case… admit guilt
Mungo Soggot
SAFETY and Security Minister Sydney Mufamadi has ordered the police to bow out of a case brought against them by three widows of the victims of the 1989 Motherwell car bomb. He has instructed them to admit guilt for planting the bomb and to make an out-of- court settlement.
Mufamadi, who also criticised the police for litigating in the same way as they did under apartheid, said he had ordered a full investigation after a report on the case in the Mail & Guardian last week.
The M&G reported that bureaucrats under Mufamadi’s control had hired the same lawyer for the case who had defended the policeman responsible for planting the bomb – Gideon Niewoudt. The lawyer was PJ de Bruyn SC, the Port Elizabeth Bar’s most senior “silk”.
The widows’ claim against the police and Mufamadi was for loss of support as their husbands were the policemen blown up by Niewoudt.
After holding a meeting with senior officials on Wednesday, Mufamadi said he had instructed the police to withdraw their pleas – which included the contention that South African Police Service (SAPS) members had not caused the death of the deceased – and to negotiate an out-of-court settlement.
“The SAPS is to concede the merits which
include the admission that the Motherwell bombing took place at the instance of the police,” he said.
One of the widows, Doreen Mgoduka, said she was “more than delighted with the decision”.
The minister said that at his meeting with SAPS legal officials “concerns were raised about De Bruyn in light of the fact that he had defended policemen who were charged with, and convicted of, the murder of the victims of the Motherwell bombing.
“The visible implementation of the new style of litigating and a complete breakaway from the style so reminiscent of the apartheid era is long overdue.”
Mufamadi said he had criticised SAPS legal officials for not consulting him on how to approach the case and which counsel to select.
He said the officials had failed to follow “recently developed legal policy of having prior and proper consultations with the safety and security secretariat and the ministry both in regard to the manner in which politically sensitive matters are to be dealt with and the choice of counsel to represent the minister.”
Earlier in the week, legal director of the safety and security secretariat Amichand Soman said the legal policy introduced in February to give Mufamadi more say in cases against the police had proved ineffective.
In the new year, the secretariat would prepare “monitoring mechanisms to track implementation of policy”.
The policy is supposed to give Mufamadi more say in deciding which cases against the police should be fought, the choice of argument and the choice of counsel – as opposed to leaving such decisions to civil servants and state attorneys.
Soman said he had queried the choice of advocate when he found out about it last week and had organised Wednesday’s meeting.
Soman said he had not been satisfied by the officials’ response that it would lead to “unnecessary costs” if the department hired a different advocate.
In June, safety and security secretary Azar Cachalia complained about the handling by state attorneys of police legal matters, particularly their “knee-jerk” habit of defending all claims against the police.
Cachalia criticised the frequent “abdication of responsibility by state attorneys” and said he was also often troubled about the choice of counsel.
Cachalia said the root of the problem was that old guard bureaucrats were used to acting in an environment in which the minister abdicated his responsibility, as opposed to it being a case of old guard officials undermining the ministry.