Contradictory statements from the police and private security firm Vision Tactical have highlighted the extent of the alleged cover-up of the murder of a civilian during a multimillion-rand kidnapping rescue mission.
Contradictory statements from the police and private security firm Vision Tactical have highlighted the extent of the alleged cover-up of the murder of a civilian during a multimillion-rand kidnapping rescue mission.
Moreover, the Egyptian who was beaten after being suspected of being involved in the September 2020 kidnapping of Johannesburg businessman Hamza Khan has slammed comments made by Vision Tactical. The private security firm said he received his bruises from Norwood residents, who were supposedly partying at his restaurant in the suburb.
Farag Salama Abdelsalam Elnaggar told the Mail & Guardian this week that he was, in fact, assaulted by members of Vision Tactical, who had picked him up while he was driving after 10pm on the night of 22 September 2020.
A police officer’s statement seen by the M&G states that Vision Tactical had informed the police that Elnaggar was beaten for resisting arrest by the security company on that night. This is contradictory to the statement that he was beaten by a mob.
The M&G reported in December that Khan was kidnapped on 18 September 2020 at his family business in Mayfair, Johannesburg, and a R5-million ransom was demanded for his safe return. This was according to an internal crime intelligence report seen by the M&G.
The report added that Khan’s family, after negotiations, decided to pay a ransom of R200 000 three days later, but the hostage was not released. A day later, a mission involving Vision Tactical, the Johannesburg Metropolitan Police Department and crime intelligence officers, among other policing units, rescued Khan, who had been held in a small lodge on Clifton Street in Mayfair.
It is alleged that the joint operation was convened by major general Feroz Khan (not related to the victim), the head of crime intelligence’s kidnapping task team, at Vision Tactical’s Houghton head office.
A Vision Tactical car
Multiple sources on Clifton Street confirmed that Abdi Nasir Yusoof, a Somali over the age of 30, was gunned down when either the police or the security firm opened fire during the Hamza Khan rescue operation.
An M&G investigation into Yusoof’s killing found that there were no official police records of the Somali’s death, and that he seems to have been caught in the middle of an underworld of kidnappings, private security firms, retainers, ransoms and turf wars over who saves whom. Yusoof died in hospital five days after he was shot.
Meanwhile, Elnaggar was arrested on the night of Khan’s rescue on 22 September, with the police’s operations report saying the suspected kidnapper was caught with R96 250, which was allegedly his share of the ransom loot.
Sourced pictures of the night of his arrest show the Egyptian battered and bruised from a beating he had received. Speaking to the M&G this week, Elnaggar, who will return to court in February on charges of kidnapping and extortion, claimed that he was assaulted by members of Vision Tactical.
“I was pulled over by black cars while driving home. I thought I was in the middle of a hijacking, and started pleading with the gun-wielding men to take whatever they want and spare my life,” said Elnaggar.
He said he was thrown into a black Mercedes-Benz Viano, he believes belonged to Vision
Tactical, where he was allegedly assaulted. The M&G understands from two sources that police reservist Afzal Abramjee, the nephew of self-proclaimed anti-crime activist Yusuf Abramjee, was also allegedly in the Viano when Elnaggar was picked up.
Afzal Abramjee referred all questions to the South African Police Service, which had not responded by the time of publication.
“There were no police around when I was taken by the security guys. I would have been happy to have seen the police because these guys were beating me up very badly,” Elnaggar said.
In an interview with the M&G in December, Vision Tactical’s director Yaseen Theba said patrons at Elnaggar’s Norwood establishment were the ones who had assaulted the Egyptian. Theba said Vision Tactical had arrived at the restaurant and found “a commotion” underway.
“The police rushed there and arrested him. The police helped him because the okes were hitting him. He is currently out on bail and is appearing again in February,” Theba said in December.
Theba’s version was, however, contradicted by an official police statement from warrant officer Joel Rachoene of the Brixton police station, where Elnaggar was taken to be charged.
Rachoene stated under oath: “He [Elnaggar] was injured as explained by the [Vision Tactical] security during the time of his arrest, as he was resisting arrest.”
The police, both in Gauteng and nationally, have ignored questions as to why a private firm was involved in police operations, including running the joint operations centre at Vision Tactical’s Houghton offices.
This week, Theba did not answer questions sent to him, including the apparent contradiction between who he said had assaulted Elnaggar and the statement from police.
But in a subsequent recorded phone call, Theba accused the M&G of being part of a plot “to smear Vision Tactical”, saying the publication was being fed wrong information.
“I met with your colleagues in December and gave them all the information. Even if I respond to your questions, I know you will not use [my responses],” Theba said.
When the M&G read out Rachoene’s statement to him, Theba did not comment on the apparent contradictions.
Meanwhile, Elnaggar also accused Yusuf Abramjee of “spreading misinformation” about his arrest. This followed a tweet sent by Abramjee on 23 September 2020, where he posted a blacked-out image of Elnaggar, as well as the R96 250 ransom money allegedly found on him.
The ransom money in the picture was in R200, R100 and R50 notes.
But this is contrary to a statement by warrant officer Gary Cooper of the organised crime head office in Tshwane. Cooper stated under oath that the ransom money that was counted was in only R200 and R100 notes.
This contradiction is what caused Elnaggar to allege that Abramjee was spreading false information about him.
But Abramjee disputed Elnaggar’s allegations, saying that he stood by his tweets because the Egyptian was charged, and that he did not want to comment on the merits of the case.
“In December, you sent me a list of questions and then went on to quote my responses completely out of context. You sent me questions then which were completely unrelated to the actual contents of your article,” Abramjee said.
“If anything, your questions and article, in so far as they relate to me, were highly misleading, unethical and unprofessional. You created a false impression about my non-involvement in a matter, solely for the sake of sensationalism.
“Further, your street posters, headlines and subheadlines were totally unrelated to the contents of your article and thereby in breach of several provisions of the Press Code,” he added.
“The questions you sent to me then, were on their own highly defamatory of me. I am currently in the process of seeking legal advice on your questions sent to me then, as well as your subsequent article that you published.”
[/membership]