Alleged crime boss Nafiz Modack has asserted that the investigating team handling the state’s case against him is guilty of a gross dereliction of duty.
(David Harrison/M&G)
The bail hearing of alleged underworld figure Nafiz Modack and his co-accused is yet to commence as their lawyers request more information relating to their clients’ lengthy list of charges.
Modack, Zane Kilian, Jacques Cronjé, Ricardo Morgan and police officer Ashley Tabisher made another court appearance at the Blue Downs regional court on Friday, 28 May. The accused are appearing on various charges including conspiracy to commit murder, illegal cellphone tracking, racketeering, kidnapping, intimidation, corruption and gang-related extortion.
State prosecutor Greg Wolmarans started off in court saying the problems raised by the defence on Monday 24 May have not been resolved, arguing that the only way the matter can be dealt with is through a full interlocutory court.
The defence for three of the accused — Modack, Kilian and Cronje — demands the state to provide sufficient information in order for them to prepare for bail.
Advocate Dirk Uys, representing Modack, handed a “signed request for particulars” to the court wherein he enumerates the detailed information he requests from the state.
“The state has not yet furnished us with a certificate of the national director of public prosecutions (NPA) authorising the charging of my client,” Uys told the court, adding the “affidavit which forms the basis upon which they [the police] have obtained a warrant for my client’s arrest.”
Modack, charged for the murder of top Western Cape anti-gang unit cop Lieutenant-Colonel Charl Kinnear and several other offences, says in his affidavit that the state’s allegations in the charge sheet are too “vague” or “confusing” to respond to in a meaningful manner.
Modack also claims he was harassed by members of the police and the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (Hawks) in March and April this year.His court application to obtain an interdict to stop the harassment was set for 28 April, a day before his arrest, but was postponed to 3 June after Modack failed to file a reply affidavit on time.
In the prosecution’s response, Wolmarans said they have not been given enough time to respond to the defences’s requests, adding “there is a variety of factors to be considered while the investigation is ongoing” before certain particularities can be disclosed.
Wolmarans said that providing the defence with certain information might disclose police investigating methods while some information might impact witnesses. He also said that more charges might be added to some suspects.
Judge Deon van der Spuy postponed the interlocutory matter to be dealt with on Wednesday 9 June.
The state indicated it will respond to the defence’s “signed request for particulars” by Friday 4 June.