We have detected that the browser you are using is no longer supported. As a result, some content may not display correctly.
We suggest that you upgrade to the latest version of any of the following browsers:
close notification
Seve
ral of chief prosecutor Bulelani Ngcuka's alleged
off-the-record comments at a July briefing with black editors were
placed on record on Wednesday before the Hefer Commission.
Presiding Judge Joos Hefer described Ngcuka's alleged remarks, as
revealed by former City Press editor Vusi Mona, as "gravely
defamatory matter".
Mona went even further, calling the off-the-record meeting a
"vitriolic character assassination" of those the national director
of public prosecutions had named.
"At my age and experience I know the distinction between malicious
gossip and a legitimate off-the-record meeting," Mona added.
He has since officially complained to the Constitutional Court, the
Public Protector, the Human Rights Commission and Justice Minister
Penuell Maduna.
Mona told Hefer that the controversial meeting took place on the
evening of July 24 in a Sandton hotel. Ngcuka had called it and met
with a selected group of seven black editors and one assistant
editor.
He was concerned about this "racial exclusivity", Mona said.
He was brought under the impression that Ngcuka wanted to
givebackground information on a widely circulated anonymous e-mail
that contained allegations against him. However, the meeting turned
out to be "wide-ranging".
Ngcuka used the event to violate citizens' rights, particularly
their constitutional right to human dignity, under the guise of an
off-the-record meeting, Mona testified.
These included Deputy President Jacob Zuma. Ngcuka allegedly
revealed that Zuma could not meet his monthly financial
obligations.
Regarding the National Prosecuting Authority's prima facie
corruption case against Zuma, Ngcuka allegedly said he would wash
his hands of the matter -- like the Biblical Pontius Pilate had
done. Ngcuka would leave the case to be decided in the "court of
public opinion", Mona maintained.
This apparently referred to Ngcuka's decision not to charge Zuma
because the prospects of a conviction in court were too slim.
Mona further testified that Ngcuka had told the editors Zuma was in
trouble because he had surrounded himself with "Indian
people".
Ngcuka allegedly called former transport minister Mac Maharaj
naive. This was because Maharaj maintained that payments he
received from businessman Schabir Shaik was for work his wife had
done for Shaik's companies.
Ngcuka said this unwittingly exposed Ms Shaik to tax evasion
charges which he intended to bring against her, Mona
maintained.
Further discussion during the meeting implied that Maharaj was
willing to "sacrifice" his wife.
Ngcuka also alleged that the African National Congress, and
particularly its youth league, was defending dubious white
businessmen, Mona testified.
He said he decided to break the confidentiality agreement imposed
at the meeting because he did not want to be party to the
"character assassination".
He stressed that he was not taking sides in the fight between Zuma
and Ngcuka. He repeated his belief that the anonymous e-mail
against Ngcuka formed part of an unfortunate smear campaign.
Mona will retake the stand on Thursday for further
cross-examination.
Meanwhile, it emerged that Deputy president Jacob Zuma will not
complain before the Hefer Commission about the way in which
Ngcuka's National Prosecuting Authority is treating him.
Hefer said at the beginning of the day's public commission hearing
in Bloemfontein that he had been corresponding with Zuma's office
on the matter.
From this it became clear that Zuma was not happy with the
treatment he was receiving from Ngcuka's office. The deputy
president nevertheless preferred not to use the commission as a
forum to resolve this, Hefer said.
Zuma recently lodged an official complaint against Ngcuka with the
Public Protector.
This followed the national director of public prosecutions'
announcement that his department had established a prima facie
corruption case against Zuma. Ngcuka nevertheless declined to
charge Zuma for allegedly soliciting a bribe, because the prospects
of conviction were too slim.
Hefer also announced on Wednesday that Zuma had informed him he was
not part of an apartheid-era spy investigation against
Ngcuka.
According to the deputy president his only knowledge of the spy
claim against Ngcuka came from an earlier report that Mo Shaik had
handed to him.
For this reason, Hefer said, he had decided not to subpoena Zuma to
testify.
Hefer's comments left Mo Shaik, Ngcuka's main accuser, out in the
cold.
Shaik served during the anti-apartheid struggle under Zuma's
command in the African National Congress' intelligence
operations.
His earlier testimony alleged that Zuma did take part in the
investigation into Ngcuka as a suspected spy.
"I have reason to believe that (Ngcuka) is investigating (Zuma) now
because he knew that (Zuma) had investigated him then," Shaik
testified.
With this, he suggested that the NPA's corruption investigation
against Zuma was in retaliation for the erstwhile spy investigation
against Ngcuka.
Evidence so far before the commission indicated that Shaik was the
sole source of the spy claim against Ngcuka. Shaik has called on
the commission to ask Zuma for independent confirmation of the
apartheid-era investigation into Ngcuka. He insisted that he had
reported on the matter to Zuma - Sapa