Justice and Constitutional Development Minister Thembi Simelane has refuted allegations that her ministry is obstructing the National Prosecuting Authority’s (NPA’s) access to the Zondo Commission database.
Simelane addressed the justice and constitutional development portfolio committee, saying she had not received a full briefing from the NPA and was committed to finding a solution to the issue.
She emphasised that she had not met with anyone to block access to the database and was unaware of the location and accessibility of the state capture information.
She acknowledged that an article surfaced two weeks after her meeting with the NPA, making allegations against her department and leadership.
Director-general Doc Mashabane denied claims that software licences had not been renewed, stating that R40 million was paid for licences and maintenance. He gave an assurance that no NPA or Investigating Directorate (ID) official was hindered from accessing information at the data centre.
National Director of Public Prosecutions Shamila Batohi expressed gratitude for the opportunity to address the matter, emphasising the need for unhindered access to the data centre to fulfil the ID’s constitutional mandate.
Meanwhile, the NPA’s investigating Directorate Against Corruption (Idac) has refused to disclose how much senior advocates Paul Pretorius’s and Matthew Chaskalson’s appointments as consultants would cost the fiscus.
It has emerged that the Zondo Commission’s two former evidence leaders, who will assist with “specialised aspects” relating to the investigation and the prosecution of “complex crimes”, have not obtained security clearance certificates.
Their appointments were thrust into the spotlight after a source told this publication that it was part of an attempt to capture the NPA. Questions were also asked about whether these functions should not be the responsibility of permanently employed staff.
The matter once again came up in the National Assembly this week when uMkhonto weSizwe Party chief whip Mzwanele Manyi asked the NPA and ID top brass to shed light on whether the two, and deputy national director of prosecutions Anton du Plessis, had security clearance certificates.
“What is the state of play there so that we know what is happening?” Manyi said. He also raised a question of a conflict of interest in the appointment of Pretorius and Chaskalson having been “evidence leaders on one side and now on this side of prosecution”.
“It is like someone is given an opportunity to mark their own homework. Why and how did this happen? I think it is a blatant conflict,” Manyi said, adding that it was bizarre for evidence leaders to now be prosecuting.
In reference to Pretorius and Chaskalson, Batohi said Section 38 appointments in terms of the NPA Act were not a new thing. “It is in the act and we have been appointing Section 38 counsel as long as the NPA existed,” she said. Batohi also said the NPA was not the only law enforcement agency that used such a provision. “All use external counsel to deal with various matters to support their work.”
ID head advocate Andrea Johnson said Pretorius was appointed for six months. “He does not conduct any prosecution in the ID space,” she said. When Manyi complained that his question on security clearance had not been answered, Batohi said they had many members of the NPA without a top security clearance.
“This is a challenge throughout the government. The State Security Agency (SSA) has to do its job.” She also said the NPA had done everything needed to submit the application forms and all other required documents to get the top clearance certificates.
“The fact is that there is a backlog in the SSA. I do think this question should be put to the SSA, how quickly they can finalise the matter? This committee will do us a favour if they raise the issue,” Batohi said, before indicating steps they had taken to have the security clearances finalised.
Saturday Star