/ 2 November 2009

Selebi calls state’s behaviour into question

Jackie Selebi's lawyer changed his target on Monday, firing salvos at the prosecution after a failed application to have Judge Meyer Joffe removed.

Jackie Selebi’s lawyer changed his target on Monday, firing salvos at the prosecution after a failed application to have Judge Meyer Joffe removed on Friday.

Senior advocate Jaap Cilliers brought an application for a special entry to be placed on the record against the state’s alleged improper behaviour.

This comes after Joffe criticised Cilliers on Friday for attacking him when a number of complaints were levelled at the state.

Cilliers particularly referred to the alleged late handing of statements to the defence. These include the affidavits of businessman Billy Rautenbach and the people state witness Glenn Agliotti alleges assisted him in drawing up a sworn statement for the National Intelligence Agency — Tanya Volschenk and Dennis Kekana.

This, according to Cilliers, infringed upon Selebi’s right to a fair trial.

Cilliers’s latest manoeuvre is a continuation of his strategy to lay the ground for an appeal or application after the trial, arguing that Selebi’s constitutional fair-trial rights were trampled on.

Chief state prosecutor Gerrie Nel said he found ”irony” in Cilliers’s words, who once spoke about ”being collegial”, but did not inform the state about the application.

Cilliers then spent the next hour-and-a-half drilling holes into Agliotti’s evidence and credibility.

He told Agliotti that Selebi had not been available on a number of the dates that Agliotti claimed he paid the former top cop packages of money. He also threatened to bring a pilot to testify that Selebi was on a flight to another town on one of those days. Agliotti replied: ”When I made the statements I had no access to anything I could refer to, no cheque stubs. It was a generalisation of what we used to do.”

When Agliotti was told that Selebi was not available on the day that he apparently bought him (Selebi) a Canali tie from a Sandton shop, he said that he would often leave goods to be altered at the shop and collect them the next day. ”Mr Agliotti,” said Cilliers, ”you don’t suggest they were making alterations to a tie.” Agliotti replied that he would often buy several items of clothing and ”collect the whole parcel”.

Cilliers then questioned Agliotti on why he had a ”change of heart” regarding where the money for alleged payments to Selebi came from. ”You said more than likely the money came from the Spring Lights account [an account allegedly used by the late Brett Kebble to pay Agliotti],” said Cilliers. ”Now you say it is highly unlikely.” Agliotti, who looked more than ready to leave the stand for good, said: ”I am trying my best to give an explanation.”

Agliotti also sat through persistent questioning on his January 2008 affidavits made to the Scorpions, which changed from stating that he never bribed Selebi to, ”I never maintained that I never ever bribed the accused.” Agliotti put the change down to a mistake, and then to not understanding the legal definition of bribery. ”I’m not a lawyer or an advocate,” said Agliotti. ”I didn’t know giving someone money constituted bribery. I say it’s not bribery, the law says it is.”

Cilliers, who did not buy the explanation, said: ”You took the easy way out. You lied to [the Scorpions] under oath, and then you said you never said that.”

The defence closed its cross-examination with: ”Mr Agliotti, regarding the defeating the ends of justice charge, [the accused] denies that at any stage he assisted you in any untoward manner.”

Agliotti replied: ”Again, I don’t understand what defeating the ends of justice means, but yes, I agree with you.”

Nel commenced his re-examination of Agliotti on Monday afternoon.