The Scorecard Review of the Madlanga Commission turns its lens of scrutiny on the National Prosecuting Authority’s (NPA) quiet but stealthy hand in muddy matters, as evidenced in testimony presented before the Madlanga Commission and the Nkabinde Enquiry.
The question to be posed to the commission as it wraps up its evidence schedule is: Has it sufficiently probed the explosive evidence exposed by the courageous Drushantha Ramsamy, detailing the rot within the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC) and the NPA?
Ramsamy’s evidence may well have been the tip of the iceberg, as it laid bare interference by high-ranking politicians, such as Minister Senzo Mchunu, as well as Benjani Chauke, his friend Paul O’Sullivan, Feroz Khan and their cronies, hell-bent on abusing the “corruption-busting” mandate of IDAC and the NPA for nefarious purposes.
In fact, startling revelations at the Nkabinde Enquiry into the fitness of Director of Public Prosecutions Andrew Chauke to hold office revealed that the rot within IDAC is neither unique nor new to the NPA’s playbook.
It will be interesting to see whether the commission can guard against the perception of selective scapegoating and test the veracity of the evidence at its disposal against former prosecutions boss Shamila Batohi’s version, especially since the NPA falls within the commission’s scope.
The NPA’s constitutional mandate under section 179(4) requires the prosecuting authority to act without fear, favour or prejudice, precisely because the NPA is the prosecutorial guardian representing the constitutional state and all its people, rather than only specific political factions, preferred private networks and individuals it favours.
If citizens have no confidence in the integrity and objectivity of their guardians, marginalised citizens who are not close to political power become particularly vulnerable to state abuse. As the commission continues its truth-finding mission, it must probe just how deeply the NPA has been infiltrated by criminality.
What the commission got right and wrong
The commission must be commended for the transparent and direct manner in which evidence was presented concerning IDAC’s now-infamous “investigation” into Fadiel Adams’ section 27 referral and Minister Mchunu’s role in this process.
Lest we forget, the nefarious section 27 referral stratagem was set in motion as “an orchestrated attack” on National Commissioner Fanie Masemola, Lieutenant General Khumalo and Brigadier Mokwele to pave the way for the alleged promotion of Johnson’s cohorts.
Ramsamy testified that “IDAC investigators were directed to search for links between Cat Matlala and Gen. Masemola’s daughter” despite prosecutors finding no prima facie evidence linking the family to Matlala. Her evidence was further that “Masemola had become the target and that the rules would be broken to catch him by any means necessary”, as previously reported by IOL.
The startling revelations of weaponisation and abuse of state authority and resources by IDAC should not be dealt with in isolation. The NPA must be investigated in its entirety, as has been done with the SAPS.
The uncomfortable question that follows is therefore: Is the weaponisation and abuse within the NPA and IDAC structural or incidental? And why is there a deafening silence about Batohi’s role in all of this as the head of the NPA, to which IDAC reports?
More pertinently, it must be asked whether this type of flagrant abuse has been part of the NPA’s playbook all along.
Had it not been for the commission’s steadfast investigation and hearings into the now-infamous section 27 referral, the public would not be celebrating Masemola’s return to office.
In addition to her evidence linking Batohi to the shielding of Johnson and the shenanigans at IDAC, Ramsamy raised serious allegations of harassment and abuse suffered by IDAC staff who questioned malfeasance within the directorate.
This was corroborated by the testimony of retired DPCI Colonel Kobus Roelofse and Captain Mark McLean, who testified that they had informed the head of the DPCI, General Lebeya, about evidence at their disposal implicating Johnson in criminality. They alleged that she had unlawfully disclosed information about an active investigation to third parties, General Feroz Khan and journalist Barry Bateman.
These witnesses testified that they feared taking the evidence directly to Batohi because of her close relationship with Johnson. After the alleged crime was reported to Lebeya, Batohi informed Johnson about it rather than holding her accountable for her gross misconduct.
It was evident from their testimony that this matter was quietly suppressed, as neither Johnson nor Batohi was held accountable for their egregious misconduct, signalling the stealthy hand of the NPA in muddy matters.
Then there is Johnson’s infamous “fake it till you make it” instruction to NPA staff. It is worth remembering that when Batohi was confronted with “fake it till you make it”, she promised the public an investigation and concomitant action.
All this shines the spotlight on Batohi, whose own walk of shame is hair-raising. It certainly casts a renewed spotlight on the “Cato Manor hit squad” allegations. It should be especially interesting to the Madlanga Commission, which took sharp umbrage at Johnson’s abuse of an innocent female SAPS warrant officer through malicious prosecution.
Batohi previously defended and secured the withdrawal of criminal cases against Major General Johan Booysen and others. It has also been reported that both Booysen and one of his crew quietly secured hefty, secret “damages” awards from the NPA, while Batohi seemingly manipulated NPA processes to set up DPP Chauke and others to take the fall, as the Nkabinde Enquiry revealed.
Interestingly, the NPA’s internal review that Batohi relied on to absolve the Cato Manor hit squad was finalised in July 2019. A similar internal review to absolve the so-called “SARS rogue unit” of wrongdoing was finalised in February 2020, also involving Batohi, with compensation settlements awarded in both instances. A coincidence?
It is therefore in the Madlanga Commission’s interest to take a closer look at the stark contrast between IDAC’s malicious pursuit of Masemola on the one hand and the NPA’s treatment of Booysen on the other.
Why was Masemola pursued despite internal prosecutorial concerns that there was no prima facie evidence, while charges against Booysen and others were withdrawn by the NPA on the strength of an incomplete internal review process, as presented in evidence at the Nkabinde Enquiry?
This, in itself, underscores the importance of section 179(4) of the Constitution.
The NPA’s playbook is no coincidence. It is tried and tested, dating back to the days of Police Commissioner Jackie Selebi and criminal mastermind Glenn Agliotti, a notorious criminal who died a free man.
This is the pattern of misconduct and abuse that the Madlanga Commission is obligated to probe. But does it have the will and time to do so? Time will tell.
IOL