

CHAIRPERSON: In other words do you agree that May 1988 comes after January 1987?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR DREYER: Thank you Mr Chair. In 1987, MK Commanders according to the ANC statement, were specifically instructed by Oliver Tambo and the National Executive Council of the ANC, to re-assert ANC policy to operational Units as to the avoidance of purely civilian targets, failure to comply with these orders, would be considered as violation of policy and action would be taken against offenders.

That is taken from page 9 of this statement. So once again, I would like you to put that into the clear perspective of what you have just testified.

MR TOKA: What is your question there?

MR DREYER: The question is, if the top structure of the ANC and the MK issues a very clear policy as to civilian targets and the avoidance of civilian deaths in 1987, why would you say that in 1988, that would not apply?

MR TOKA: If the same top structure approves of my attack that I sent for the approval in Botswana and Lusaka to attack that place, what should I say about it, because it is the same top structure that we are talking about, it is the same top structure that you are referring to, that gave us orders to do that.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, but they were dependent on the information you gave them? You told us that either you or the Commander went to Botswana in order to get approval?

You were, either you or your Commander at that stage, informed the Commander in Botswana about the situation here. He had no means to check on what you have told him, he trusted you.

So, if you have given him information that would be wrong, he will make a decision based on that wrong information, isn't that so?

MR TOKA: Yes, but you see normally what will happen is that the Commander as well, as a responsible Commander, would like to know the location of that area, where is the area located? What type of an area is that before he can sanction such an order, before he can give you an approval of such an order.

He will have to know exactly where it is, is it right in town, why do you have to do that, what have you seen in that area, these are the questions that he will ask before he gives the approval.

From there with the information that you have given him, he will also get approval from higher up. Then, you know it is a line of command, it moves from up until to the last man on the ground. That is exactly what happens.

ADV DE JAGER: Unfortunately all the information are based on hearsay, you depend on what Webster told you, and you are conveying that to him, because you believe Webster, and if Webster had given you the wrong information, the unfortunate result would be that the wrong information would end up with the Commander over there.

MR TOKA: You see, it is not just a matter of one giving another wrong information. It is a matter of assessing exactly what political benefit will that target give us.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, no but I think what Mr De Jager is saying is let's say just for example Webster came to you and said look, Juicy Lucy is a target because that is where the soldiers who work in the nearby building, they come for lunch there, and at lunch time there is soldiers there. But let's say that was wrong, they don't go to Juicy Lucy, they go to Wimpy instead, and also just ordinary civilians go to Juicy Lucy, so you then pass that info on to Botswana, who pass it on to Lusaka and it is the wrong information, then Lusaka will give the approval saying well, look soldiers are there, it is a legitimate target, etc, etc, we approve it.

But, they are making the approval on wrong information, I think that is what Mr De Jager is trying to convey to you.

Everything depended on that initial intelligence?

MR TOKA: I will say that Your Worship, but what I said during my submission is that, you see it depends on who comes with the information. In this case the people who came with the Juicy Lucy information, were not intelligence trained people, unlike if it came with Webster, it would be a different thing.

On the Juicy Lucy, it is somebody who is not trained in intelligence who comes with this information, and we also have to go there personally, witness whatever he is talking about, confirm it also with some people. You always have to have second opinions, before you take a decision on that, because at the end of the day, my mother passes at Juicy Lucy, my mother can go into Juicy Lucy and have a drink there, my sister can go there. So you might find that that limpet mine placed there, is not only on a specific person, it might also hurt my own mother, so you have to confirm on the information that comes in.

ADV DE JAGER: Then did you confirm on the Juicy Lucy information?

MR TOKA: That is correct Your Worship.

ADV DE JAGER: You went there yourself and confirmed it?

MR TOKA: And saw that place yes, and saw the military installation they were talking about.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry Mr Dreyer, this Juicy Lucy, is it - you walk through a door and it is between four walls, or is it one of these ones that have got a type of a - where the people sit outside, next to where people are walking in the shopping centre, or is it enclosed?

Mr Toka, the Juicy Lucy, that particular Juicy Lucy, is it enclosed, self-contained type of restaurant or is it in the open mall, in a shopping centre like some of them are?

MR TOKA: It is not right in the mall as I can say.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you go through a door to get into it, and it's got its own walls?

MR TOKA: Yes, I think it has doors to get into, because it is just along the street.

MR DREYER: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Toka, I would respectfully in respect of the last question that I put to you and your answer to that, challenge you to point out to me where in either the August 1996 or the May 1997 supplement the statement of the ANC, there was a reversal or an amendment of the 1987 policy declaration on behalf of MK and the ANC, as to the avoidance of civilian targets and I would respectfully request you to point out to me, if so, where in this statement by the ANC to the TRC, was that stated, because obviously if there was a change of general policy in this regard, I would expect that to be contained in the statement, would you?

MR TOKA: You see, what I can say is that soldiers are not only contained in the barracks or police in the police stations, they go into shops as well. And like for instance, in Pointem Building next to Church Street, I think the larger community, it is an army community that lives there.

Are you going to say that because I put a limpet mine in a restaurant where soldiers come in to buy, will you say I hit a civilian target? You see, it depends on how you see it from your eyes. I see it from the eyes of a military man, that target was mainly for people who were eating there, and those were soldiers.

MR DREYER: All right, Mr Toka, we will get back to the Juicy Lucy bombing, as you refer to it, and I would like to reiterate as you refer to it, because I intend to come around to that very particular point, in contrary to your evidence.

Let me just in furtherance of this point state the following. It is also stated on page 8 of the August statement, that it is part of the political schooling of each and every MK combatant, that there is an insistence that the enemy should not be defined simply in racial terms and that is clearly manifested by the simple fact that the ANC became a signatory to the Geneva Convention on the conduct of war in 1997.

I still haven't received an answer. Do you maintain or do you infer that from 1987 specifically, towards 1988, there was a change in the express policy of the top structure of the ANC in regard to civilian targets? Forget the Juicy Lucy bombing for the moment, I just want to know whether you maintain that there was any kind of a change in the official top structure policy of the ANC in that regard?

MR TOKA: I think I can not answer that on the basis that it is true that the ANC never identified its enemy by race like you have just quoted there, on racial grounds, whatsoever.

Like I just said in my submission, if you put a target on an army truck, if you put something on an army truck, you don't know whether it is black soldiers or white soldiers that will die. At the end of the day, it is the enemy at that stage. Like we used to call it, it was the enemy that would be caught in that thing, and it is not based on racial bases.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, Mr Toka, but the essence of the question is, are you aware of any change of the policy or - okay, let's stop there, are you aware of any change of the policy?

MR TOKA: I am not aware of that.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes. So it may be that on the ground, you have interpreted it that because soldiers are eating at a place, that is a sort of target that can be approved by the ANC?

MR TOKA: Not that can be approved, that actually at the end of the day, was approved, that is why it was carried out.

ADV SANDI: Sorry Mr Dreyer, if I can just come in here. Mr Toka, can I just ask a question here. I take it that you are still a member of the ANC, not so?

MR TOKA: I am a police officer, I am supposed to serve the government of the day, and I am supposed to be apolitical, but first before I became a police officer, I think I was a member of the ANC.

ADV SANDI: Yes, but let me ask, was any action taken by the ANC against yourself or anyone of you, for having been involved in this Juicy Lucy operation?

MR TOKA: No, there was no action taken against any one of us.

ADV SANDI: Was there any kind of warning given against yourself or one of your colleagues by the ANC for this Juicy Lucy operation?

MR TOKA: Yes, what the ANC would normally, it would normally caution you after maybe having missed the particular target. It will normally caution you to conduct proper intelligence, that is what it will do.

In that case it will be, let me say, a warning that such attacks of that nature, should be avoided in all costs.

ADV SANDI: Yes, but concerning this particular operation, did you get any warning that this was a wrong operation, and that in future you should not carry on a similar operation? Did you get such a warning from the ANC?

MR TOKA: You see, I cannot answer that in the positive, because you see, as a soldier, you get a warning once, or twice or thrice you know. You cannot remember exactly where you were warned.

CHAIRPERSON: Did the - do you remember whether or not your movement, the ANC or MK, or any structure within there, reacted at all to you or anybody else in your Unit or group about the Juicy Lucy operation? Can you remember, did they do that?

MR TOKA: I cannot remember that Your Worship.

ADV SANDI: Would one be correct to infer perhaps from what you have said, that if this operation was not in accordance with the policy of your organisation, you would have received some kind of caution from the ANC?

MR TOKA: I cannot say that, because I don't think that at, you see, I am not clear at this stage whether anything was said or not. You see, that is the problem. I have a problem in answering that question appropriately.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Dreyer?

MR DREYER: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Toka, can I please request you to detach yourself for the moment, from the so-called Juicy Lucy bombing, because the whole purpose of my questions that I have directed to you and still intend directing to you at this particular point, simply revolves around the prevailing policy.

I am not referring to the Juicy Lucy bombing, so please do not confuse yourself in answering my questions with that issue. I would merely like to ascertain what the exact policy according to you, as a Commissar and a Commander was, in the point in time, 1988. Do you understand what I am saying?

MR TOKA: Yes, I think I am getting exactly what you are saying.

ADV DE JAGER: He answered and said that there was no change in the policy as far as he is aware. I think we could accept that the policy was as stated in the document you have read to him, unless he wants to add something to it.

MR DREYER: Thank you Mr Chairman. And would you have considered, you had all relevant times, and more particularly during 1988, to be well acquainted with such policy of the ANC as a person in a commanding position?

MR TOKA: You see, let me come out clearly like this. You see, here we have a problem that the type of evidence one is adducing, is based on documents that are trying to separate the incident at Juicy Lucy, and make it a separate incident.

You see, if you quote documents, you are simply separating the two and I think Juicy Lucy and those documents should not be separated, because I am still holding to it that what was targeted in Juicy Lucy, was military personnel.

If you are pushing me to a change of policy, you are simply saying it was not military personnel that was targeted. That is why I am saying I have a problem with your kind of cross-examination, in that it wants to separate the two incidents, and these incidents cannot be separated because they carry one political motive.

Whether the ANC said in CABO conference or in (indistinct) conference, it will still lead us to the same answer. What was targeted in Juicy Lucy, was the military personnel and not those people who were injured.

If you are going to quote all the documents that the ANC have written since it started in 1912, we will have a problem that at the end of the day ...

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Toka, the problem is again, we are confusing facts now. Let's stay at the policy stage, the policy was that you shouldn't target civilian targets.

Now, turning that into practice, we could investigate whether that was a civilian target or a military target. I think you are ad idem that that was the policy. Now, I don't know whether the Advocate would enquire, I presume he would, and he would put facts to you to say but this wasn't a military target, or and you will bring facts and say it was a military target, so that is a dispute at this stage.

MR TOKA: Thank you Your Worship.

MR DREYER: Thank you Mr Chairman, that is indeed the whole purpose of the cross-examination.

Mr Toka, at some stage you endeavoured to justify the difference in targets like Sterland and the Juicy Lucy bombing as you referred to it, and so forth, from other types of attacks or incidents on the basis that there was a specific order that the struggle was to be taken to the white areas, or the so-called suburbs as you have pointed out, is that correct?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR DREYER: Now if the struggle was to be taken there, I suppose it was still to be done within the guidelines and the pillars of the ANC policy?

MR TOKA: Exactly.

MR DREYER: Right, now could I then on that particular point quote from this statement once again, what the policy was.

On page 52 it is stated as follows: by the end of 1985 an official ANC pamphlet, titled Take the Struggle to the White Areas, was distributed inside the country. Targets were identified as and I would like you to ...

ADV DE JAGER: 1995?

MR DREYER: 1985 Mr Chairman. Targets were identified as and I would like you to take cognisance of this, the racist army, police death squads, agents and stooges in our midst and the call to take the war to the white areas, is defined as follows, this is official policy and there is quite a few of which the most relevant one that I would like to point out to you, reads as follows: systematic attack against the army and police and the so-called area defence units in white areas.

What I would like to put to you Mr Toka, is even if there was official order or policy declared by the ANC that the war or the struggle should be taken to white areas, it was clearly as I understand the statement, not directed at civilian targets in white areas, but still military associated or policy associated targets within white areas, do you agree with me?

MR TOKA: I agree with you, that is why I said in my submission that the Juicy Lucy attack was mainly based on the fact that there was a military installation there, with army people having their lunch at Juicy Lucy, or the food at Juicy Lucy. That is what I said, and that bring us back to a document to say that it should be related to army personnel, police personnel, whatever yes.

MR DREYER: Right Mr Toka, now I would like to put the following factual bases to you in opposition to your inference that Juicy Lucy as you call it, was a military type of venue in the sense that it was frequently frequented or patronised by people that were either working at the Defence Force building that you referred to or police officers or whatever.

First of all, do you agree with me that the Juicy Lucy chain of stores, could loosely be referred to as a sort of health shop in the sense of that they serve healthy type of foods as opposed to your normal street cafe, that is their sort of image? They serve health type foods, do you agree with that, fruit juices and very healthy type of meals?