Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula. (Elmond Jiyane)
Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula will face 12 corruption charges and one of money laundering for allegedly soliciting R4.5 million in cash bribes from a state contractor, according to a National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) affidavit.
Advocate Bheki Manyathi, the Investigating Directorate’s (ID) deputy director of public prosecutions and the lead prosecutor in Mapisa-Nqakula’s criminal case, said in his affidavit that the speaker of the National Assembly received the “gratification” from a business person who is now a state witness.
Manyathi said that he was authorised to speak on behalf of the ID and its officers in the urgent Pretoria high court application Mapisa-Nqakula launched to halt her impending arrest. Her application is expected to be argued in court on Monday.
Manyathi claimed that the speaker – who took “special leave” from her position last Thursday – received more than R2.5 million over 11 payments between December 2016 and July 2019 from a former South African National Defence Force contractor.
The lead prosecutor added that, in September 2018, Mapisa-Nqakula allegedly asked the business person for a further R2 million, which the business person did not pay. The alleged bribes occurred when Mapisa-Nqakula was the defence and military veterans minister, a position she held until 2021.
In his statement, Manyathi confirmed that the NPA had an agreement with Mapisa-Nqakula’s lawyer, Stephen May, for her to hand herself over to the Lyttelton police station in Tshwane on Friday, 22 March. The Mail & Guardian reported last week that the speaker, with her lawyer, agreed to present herself to the police for arrest, which May confirmed to the publication.
Manyathi stated that Mapisa-Nqakula was present during the ID’s 19 March search-and-seizure operation on her Johannesburg home and could have arrested her then, but decided not to.
“The reason for not arresting her is because talks had already commenced with May to process her on the 22nd. When the search-and-seizure team informed me that the applicant was willing to be handed over on Wednesday the 20th, I indicated that we [would] stick to Friday the 22nd as discussed with May,” the prosecutor stated.
This contradicts the speaker’s statements that she did not agree to hand herself over to the police, saying in her affidavit filed on Friday that she wanted full disclosure of the case docket before she could submit herself to authorities.
Mapisa-Nqakula added that an investigator — named as Sergeant Suneel Ballochun in Manyathi’s affidavit — from the ID, tried to “strongarm” her into presenting herself at the Lyttelton station “under a false construction” that she agreed to submit herself to the police.
“This is not true. [Ballochun] did this, despite knowing I was represented, knowing my attorney’s contact details, and having spoken to him several times that day,” she stated.
But Manyathi said the NPA rejected her demand for the case docket, saying she “had no right” to see the docket because she had yet to be charged, adding that Mapisa-Nqakula’s rights “cannot be elevated above the interest of justice”.
The prosecutor also dismissed the speaker’s claims that her application was urgent because of the senior political office she held after Mapisa-Nqakula said in her affidavit that the media scrutiny that would follow her arrest made her interdict urgent.
Said Manyathi: “Everyone is equal before the law and all members of the society must account for their actions. If she is not guilty, the court will pronounce as such after a due process, and I must state that she is presumed innocent at this stage.”
State has strong case
In her affidavit, Mapisa-Nqakula said the state had a “weak” case against her, calling the investigation “persecution, rather than prosecution”.
However, Manyathi provided a list of 12 alleged payments the SANDF contractor made to the speaker, with dates supplied on when the alleged bribes were received.
According to the NPA, in December 2016, she received R700 000 from the service provider in two payments, and a further R350 000 was allegedly given to her in two transactions dated July and November 2017.
In August of the following year, she allegedly gained a further R250 000 before, the state claims, amassing R450 000 in cash bribes a month later, as well as the alleged failed R2 million demand Mapisa-Nqakula made to the business person.
The remainder of the R800 000 was allegedly given to her in February, April and July 2019, including an alleged R300 000 payment and a wig the contractor is said to have given to her at OR Tambo International Airport. Seven of the payments, the state claims, were made in the Johannesburg suburb of Bruma, where Mapisa-Nqakula’s house is.
Manyathi cited the 2012 Supreme Court of Appeals ruling dismissing former top cop Jackie Selebi’s appeal bid after being found guilty of accepting a raft of cash and material bribes from notorious convicted gangster, Glen Agliotti.
The ruling stated that the bribes Selebi received were intended to “induce” him as the national police head, adding that the corruption was still “complete” even if the bribed official did not carry out any tasks for the money.
“In other words, it is immaterial whether the applicant [Mapisa-Nqakula] did anything in return for the gratifications she received,” Manyathi contended.
“Corruption is a straightforward offence that is easy to decide. There is a prima facie case that warrants the prosecution of the applicant,” he added.