/ 23 August 2002

Selebi in bomb threat row

A Johannesburg International Airport security officer alerted his superiors two weekends ago that National Police Commissioner Jackie Selebi had ”made a bomb threat”.

But the airport’s security manager let Selebi go, unlike civilians who have been arrested on the spot.

To make a bomb threat at an airport, even in jest, is an offence punishable by up to 25 years in jail.

Did Selebi escape repercussion because of his position? Selebi has denied making the threat, saying he has witnesses to back him. ”It is absolute nonsense of the highest order … I don’t know where that comes from.”

On Friday, Sapa quoted Selebi’s representative Director Sally De Beer as saying ”It is absolutely outrageous. Outright lies”.

”He didn’t even have a bag in his hand when he went to the airport,” De Beer said.

The way the incident was handled has led to discord at the Airports Company South Africa (Acsa), the parastatal that runs the country’s major airports.

The Mail & Guardian has seen internal correspondence questioning the actions of Thele Moema, the Johannesburg International security manager, who opted to believe Selebi over his own official and allegedly refused at first to file a report required by law.

The incident happened between 5.30pm and 6pm on August 11 as Selebi passed through international departures en route to Europe. The M&G has seen an internal Acsa e-mail message in which Bennie Edwards, a senior security officer, states: ”I was on duty at international departures terminal 6 … when a member of the [police] informed me that the national commissioner was flying and that we must not search him …

”I informed the policeman that if the gentleman was in civilian clothes and he activates I will be obligated to search him. He further informed me that if I search him there will be big problems.

”The commissioner did come through but did not activate. I informed him to put his bag into the x-ray machine. On giving the bag to one of the [police] members to put into the x-ray machine … he told me that he had a bomb in his bag. I informed him not to make that kind of remark … He insisted that he did have a bomb in his bag.”

Edwards contacted his supervisors, who alerted senior management.

Acsa spokesperson Charmaine Lodewyk this week confirmed the basic details but said Moema, the airport security manager, saw no need for further investigation after interviewing all concerned.

”I can confirm that an allegation was made by the security officer. The officer alleged that commissioner Selebi had made a bomb threat when passing through a search point …

”At the time of this incident, [Moema] was at the airport and moved directly to the scene at the request of the general manager, Mr Bongani Maseko … After investigating and questioning all parties involved, Mr Moema concluded there were no grounds for further investigation, thus the commissioner continued with his journey.”

Lodewyk’s answer implies Moema played instant judge in what could be a serious criminal matter — and ruled in Selebi’s favour. On Selebi’s own version, Moema gave him no serious grilling.

Last week Selebi told the M&G that all that happened at Johannesburg International was that the security officer had engaged him in a long conversation at the search point.

”He talked to me about being a reservist, but not getting a promotion … that is all.”

This week Selebi confirmed Moema had come to him after he passed through the search point. Selebi gave this account: ”Thele Moeme said, ‘Did you experience any problem?’ I said no. He said there was a chap who said there was a bomb threat. I said, ‘Where, by whom?’ He said, ‘There is a problem, somebody has a problem.”’

Moema’s instant dismissal of Edwards’s complaint led to serious unhappiness, apparently not only on Edwards’s part, but also on the part of Petko Atanassov, operationally in charge of security at Acsa airports.

In an e-mail message to airport general manager Maseko, Atanassov complained bitterly about Moema’s alleged refusal to file an ”NKP report” — a report required under the National Key Points Act when there has been a security-related incident at a sensitive installation.

Said Atanassov: ”Mr Moema stated to me that he is not going to submit a NKP report as the commissioner is denying what was reported by [Edwards] and he is setting up a meeting with the commissioner to resolve the problem.

”I explained to him that he needs to follow procedure and file the NKP report based on the statements from the security personnel on duty. As I was speaking to Mr Moema he abruptly closed the phone. I insist on receiving a NKP report from Mr Moema addressed to the relevant authorities and within the required time.”

It seems, however, that Moema did later file the report. Trevor Davids, spokesperson for the Civil Aviation Authority, confirmed this week the report had been received, but did not give details. The Civil Aviation Authority is part of an interdepartmental body that administers National Key Points Act prescriptions on aviation security.

Atanassov also said in his e-mail message that Edwards ”is very unhappy with the way that Mr Moema handled the incident. He was told by Mr Moema that he [was] fabricating the story … [Edwards] insisted that Mr Moema follow the right procedure and arrest the person who made the bomb threat as it was done in the past with number of other passengers.”

A number of arrests for alleged bomb threats at South African airports have been reported. In August last year a 16-year-old Swiss girl spent a night in a police cell and faced prosecution after allegedly telling Johannesburg International staff she had a bomb in her luggage.

And in the weeks after September 11 last year, three men were arrested in separate incidents for allegedly making bomb threats at the same airport. Two were prosecuted. A police spokesperson reportedly said: ”We take a very dim view when anyone says they are in possession of a bomb, whether that information is false or not.”

The outcome of the prosecutions could not immediately be established.

Selebi insists he has five witnesses, among them the head of the police detective service, Commissioner Johan de Beer, who can attest to his innocence. The M&G understands that Edwards also has a witness.

Civilians in Selebi’s shoes have been arrested on the spot. And they have had to present their version, against that of their accusers, in court. Selebi, it seems, will not have to defend himself in that way.

Jackie cops some strife

Trouble seems to follow National Police Commissioner Jackie Selebi.

The airport ”bomb threat” incident is only the latest in a series of controversies over the oft-robust actions of the police chief.

No sooner had Selebi been installed in 1999 than he was alleged to have called a sergeant a ”chimpanzee” when the sergeant failed to recognise him. Another sergeant complained Selebi had intimidated him in a dispute over stolen maize cobs. The commissioner rode out the resultant storm.

Last year the Mail & Guardian recorded Selebi’s denials that he had ”fled” the scene of the soccer stampede at Ellis Park, where he was a spectator, only to return later in a helicopter and berate other policemen for the way they handled the situation.

Earlier this year the M&G reported that Paul O’Sullivan, the Airports Company South Africa (Acsa) group executive for aviation security, had lodged a complaint with the police oversight body, the Independent Complaints Directorate (ICD), against Selebi.

O’Sullivan’s complaint was that Selebi had ”intimidated” him and Mashudu Ramano, the Acsa chairperson, in a row over an airports security contract. Acsa terminated Khuselani Security and Risk Management’s R99-million contract last year, claiming the private security company was not performing adequately. Selebi denied allegations that he had intervened improperly to save Khuselani’s contract.

ICD spokesperson Steve Mabona this week said about O’Sullivan’s complaint: ”We are still investigating.” O’Sullivan, however, said: ”The ICD do not appear to have taken the matter any further. I am considering my options with a view to high court action.”