Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO STATE CAPTURE HELD AT PARKTOWN, JOHANNESBURG 10 03 MAY 2019 DAY 88 20 03 MAY 2019 – DAY 88 HEARING RESUMES CHAIRPERSON : Good morning Ms September, good morning everybody. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : Good morning Chair. CHAIRPERSON : Before we start I just have two matters that I want to deal with. The one is what I said yesterday with regard to Colonel Madhoe. Sections of the media may have misunderstood what I said or I may not have articulated what I wanted to say correctly. So I just want to try again to make sure that I am not misunderstood. 10 1. I am hearing evidence in relation to Law Enforcement Agencies in regard to which there is a suggestion that powers were being abused n regard to the arrest and prosecution of officers wh o were investigating corruption matters and that they were being suspended and there were transfers that appear not to have been motivated by proper reasons but may have been connected with corruption or harassing people who were doing their job. And in regard to Colonel Madhoe I have heard evidence that suggests that he may be guilty of corruption. That he may have been guilty of bribery or attempted bribery. And I have heard that it 20 appears that not much has been done over many years in regard to the a llegations against him relating to bribery. And that includes in terms of internal disciplinary matters within SAPS. So if not much has been done over so many years that would be a matter of grave concern but I am not at this stage or I am not the person at this stage to say whether he should or should not Page 2 of 170 03 MAY 2019 – DAY 88 be there at work. Somebody within SAPS is supposed to look into the matter and take such decisions as are dictated by the law and the policies of SAPS. Whether somebody has already looked into the matt er and came to a decision that nothing should be done I do not know but I would like to know whether anything has been done and if so what it is. Therefore I would like these concerns – this issue to be brought to senior authorities within SAPS because it is important to find out whether they know about the matter and they know whether anything has been done 10 and if nothing has been done why nothing has been done, they can look into the matter. But as a commission we would definitely like to have full information as well because there is a suggestion in the evidence that as part of what was happening during the relevant time is that those officers who were doing their job in terms of investigating corruption cases were being victimised and other people were not being dealt with even when there was a reason for them to be dealt with. So we would like to look into that. So the legal team and the secretary of the commission should communicate with the senior management of SAPS to establish whether particularl y one I think they could go to the 20 National Commissioner because he would be the one that would know who in the hierarchy is supposed to have dealt with the matter and whether he is aware of it and would be able to cause information to be made available as to what has happened. So no judgment has been made as to whether Colonel Madhoe should or should not be at work. I have not heard Colonel Madhoe’s side of the story so the idea was Page 3 of 170 03 MAY 2019 – DAY 88 certainly not that I have made any decision about whether or not he should be there. What is important is to find out whether these allegations are known to SAPS? What they have done about them if anything and even if they have not done anything why they have not done anything? And then the matter can be taken from there. All people will be given hear – a fair hearing by the commission no matter how serious the allegations against them are and their side of the story will be heard and considered properly and fairly and nobody will be presumed to be guilty of anything just b ecause a witness has said he or 10 she did something. Findings will be made at the end of the work of the commission. So everybody will be given a fair hearing no matter what has been said about them or against them. That is the one thing I wanted to say. The second thing I want to say is this. Major General Booysen from the evidence that he has given has indicated that there are a number of court applications that he had to do. He had to bring to court to deal with various matters. In some of them ther e are judgments. I would like the legal team to secure not only the judgments in regard to those matters but I would like the full set of papers in each application so that we can have a full picture of exactly 20 what happened in regard to each matter and h ow people against whom certain allegations were made how they responded in affidavits that were placed before the courts. I would also like to see the findings that were made by those courts in regard to each matter and in this regard I would like the leg al team to prepare for me for later use a list of all findings that have been made by the courts in the various Page 4 of 170 03 MAY 2019 – DAY 88 applications where there is no appeal pending. Maybe they can make them even if there is an appeal pending but a note can be made that in regar d to that one specific ones there is an appeal pending. Mr McBride also gave evidence and indicated that he had to go to court a few times where he brought applications. I would like the same in regard to him. And in regard to him I think I may have alr eady said this when he was giving evidence it is important to obtain documentation that was before the prosecutor who made the decision to prosecute and the information that was before the prosecutor when the charges were 10 withdrawn, the criminal charges we re withdrawn. I want to know all of that. Thank you. ADV PAUL JOSEPH PRETORIUS : Noted Chair. CHAIRPERSON : Thank you. Okay we may proceed. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : Chair I am informed that there are legal representatives at this venue who have not placed themselves on record as yet. With your indulgence … CHAIRPERSON : Yes let them place themselves on record. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : Thank you. CHAIRPERSON : If there are those who wish to do so. 20 ADV YUSUF PEER : Thank you Chairperson. My nam e is Yusuf Peer from the Johannesburg Bar. I appear on behalf of Minister Nathi Mthethwa to observe the current witness’s evidence. I am instructed by Mabuza Attorneys and the lead counsel is Mr [indistinct] who is not present here but is part of the tea m. Thank you Chairperson. CHAIRPERSON : Okay let us proceed. Page 5 of 170 03 MAY 2019 – DAY 88 ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : Chair to address – to firstly address some of the queries that you raised yesterday for attention. CHAIRPERSON : Yes. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : Would you grant me the indulgence to deal with those now? CHAIRPERSON : Yes let us deal with them now. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : Okay. Just one administrative or housekeeping issue. All the exhibits that were handed up yesterday which starts at Exhibit Z[H], [I], [J ], [K], [L] have been consolidated into 10 a blue folder. CHAIRPERSON : Okay. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : There is one additional exhibit that has been added. CHAIRPERSON : Yes. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : And it has been marked Z[M] to follow the sequenc e. CHAIRPERSON : Yes. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : And that particular exhibit is the case that Chair requested yesterday. 20 CHAIRPERSON : Yes. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : In relation to who took the decision. CHAIRPERSON : Is a judgment? ADVOCATE VERUSHK A SEPTEMBER : To withdraw. Yes. CHAIRPERSON : Ja. Page 6 of 170 03 MAY 2019 – DAY 88 ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : Yes Chair. CHAIRPERSON : Okay. Okay so that particular exhibit then will be marked Exhibit Z[M] – M in brackets. Thank you. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : Thank you Chair. C hair if I could just direct you to the relevant paragraphs of that case. CHAIRPERSON : H’m. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : The first paragraph is paragraph 53 which is on page 50, 50. CHAIRPERSON : Yes. 10 ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : And to read into the r ecord 53 reads: “This court is of the view that the ground of opposition premised on the alleged failure to exhaust internal remedies is misplaced. Firstly the facts indicate that it was not Mokgatle and rather Abrahams who took the decision to withdraw t he charges preferred against Jiba.” CHAIRPERSON : Oh that is the one where Major General Booysen was saying three judges made a finding specifically that Mr Abrahams was 20 the one who had made the decision despite the fact that he had deposed to an affidavit saying he was not the one who made the decision. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : Correct Chair. CHAIRPERSON : Thank you. ADVOCATE VERUSHKA SEPTEMBER : The next relevant paragraph it Page 7 of 170 03 MAY 2019 – DAY 88 is at page 52 of the same bundle.