Winnie Madikizela-Mandela’s counsel has rejected assertions that his client was ”infamous” and that she and her followers could express their ”wrath” towards opponents.
”There is no stitch of evidence of her infamy,” Ishmael Semenya told the Pretoria Regional Court on Wednesday. ”Where does infamy come into this?”
Judgement is expected on Thursday in the fraud and theft trial of the African National Congress Women’s League (ANCWL) president and broker Addy Moolman.
In his legal argument on Tuesday, prosecutor Jan Ferreira said the main State witnesses had no motivation to lie when they incriminated her.
”Eunice (Martins) was even at the time of her evidence the secretary of [Madikizela-Mandela], clearly a situation that would make her life very tricky, even more so when your boss is the infamous ‘Winnie Mandela’.
”Where therefore these witnesses do give incriminating evidence it must be the truth; why else would they risk facing the wrath of [Madikizela-Mandela] and/or her followers?” Ferreira said.
Semenya said the reference to ”wrath” contained the unfounded imputation of criminal violent behaviour. He also protested against the phrase ”her followers”.
”It is not very hard to imagine that came out of the TRC (Truth and Reconciliation Commission) type of publications about the football club.” Magistrate Peet Johnson told Semenya the court would not take into account that her character was attacked.
Ferreira, in his reply, said a serious attack on the character of State witness Humphrey Mafalala, a personal assistant of Madikizela-Mandela’s, had thrown her open to attack.
Semenya defended the tone in which his client answered questions during the trial, saying it might not endear her to many.
”Given the history of her life and the tensions that have characterised her life within the law, this can be understood. It would be wrong to use her dismissive responses to questions as argument on her credibility.
”If she thinks issues (raised in cross-examination) are not limited to the charges, if she thinks the prosecution comes out of external influences, then the anger… and the dismissiveness can be contextualised.”
According to testimony, there was an agreement that Saambou Bank would extend loans to ANCWL employees.
The State alleges that loan applications for non-league employees, accompanied by letters on the ANCWL letterhead stating that the applicants were in its employ, and bearing Madikizela-Mandela’s signature, were submitted to Saambou.
A handwriting expert testified that in 16 of the 60 letters pertaining to the fraud charges, the signatures purportedly made by Madikizela-Mandela were forged.
One of those was the letter accompanying the application of her daughter Zinzi, whose signature was also forged.
Semenya said his client could only be convicted of fraud if it was found she had a common purpose with Moolman, who submitted the applications.
”If Mr Moolman was in common purpose with Mrs Madikizela-Mandela he would have had no reason to cause her signature to be falsified (on Zinzi’s letter)…
”Clearly, Mr Moolman did not want to open a possibility that Mrs Madikizela-Mandela might see the applicant was her daughter and her details were falsified. He feared that his entire plot would have been exposed.” Ferreira compared Zinzi’s application to a double-edged sword.
”There is uncontradicted evidence that Zinzi applied for a loan, got a loan and haven’t paid a cent back.
”Why then would it be necessary for Moolman or anyone else to falsify any signatures?” Ferreira asked why it would be feared that Madikizela-Mandela would not sign Zinzi’s application if she — as she claimed –did not read the letters before she signed them.
The 25 theft charges relate to amounts of R360 deducted from loan applicants’ bank accounts for a funeral policy scheme that was allegedly not underwritten.
Semenya said Madikizela-Mandela did not know the money was being deducted. Nor was she aware that money was used to pay Waki Gosani, who, according to her, was an employee of the funeral scheme.
According to others’ evidence he was her personal assistant.
In conclusion, Semenya said: ”…If politics were ultimately to claim her life, she would be comfortable to know that such perils are inherent in a life she chose for herself.
”To use the law as an instrument that will explain her political demise would be to cause casualty on the law and on all of us.” – Sapa