The conviction this morning of former Police Commissioner, Jackie Selebi, on charges of corruption leaves many questions unanswered. Judge Meyer Joffe found that Selebi had received substantial amounts of money from gangster Glen Agliotti and then did favors for Agliotti, including showing him a top secret document which contained substantial sections of the the national intelligence estmate. Joffe also found that Selebi had been a very bad witness who fabricated evidence and lied to the court.
Not that Agliotti was a much better witness, but in as much of his testimony was corroborated by other witnesses, the court found that he had to be believed and not Selebi.
The conviction must place a question mark over the actions of former President Thabo Mbeki, who appointed Selebi, at first took steps aimed at protecting Selebi and claimed that there was no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Selebi even after Mbeki was briefed by the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) about the evidence against the former top cop.
Why was Mbeki so adamant that Selebi should not be arrested? Why did Mbeki ask us to trust him on Selebi and why did he maintain – in the face of overwhelming evidence provided to him – that there was no evidence to suggest that Selebi was a crook? Why did he appoint this guy in the first place? Does it not show- at the very least – a spectacular lack of judgment on the part of our former President?
One should also ask if Selebi would ever have been investigated and prosecuted by the Police and whether he might not have still been our Police Commissioner had it not been for the Scorpions. If the now defunct Scorpions had not taken on the case, the chances are that we would never have known that Selebi was a crook. The conviction of Selebi thus underlines the sheer folly of the decision to abolish the Scorpions.
During Selebi’s trial it emerged that several members of the Police Service tried to assist Selebi to prevent him from ever facing charges of corruption. The prosecutor was arrested and acting crime intelligence boss Mulangi Mphego intervened to secure testimony from Agliotti to weaken the case against Selebi. But it is not entirely clear to what extent the Police tried to protect a now convicted crook from prosecution.
Meanwhile Menzi Simelane has dropped all charges against Mphego relating to the Selebi case. Why was this done? Who is being protected? Can one trust Simelane to have dropped the charges purely for legally sound reasons? The conviction of Selebi suggest that the decision to drop all charges against Mphego was at best dubious.
For the conspiracy theorists, or even for those merely skeptical of the integrity of the Police, questions must now also be posed about the role of Selebi and other members of the police in the investigation into the murder of Brett Kebble. Selebi was called from the scene of the crime and it is alleged that he allowed Kebble’s car to be removed from the crime scene before the police could gather the required forensic evidence. Was Selebi protecting anyone when he allegedly did this?
At Kebble’s funeral then President Mbeki’s side kick and enforcer, Essop Pahad, bizarrely said that “what Brett said to any of us in private should remain private”. It is well-known that Kebble bankrolled the ANC and questions will inevitably be raised about the link between Selebi, Kebble, Mbeki and the financial dealings of the ANC and some of its members. Whether Selebi and others are hiding anything is, of course, unclear.
Lastly, the conviction underlines the fact that the relevant piece of legislation on corruption – passed by the ANC dominated Parliament – is excellent. Where a political will exists to investigate and prosecute corrupt individuals, whether they are politicians, state officials or private businesspeople, the legislation will provide sufficient legal backup to secure convictions. In that sense, the prosecution and conviction of Selebi is remarkable: I suspect in most countries in the world the top cop would never have been investigated and convicted of corruption – no matter how crooked he might have been.
The question does arise though, whether there is sufficient political will on the part of the Zuma administration to ensure that this act will be utilized properly to help stamp out corruption in both the public and the private sector. Given the fact that President Zuma himself only escaped prosecution for corruption through the shenanigans of the NPA, this is sadly far from clear.
Political will is key to fighting corruption. If we see more high profile cases of private and public corruption brought to court, we will know the Zuma administration is serious about stamping out corruption. If we do not, we will know that it is rotten to the core.
This is Selebi guy is one among other people who were pushing for disbanding of the Scorpion. Could this means that he was hiding something? Luckily he was too late. Enjoy the harsh reality of going to jail, Mr Selebi.
A proud day for justice in SA, but a sad day for SA, and a damning indictment on Mbeki’s government and, increasingly, the Zuma government. Unfortunately Rasool off to Washington confirms the trend – no credibility in (this time, once again, ANC) politicians.
Pierre, you just won’t let it rest hey? It must be very troubling to you to find that despite all the accusations to the contrary, from liberals, conservatives, communists, trade unionists, Africanists, trade unionists, trbalists, Zionists, trotskyists, etc, that not a single evidence of wrong doing has ever been brought forth.
The conviction does not place any question marks on Mbeki, to the contrary it exonerates him. The court has accepted the evidence pertaining to the toxic relationship between the Scorpions and the SAPS, evidence which any responsible President would have considered to have ramifications for state security. Pikoli was a mere prosecutor and could never have been able to assess the countries security situation. The best placed person to do so was Mbeki, who, based on this assessment requested two weeks to arrange an enabling processes (which would obviously entail assessing the reaction of the SAPS, evaluating the best person to act as acting head of SAPS, assessing the political ramifications, etc ) and Pikoli refused. In the interests of state security he was suspended.
To claim that Mbeki took steps aimed at protecting Selebi, is without any factual basis whatsoever and should be deemed, at best, a lie. Within less than two months of Pikoli’s suspension Selebi was arrested, how do you explain that? Clearly, Mpshe must have provided sufficient space to enable Mbeki to create an enabling environment (something which Pikoli irresponsibly denied him).
To claim that Mbeki stated that there was no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Selebi is false, and I would appreciate if you gave me a transcript wherein he says so. The best I got was this: (http://www.mg.co.za/article/2006-11-20-mbeki-trust-me-on-selebi), a full year before Pikoli himself felt he had sufficient evidence to arrest Selebi!
@Why was Mbeki so adamant that Selebi should not be arrested?
For security concerns which you self servingly dismiss (Ginwala raised concerns about Pikoli’s disregard of security concerns in support of Mbeki).
@Why did Mbeki ask us to trust him on Selebi.
He said this a full year before Pikoli sought warrants of arrest. He said this before Pikoli had provided him with the majority of the briefings that he is said to have made.
@”and why did he maintain – in the face of overwhelming evidence provided to him – that there was no evidence to suggest that Selebi was a crook?”
Please adduce a link substantiating the above statement f from the former president. We know the sates of Pikoli’s briefings, so it will be easy to assess whether on not at the given time there was any information of that nature.
@Why did he appoint this guy in the first place? Does it not show- at the very least – a spectacular lack of judgment on the part of our former President?
For the same reasons you claim to have initially supported Rasool, or do you have a spectacular lack of judgment as well. In any event nothing turns on this, Selebi was appointed as President of Interpol for Pete’s sake! Are you suggesting that the heads of police of the known world are have a spectacular lack of judgment.
@ It is well-known that Kebble bankrolled the ANC.
Kebble bankrolled the ANCYL, under Mbalula, present deputy minister of police and Zuma ally. The ANCYL turned against Mbeki precisely because he was opposed to the ties with Kebble. In fact Kebble was an ally of Jacob Zuma and tried as much as possible to smear Mbeki.
Well the after effects and follow through will be even more interesting as an indicator of where we currently stand on the slippery slope.
However one cannot excape the feeling that Selebi is no more than a rather dull bone thrown to the howling pack to keep the appearance of legitimacy a little longer. One has noted the slow sideways movement of erstwhile political comrades as they seek to put some distance between themselves and the sacrificial lamb/ram.
Vuyo says:
July 2, 2010 at 15:33 pm
If what you say is accurate, it’s rather disturbing.
The thought of having any arm of our security forces placed under the control of a crook and then the country being powerless to deal with that for two weeks or two days or even one day is very worrisome.
How is it that the security of our entire nation can be entrusted to the worst kind and then the entire state is powerless to deal with the crook for any period of time, be it a month or an hour?
How is it that we can have a President (who is our Commander in Chief) brought to his knees by a shady, corrupt crook?
And in my view it’s good for our wonderful fledgling democracy that both of them are gone forever.
Vuyo, we have been over this before.
(1) If the real reason for the suspension of Pikoli was security, why was this never mentioned by the President or anyone in the Presidency – not even at the Ginwala Inquiry? Either the President lied about the real reasons for the suspension when he suspended him or the allegations that it was all about national security is false. Given the fact that when Pikoli told the President he could get one week before the arrest and the President did not respond to this at all, suggest that one or two weeks was not the issue.
(2) It is not disputed that Adv Pikoli met with the Minister and briefed her on the investigation into the National Commissioner of Police on 13 separate occasions: In March 2006, in August 2006, on 9 November 2006, on 16 November 2006, on 11 March 2007, on 13 March 2007, on 17 March 2007, on 28 March 2007, on 8 May 2007, on 25 June 2007, on 11 September 2007, on 18 September 2007 and on 23 September 2007. Following these meetings he furnished the Minister with two written reports on 19 March 2007 and 19 September 2007. It is also common cause that Adv Pikoli met and briefed the President on the investigation against the National Commissioner of Police on 10 occasions: In March 2006, in August 2006, on 9 or 10 November 2006, on 14 November 2006, on 20 November 2006, on 11 March 2007, on 9 May 2007, on 20 May 2007, on 15 September 2007 and on 16 September 2007. The evidence is that he gave the President written reports on 7 May 2007 and 16 September 2007. But in January 2008 Mbeki told reporters he was told only “a few days ago” about the allegations of wrongdoing against Selebi and “If the national commissioner had done wrong things, I would act on it. Nobody did. Nobody came with information.” This was false. Mbeki also refused to suspend the police commissioner despite all these briefings.
Unsavoury characters favour gun control
Die Burger
Geen geld vir wapens, sê polisie
KAAPSTAD – Geen vergoeding gaan betaal word aan vuurwapeneienaars
wat hul gelisensieerde vuurwapens inhandig nie, het die polisiehoof,
komm. Jackie Selebi, gister gesê.
Selebi het gereageer op ‘n vraag deur die DA-LP mnr Roy Jankielsohn
in die portefieljekomittee oor veiligheid en sekuriteit.
Selebi het gesê daar is tans nie ‘n begroting vir sulke terugbetalings
nie.
“Mense moet hulle wapens wegdoen. ‘n Mens kan nie betaal word as jy
van ‘n euwel ontslae raak nie, en wapens is euwels,” het hy gesê.
Hy het gesê iemand wat byvoorbeeld 500 wapens het en besluit dat
hy geld nodig het om sy huur te betaal, sal dan daardie wapens kom
inhandig net om sy huur te betaal.
Hy het egter gesê die tesourie sal moet sê of die polisie geld het
om vir vuurwapens te betaal of nie. Byna 30 000 gelisensieerde
vuurwapens is in die eerste drie maande van vanjaar ingehandig
– Carien du Plessis
Huge props to the Mail & Guardian for pursuing this story so tirelessly!
HUGE PROPS!
So, Vuyo, why do you not explain why Mbeki dilly-dallied so long over firing the disgraced Commissioner of the SAPS after he had belatedly suspended him?
Mbeki is some manager, huh?
Brett Nortje says:
July 2, 2010 at 19:46 pm
If I’m not mistaken Selebi was never fired. He was suspended until his contract expired. Full time off with full time pay.
Disgracefool!
Surprised he did not run to the CCMA.
Do you think the result would have been different if he had been tried by a jury of his peers like happens in many other countries?
I have never been one for conspiracy theories.
But I cannot help thinking that General Selebi is the victim of a form of RACISM!
White prosecutor.
White counsel.
White judge.
Thanks a lot.
@ Mikhail, you forgot white criminal justice system, lol. @ Vuyo, its ironic that you do exactly what you accuse Pierre of – unfounded accusations. Where in Gods name have you ever come across any link between Kebble and Jacob Zuma – please provide us with such proof? Even the very ‘rumour’ that Kebble funded ANCYL remains that till to date. Its sad how loyalty to a man made you contradict the very good arguement you brought against Prof, who by the way, is out of order with this rumour-mongering and unfounded accusations of his regarding the former President. @De Vos, I know its your blog and you ‘write what you like’ but you tend to take these conspiracy theories of you a little too far sometimes. I mean, I fail to understand how you come to bring Thabo Mbeki and especially the ANC into this! Not anything from the judgement implies as u suggest yet u found it in your head to defame him and the organisation. The organisation which by your own admission, brought about the very watertight coruption legislation. It is the very organisation that is in power in this country where a top cop has been found guilty (which, by your own admission, u wouldnt find common in other countries). What more do you want?
Brett, what do you mean by our blanket statement: “Unsavoury characters favour gun control”?
It does seem pretty fair to say that corruption cannot be convincingly combated in the absence of the political will to do so. Sadly, it seems quite clear that the relevant will does not exist in our country.
Politicians are ideally placed to ensure either (a) that the constitutional furniture geared towards combating corruption works well or (b) that it does not. Thus it can only follow that the extent to which corruption is effectively tackled will turn greatly on the extent to which politicians are motivated to do the right thing.
But as many of us will have gathered, our politicians are obviously inclined to abuse the relevant constitutional machinery and thus it seems likely that the Selebi trial and resultant conviction will prove to be an isolated proceeding.
Notwithstanding the relatively sombre tone of my earlier remarks, I want to congratulate the state on a well-conducted trial and additionally, I think judge Joffe deserves some commendation for a sensible and eminently fair ruling.
Leigh says:
July 3, 2010 at 10:35 am
It sound like you think that our constitutional machinery is seriously wanting.
What should be changed or strengthened?
There is an easy way to deal with corrupt politicians – diss them at the next elections.
How do we deal with the members of the legal profession who accept wayward politicians as clients and advise, guide, encourage, coerce them on how to abuse or short circuit the constitutional machinery?
As Chris says, he was suspended on full pay until his contract expired some 2 years later ..
…. at which point Mbeki renewed his contract ?!?
Why Ricky! Just look at the kind of people who do not want other people to own guns lawfully! Organised crime kingpins! Those who engage in bribery and corruption! Druglords. Incompetent kleptocrats. Travelgate fraudsters. The kind of Minister who would thumb his nose at the Constitution and the rule of law. Rogue cops who would lie to Parliament or laugh off PAJA have no qualms about dispossessing the elderly of their licensed firearms. The Argus is in the news for the wrong reasons. You might want to do some homework about the amount of anti-gun propaganda coming from that media group. Other journalists who now preach the anti-gun line who made trips to the TRC to confess when push came to shove they could not speak the truth to power fearlessly.
People who want to make the criminal workplace safer. In general, the godless, disarming the God-fearing.
The kind of person who would embrace gun control is on average not the kind of person you would want in your home near the wife and kids.
Another nail in Thabo’s coffin. Every time he had to weigh up his buddy against his country’s interests he decided screw the country.
It is worth remembering that the ANC enacted this legislation.
The major reason I oppose the death penalty – there are several, but this is numero uno – is that, sooner or later, the ANC will end up using the death penalty against its opponents.
Socialist regimes are not kind to those who end up on the wrong end of a putsch.
Eh, Jackie? LOLOL!
I fear the Selebi prosecution says nothing about the existence of political will to stamp out corruption. It merely highlights the rift between the Mbeki-Zuma factions. Unlike the Mbeki cronies who are essentially on their own, Zuma loyalists will continue to be protected by the likes of Simelane until an anti-Zuma faction wins the election, when the process will repeat itself.
Hey Maggs,
By constitutional machinery I mean, in this instance, the provisions governing the NPA. And in my view, that machinery is pretty decent the way it is. As you and most reasonable people would accept, a big part of the problem is that the content of relevant provisions is often ignored by significant political players because it’s expedient for them to do so. And given that political will often stems from the electorate, the obvious solution would be to demonstrate dissatisfaction at the elections – although I do get the impression that our country is destined for politically-inspired violence as the political acumen of much of the electorate has been extraordinarily poor.
Speaking quite broadly, there are two sorts of lawyers who represent dubious public figures. On the one hand, we find those who act within ethical confines and on the other we find those who do not. As far as I know, there has been no suggestion to the effect that Jaap Cilliers deliberately misled the court. And if that is in fact the case, then he honoured his brief by exploiting various ethically permissible means in defence of his client. But Jaap’s conduct is quite distinguishable from the behaviour of say Zuma’s legal team inasmuch as Zuma’s attorney and counsel were party to the commission of a crime (given that it is an offence to receive classified material) and they were party to effectively compelling the taking of the unlawful decision to drop the criminal case against Zuma. So as regards the first of the abovementioned sorts of practitioners, there is nothing to deal with as such lawyers simply do their jobs. The second sort of practitioner ought to be disbarred.
Leigh says:
July 3, 2010 at 15:10 pm
Hey Leigh,
I hope your impression that we are headed for politically inspired violence is wrong – let’s hope the minority parties are able to control their supporters and accept that winning elections is about effective strategies and not through fear and intimidation.
You say that Zuma’s legal team were party to the commission of a crime, probably referring to the tapes. There’s two things about that view which is not clear.
Firstly, once they became aware of those tapes or rather once those tapes ended up with them, what action should they have taken?
Next – I may be wrong, but I understood that there was a DVD which was accepted as evidence in favour of Selebi which also was of questionable origin – if that is true what makes Selebi’s legal team “ethical” while Zuma’s team is not?
Maggs, you ninny – when did minority parties’ supporters take over from ANC warlords as threats to the state?
Brett, you have lost all touch with reality. Are you truly unaware of the rampaging DA mobs that have been terrorising communities all the way from Constantia to Waterkloof Ridge?
Maggs, when I related my impression that South Africa is headed towards politically-inspired violence, I did not have over-ardent opposition party proponents in mind. Rather, I based my impression on three linked points: for a start, the ANC’s behaviour is very much in keeping with what we know about one party state conduct inasmuch as laws and constitutional dictates are, as far as the ruling party is concerned, no bars to expediency. Secondly, much of the citizenry is very disgruntled. And yet, many of those people will not hurt the ANC enough at the polls for the ruling party to have to entertain the prospect of a loss – at least outside of the Western Cape. Thirdly, it is hardly inconceivable that hugely dissatisfied crowds could resort to enthusiastic protests that could easily, almost predictably, turn into violence. In sum, a tendency to self-service in politicians coupled with a lack of political insight in much of the electorate in a country in which wealth is distributed exceedingly unequally is context which seems ripe for volatile remonstration that could easily become violent.
I assume we agree that it is an offence to receive classified material. And as to what action should been taken: it seems to follow logically that in the first place, private persons should not try to procure such material and in the second instance, should such material mysteriously find its way into their possession, they ought to hand it over to the appropriate authorities. What they certainly should not do, is use the material to force the taking of an unlawful decision.
I cannot comment on this DVD you spoke of for two reasons: one, this is the first I’ve heard of it and two, with respect, describing the tape as being of questionable origin is not clear enough to place me in a position to comment on whether Selebi’s legal team may have breached any ethical dictates in holding this DVD you speak of.
Leigh says:
July 4, 2010 at 6:42 am
Ok – I misunderstood what you meant by politically inspired violence.
I have no doubt that the kind of unrest and revolt that we have seen in places like Balfour will continue, possibly escalate.
I suspect that the ANC is not likely to retain it’s strength at local government levels.
There are several local areas where I think the ANC does not deserve to lead where its performance has been shockingly bad.
It’s so bad in some areas that our President recently was “shocked to tears” to find that people lives in such conditions.
Imagine that, eh, our President did not expect to find that awful these conditions exist.
Selebi went down because he was politically expendable.
Zuma is our president despite a vast amount of evidence against him which lies untested.
Mbeki won’t be charged for the same reason Zuma got off. Too many big hands in the same pies. Selebi made the mistake of being corrupt too far from home and could therefore be cut off as the ANC displays “a commitment to eradicating corruption”. What utter rubbish.
If the ANC is ever voted out of power expect lengthy court battles as the entire leadership is hauled in for corruption. Maybe that’s why the ANC never handed in its weapons caches?
The whole thing stinks.
From a 12 February 2008 Legalbrief report:
Ten meetings with prosecuting boss Vusi Pikoli – as well as a ‘top secret’ letter – did nothing to convince President Thabo Mbeki there was a corruption case against National Police Commissioner Jackie Selebi.
In an affidavit, acting prosecuting head Mokotedi Mpshe has also revealed that Pikoli informed six top government officials, including Justice Minister Brigitte Mabandla, Safety and Security Minister Charles Nqakula and Defence Minister Mosuioa Lekota, of the ‘serious’ graft claims against Selebi. Mpshe’s statements that there was ‘constant communication’ between Pikoli, Mbeki and Mabandla about the Selebi investigation could cast serious doubts on Mbeki’s claims that he was ignorant of any alleged wrongdoing by Selebi, says a Cape Times report. Earlier this year, Mbeki said: ‘I have said this before, many times, that if there was anybody with information that shows National Commissioner Selebi has done wrong things, I would act on it.’ Mpshe has, however, stated under oath that: ‘the President himself has been kept fully informed of both the fact of the investigation against Selebi and the nature of the allegations against him … there was indeed information and evidence communicated to (Mabandla) and the President.’ He went on to state that Selebi’s claim that ‘Advocate Pikoli had simply informed the President of Selebi’s alleged involvement in organised crime but failed to provide him with detail of such alleged misconduct is … not correct’. In a direct challenge to Selebi, Mpshe also invited the Police Commissioner to explain how he obtained a draft copy of Pikoli’s ‘top secret’ 7 May 2007 letter to Mbeki, in which he asked the President to persuade the police to allow the Scorpions to carry out search and seizure operations at police headquarters and at Selebi’s home. Selebi’s claim that the NPA’s Scorpions unit had deliberately ‘framed’ him to save themselves from the imminent disbandment was slammed by Mpshe as ‘incorrect and unworthy … and quite unsupported by facts’.
Does anyone have any reason to believe former President Thabo Mbeki is convinced now that there had been a corruption case to answer against former National Police Commissioner Jackie Selebi?
Lets face it – no-one here would have appointed anyone convicted of illegal possession of firearms as his Commissioner of Police!
Prof
Mbeki would probably say: “Corruption? What corruption?” (to paraphrase his stance on Zim, AIDS, crime, Eskom, …)
I do not see how Mbeki can maintain his silence on this….He has to explain himself to the nation now.
Anyone following the story in M&G and O’Sullivan’s interview with Carte Blanche knows this relationship between Selebi and Agliotti was just the tip of the iceberg.
Selebi could not have got away with this kind of shit for so long without extremely poor leadership from Nqakula. Nqakula has proven to be completely spineless.
Does Paul O’Sullivan becomes a potential award recipient from the Office of the President for being a brave citizen?
The silence over this outcome is interesting and quick response on Eskom strike is puzzling. Do parties/govt pick and choose what to comment on?
@ Spuy, “ Where in Gods name have you ever come across any link between Kebble and Jacob Zuma”
I can’t provide you with proof, but I will provide you with circumstantial evidence which establishes some proof. Read the below link for starters (although I personally hate using links from the media as evidence):
http://www.armsdeal-vpo.co.za/articles06/fat_land.html
Additionally, you may not have had the opportunity to watch the Kebble video where he rants against Mbeki and waxes lyrical about Zuma and his relationship with him. You will also note that all (I mean ALL) of the dudes funded one way or the other by Kebble and those who had business dealings with him (including Tokyo Sexwale) are all latterly Zuma’s allies. You will also perhaps note the all (I mean ALL) of Kebbles business enemies (including the likes of Mzi Khumalo, Saki Macozoma) subsequently became political opponents of Zuma, and indirectly, Mbeki allies.
“Even the very ‘rumour’ that Kebble funded ANCYL remains that till to date.” No sir, it is not a rumor. Read the liquidators report of the Kebble companies. It is an incontrovertible fact that even the ANCYL has not contradicted. Even their political ally, the SACP, uses the fact for political scores against them (the so-called Kebbelism!).
Lastly, Spuy, I am not driven by loyalty of any one, including Mbeki. I however will regularly defend Mbeki in blogs such as Pierre’s precisely because no one will defend him against the lies that are regularly propagated by the likes of Pierre (and other regressives). The ANC under Zuma are happy to distract all attention by using Mbeki as the fall guy because the worse he appears the better they seem to be. The likes of the DA and their regressive supporters are happy at this because they have been afforded a unique opportunity to attack the legacy of black rule by dressing it up as a direct attack against Mbeki, knowing fully well that it will not lead to opprobrium from key black (ANC aligned formations)! Nonetheless it is black rule/governance that is under attack (and the myth is perpetuated that no good black leader exists but for Saint Madiba). The sad thing about all of this is that progressive politics lose and regressives gain.
@Spuy and Pierre,
As a follow up to my response to Spuy, note Pierre’s perpetuation of falsehoods, in the process ignoring all common sense and even basic constitutional theory.
For example Pierre and our local pundits ignore the obvious fact that Pikoli himself only decided to act against Selebi (through seeking his arrest) only in September 2007. So on what basis would Mbeki have suspended/dismissed Selebi prior to September 2007 when even the fellow conducting the investigation was sufficiently confident to initiate arrest on September 2007. Seen from this context, nothing turns on these briefings, particularly when viewed in the context of the President’s own responsibilities versus those of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
One of these responsibilities is to ensure stability in this particularly fractured society. Within this context how is possible that the pundits have ignored the paralysis that resulted in the state from Zuma’s dismissal and the clear conflicts that have been proven (subsequently) to have occurred within and between our security agencies (Nel was being investigated by the SAPS for Pete’s sake!). The khompepe Commission had informed the President that the Scorpions were remiss in their relationship with SAPS, subsequently the head of this body obtains a warrant of arrest whilst he ought to know that this may result in serious conflict and whilst knowing full well that there’s other means to secure an accused person to a charge, with arrest being the last resort! Yet with all this knowledge, Pierre and other pundits cannot cognizance why the president (1) needed an additional week and (2) suspended Pikoli! Interestingly none of them enquires as to whether or not Pikoli’s request was reasonable or not. Interestingly none of them cite Pikoli’s evidence that he was never at any stage prevented from investigating Pikoli, but for his suspension, which he alleges was because of an intent to protect Selebi without adducing evidence to substantiate same. Interestingly the pundits and Pierre fail to explain that there is no requirement in law for the president to provide a comprehensive list of reasons when suspending the head of the NPA and that the reasons adduced as an interim measure suffice in law. Interestingly the pundits fail to explain how, if the intent was to protect Selebi, he was charged shortly afterwards after a properly managed process and has subsequently been convicted. Interestingly the pundits cannot explain how the head of Scorpions/NPA and these organizations themselves (supposed tools of Mbeki’s abuse of power) would fall victim to his abuse of power to protect Selebi. Interestingly the pundits cannot explain how Mbeki’s protection of Selebi would have benefited Mbeki? Was Mbeki abusing power through the Scorpions or the SAPS, or both, against each other!???
It’s nothing else but a story of a police chief who took money for whatever reason. A police chief of whom whose professional and organizational rivals (the NPA/Scorpions) wished to prosecute. A president who could not rashly act against his police chief because of valid concerns of the motive of the investigation (when viewed within the context of the conflict between the organizations’ at issue), a president who could not preempt a process by firing his police chief based on allegations that even the NPA was sufficiently ONLY confident about years later in September 2007, a president who had experienced the collapse of the security apparatus due to a similar poorly managed (but justified) dismissal of his former deputy, a president whose country’s security apparatus (VIP SAPS and Scorpions) had nearly had a gun battle a few months earlier in front of national TV (!), a president whose Police Force was to have running gun battles with a metro police force of the country’s major city within four months of his suspension of Pikoli, a president who was at the very time being monitored by a faction of his national intelligence agency! Yet Pierre and the Pundits claim there was no justification for what occurred and would praise a reckless Pikoli who could have achieved his objective in many ways but chose the route of bravado?
How I wish we could get some of these players in a witness box and cut through the spin? Put all rumours aside, there is enough that Mbeki did that raises a lot of questions about his actions. In the absence of facts coupled with Mbeki silence, we can speculate till 2050 but it is rather mischeavous to potray him as faultless.
@ Vuyo
It is interesting that your linked article makes no reference who was in charge of ANC and government when all these activities were happening. If all of this is true, who created space for it to flourish. Party members and govt officials alike misbehaving.
NDPP NEVER WITHDREW CASE AGAINST MR MPHEGO AS REFLECTED IN PROF DE VOS ARTCILE
The article by Professor De Vos, titled “Conviction puts focus on Mbeki”, published on 5 July 2010, refers. In his article Professor De Vos writes that Adv Menzi Simelane has dropped all charges against Mr Mulangi Mphego and proceeds to ask: “Why was this done? Who is being protected?”
The NPA finds these inaccurate statements to be both disturbing and misleading, especially from a person purported to be a legal expert. The background to the case against Mphego is that he made representations to the NDPP for a permanent stay of prosecution, which is under consideration. He has launched the same application to the Randburg Magistrates’ Court. He filed his papers and the State was expected to respond by 9 February 2010, which it could not. When the case was in court again on 7 May 2010, the State applied for a postponement so as to be afforded an opportunity to file responding affidavits to the application. The Court refused the State’s request and the matter was struck off the roll in terms of section 342A of the Criminal Procedure Act, the implication of which was that as soon as the State would be ready to proceed with the case, the prosecutors would have to obtain authorization from the DPP: South Gauteng to have the matter reinstated.
It is therefore incorrect to say that the National Director has withdrawn the charges against Mr Mphego, as the case was struck off the roll by the presiding officer.
The NPA expresses the hope that Professor de Vos will in future confirm the relevant facts before making such inaccurate statements.
Issued by:
Adv Mthunzi Mhaga
NPA Spokesperson
Adv Mhaga, thank you for the correction. The case against Mr Mphego was indeed struck off the roll. I regret the error. The correct facts are, of course, as follows:
(1) The case against Mr Mphego was struck off the roll after Simelane ordered a change in the prosecuting team shortly before the case was to go to court.
(2) Adv Mhaga told the Mail & Guardian at the time that advocate Gladstone Maema, Gauteng’s acting deputy director of public prosecutions, took the “strategic decision” to remove state advocate Gerrie Nel and his team from the Kebble and Mulangi Mphego cases. But the Mail & Guardian reported the next week that a the letter written by Simelane to Maema on March 20, and signed three days later, contradicts Mhaga’s claim made on Simelane’s behalf. Simelane writes: “I have noted that you have made very little progress in dealing with the above matters [the prosecutors for the Glenn Agliotti and Mphego cases]. You will recall that I instructed that new [sic] prosecuting team be appointed. To date I have not been advised of the new team. Adv Mhaga, either on instructions of Simelane or of his own accord, therefore told a serious untruth about the matter.
(2) The Mail & Guardian also noted that: “It is bad enough that a state official and an advocate be caught out in serious untruth, but it’s even worse than that. The abrupt removal of Nel directly caused the Mphego matter to be struck from the roll and serious questions remain about whether a new prosecuting team will be ready to conduct the massively complex Kebble case come July.”
Serious questions thus remain about the manner in which the NPA has dealt with the Mphego matter.
Pierre De Vos says:
July 5, 2010 at 20:05 pm
@ Pierre,
So if I may steal your line, “Why was this done? Who is being protected?”
Voyo, the falsehoods are yours. Pikoli had informed Mbeki as early as 2006 that Selebi had serious case to answer and provided him with info. (See Ginwala Report as well as Mpshe affidavit.). On the day before the arrest warrants were going to be executed Mbeki suspended Pikoli. He claimed this was about a breakdown of the relationship between Pikoli and the Minister and his office pretended it had nothing to do with Selebi. By this stage he had 10 briefings from Pikoli. Early January 2008, Mbeki said that if anybody had given him any info on wrongdoing by Selebi he would have acted but they did not.This was untrue – for at least a year but definitely for at least 4 months since arrest warrants (during which time Selebi remained police chief and used his power as chief actively to try to twart the stae case against him). Pikoli had given Mbeki much info at least a year earlier and continuously after that. Pikoli was going to arrest Selebi in September 2007. He was suspended because – so Mbeki claimed a year later – Mbeki needed two weeks. Two weeks came and went and Selebi was not arrested or suspended. Instead, his legal advisor helped draft documents to have the arrest warrants retracted. Mbeki continued claiming there was no evidence against Selebi for the coming months despite having been shown evidence and told by Pikoli that he was going to arrest Selebi. He only suspended Selebi after he was arrested (AND MORE IMPORTANTLY AFTER POLOKWANE). In July 2008, long after Selebi’s arrest and his suspension, Mbeki extended his contract with another year!!!!! None of the above facts are in dispute. I fail to see how anyone can claim there was no attempt at protecting Selebi. The fact that the attempt failed is not proof that no attempt was made.
By the way, the week after Pikoli was suspended, I bumped into a friend who used to work in Mbeki’s office and asked him about the Selebi matter and Pikoli. He smiled and said: “Everything is now in place for victory at Polokwane, suggesting that the suspension of Pikoli and the protection of Selebi had everything to do with Polokwane. Make of it what you want.
July 5, 2010 at 20:53 pm
@ Pikoli had informed Mbeki as early as 2006 that Selebi had serious case to answer and provided him with info.
No one disputes this. But did Pikoli have sufficient evidence at that stage to justify the dismissal of Selebi? I suggest not, otherwise Pikoli would have sought warrants at that stage.
@Early January 2008, Mbeki said that if anybody had given him any info on wrongdoing by Selebi he would have acted but they did not.
Again no one disputes this. But what you and I cant possibly know based on this comment is whether or not he was referring to information that justifies action against Selebi or not. Common sense dictates that it could not be merely information, but information backed by evidence, which common sense would indicate at the earliest would have been in the form that Pikoli possessed (and a judge agreed to its sufficiency by issuing warrants) when he sought warrants in 2007, September. Prior to that period, based on Pikoli’s own actions, we can assume that there was no way that Mbeki could have had sufficient cause to suspend or dismiss or otherwise act against Selebi!
@He claimed this was about a breakdown of the relationship between Pikoli and the Minister and his office pretended it had nothing to do with Selebi.
I would assume that a material disagreement about the timing and modalities of conducting an arrest, between the executive (be it Minister or President) constitutes a “breakdown of the relationship”!
@This was untrue – for at least a year but definitely for at least 4 months since arrest warrants (during which time Selebi remained police chief and used his power as chief actively to try to twart the stae case against him).
The comment was made in relation to enquiries about why he had not acted against Selebi based in the information he had. It did not relate to the period encompassing Mpshe’s assessment of the evidence against Selebi (by then the cat or horse or whatever had bolted!) so its untrue that he sat for four months protecting Selebi. Mpshe had intigated a process and Mbeki could not preempt the process.
@ Pikoli had given Mbeki much info at least a year earlier and continuously after that. Pikoli was going to arrest Selebi in September 2007.
Pikoli gave reports and we don’t know what these reports contained. We can logically only conclude that he had sufficient evidence in September 2007. Even then, the state was not confident enough and proceeded to seek postponements whilst the sought further evidence!
@ He was suspended because – so Mbeki claimed a year later – Mbeki needed two weeks. Two weeks came and went and Selebi was not arrested or suspended. Instead, his legal advisor helped draft documents to have the arrest warrants retracted.
Perhaps that provided sufficient time to facilitate the concerns Mbeki had? Hell, the fact that the matter was personalized to Pikoli and not the NPA must have logically limited the interpretation of Selebi and his cronies in SAPS!
@ Mbeki continued claiming there was no evidence against Selebi for the coming months I dispute that Mbeki said that after Selebi’s purported arrest (substantiate). In any event that matter went for assessment to determine whether there was evidence, conducted by the NPA, independent senior counsel and Mpshe. Surely if the NPA undergoes such a process they themselves are uncertain? Or do we now revise our belief in their sanctity and approach their assessment with suspicion?
@AND MORE IMPORTANTLY AFTER POLOKWANE).
What is the significance of Polokwane Pierre? No evidence WHATSOEVER has ever been adduced to show that Selebi was a significant player in Polokwane, so why would he be so invaluable? Not even Mbeki’s opponents used the Selebi matter against him (in fact, the opposite occurred, Selebi jumped into the Zuma conspiracy wagon against the scorpions!).
@In July 2008, long after Selebi’s arrest and his suspension, Mbeki extended his contract with another year!!!!!
Pierre this is insignificant. Half the senior posts of the security services were being run ny acting heads during this period, whilst cases against them where being investigated. Really, after the Zuma experience Mbeki would have been mad to preempt a process by dismissing Selebi, particularly when a new administration was anticipated to come into power in less than 18 months.
@ I fail to see how anyone can claim there was no attempt at protecting Selebi.
You fail to do so because there’s a log in your eyes preventing you from clear thinking.. The majority of pundits in RSA suffer from the same impairment Pierre, so you are not alone!
@The fact that the attempt failed is not proof that no attempt was made.
I’m certain that this is a facetious statement. Is it not obvious to you that Selebi could have been protected in a myriad number of ways, such as the dissolution of the Scorpions in 2006 or even 2007 (which was being called for by Cosatu, SACP and ANC). Hell, the mere existence of the scorpions was used as a tool to convince ANC delegates of a grand praetorian guard, controlled by Mbeki, to prevent the advent of Utopia. He could have protected his “friend” and gotten rid of that accusation in one swoop, yet the dude is so dumb he helps obtain evidence (upon Pikoli’s request) for the Scorpions and when his buddy is arrested he acts to defeat the ends of justice, for some yet to be defined reason (friendship, a love affair, secret incriminating tapes, bribery, Selebi’s two million strong constituency in the ANC)!
@By the way, the week after Pikoli was suspended, I bumped into a friend who used to work in Mbeki’s office and asked him about the Selebi matter and Pikoli. He smiled and said: “Everything is now in place for victory at Polokwane, suggesting that the suspension of Pikoli and the protection of Selebi had everything to do with Polokwane.
Oh, I also had a few friends in Mbeki’s office, most of whom told me the dude knew he would lose but felt that he was obliged to stand because inter alia he had been requested to do so. Nothing turns on this information, but everything turns on the facts, which are simply that the Selebi matter was a trying problem for the government and that it was arguably never handled well by all concerned including Mbeki. Just another lesson for future administrations in the course of the evolution of our democracy although doubt any corrupt police commissioner will ever be investigated by the Hawks who report to him! They are in any event busy chasing drug dealers and other petty criminals, whilst our ruling elite in business and politics sleep ever so well at night.)
@ Maggs
Who were the genuises behind the OBE?
Bhengu, Asmal at least.
I am reading the book by RW Johnson and there are shocking revelations about Asmal and other individuals. I hope he has something to say about OBE saga.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/south-africas-brave-new-world-by-rw-johnson-1669476.html
Another consultation before final report.
http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/article536834.ece/MEC-withholding-baby-deaths-report
[...] Pierre de Vos also sheds light on other matters arising from this trial: The conviction must place a question mark over the actions of former President Thabo Mbeki, who appointed Selebi, at first took steps aimed at protecting Selebi and claimed that there was no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Selebi even after Mbeki was briefed by the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) about the evidence against the former top cop. Why was Mbeki so adamant that Selebi should not be arrested? Why did Mbeki ask us to trust him on Selebi and why did he maintain – in the face of overwhelming evidence provided to him – that there was no evidence to suggest that Selebi was a crook? Why did he appoint this guy in the first place? Does it not show- at the very least – a spectacular lack of judgment on the part of our former President? [...]
[...] Pierre de Vos also sheds light on other matters arising from this trial: The conviction must place a question mark over the actions of former President Thabo Mbeki, who appointed Selebi, at first took steps aimed at protecting Selebi and claimed that there was no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Selebi even after Mbeki was briefed by the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) about the evidence against the former top cop. Why was Mbeki so adamant that Selebi should not be arrested? Why did Mbeki ask us to trust him on Selebi and why did he maintain – in the face of overwhelming evidence provided to him – that there was no evidence to suggest that Selebi was a crook? Why did he appoint this guy in the first place? Does it not show- at the very least – a spectacular lack of judgment on the part of our former President? [...]
Could someone please deal – finish and klaar – with Vuyo’s red herring that the only avenue open to Mbeki was waiting until someone presented him a prima facie case against Selebi, get the consensus of the whole criminal justice cluster and then: Arrest Selebi?
Mbeki could have
o looked to the Constitution and the guidelines for dismissing provincial commissars
o asked Selebi quietly to resign
o fired Selebi’s fat ass
o appointed a judicial commission of inquiry into infiltration of organised crime in the top ranks of the SAPS
o had a word with the do-nothings in the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee for Safety and Security suggesting they haul in Selebi and confront him with the allegations of misconduct? (Hey, don’t you guys think we ought to name them and shame them for the piss-poor job of oversight they did? Organised crime bosses canoodling with the Commissar of the SAPS on their watch? And it is public knowledge? And they do SFA?)
There are a whole host of things Mbeki could have done other than arrest. Anyone want to add to the list?
[...] Pierre de Vos pia anatupa mwanga kwenye masuala mengine yanayoibuka kutokana na shitaka hili: Hukumu lazima iweke alama ya kuuliza dhidi ya vitendo vya rais wa zamani Thabo Mbeki, aliyemteua Selebi, mwanzoni alichukua hatua zilizokuwa na lengo la kumlinda Selebi na akadai kwamba hapakuwa na ushahidi wa makosa kwa upande wa Selebi hata baada ya Mbeki kupewa taarifa fupi na Mkurugenzi wa Taifa wa Mashitaka ya umma (NDPP) kuhusu ushahidi dhidi ya ofisa huyo wa zamani wa polisi. Kwa nini Mbeki alisisitiza kuwa Selebi asitiwe nguvuni? Kwa nini Mbeki alituomba tuwe na imani naye kwa suala la Selebi na kwa kwa nini alishikilia msimamo – pamoja kuwepo kwa ushahidi mzito na wa wazi aliopewa – kwamba hapakuwa na ushahidi wa kuonesha kwamba Selebi alikuwa mhalifu? Kwa nini alimteua mtu huyu awali ya yote? Je, hii haionyeshi – hata kwa kiwango cha chini kabisa – ukosefu wa busara katika maamuzi kwa upande wa rais wetu wa zamani? [...]