Johannesburg - The National Prosecuting Authority plans to open a docket to investigate perjury against two police witnesses who helped sink the Andries Tatane case.
But just how does the State intend conducting that investigation? Well, nobody’s quite sure.
At a press conference on Wednesday, the NPA tried to explain away the fumbled case that left the nation reeling and wanting to know how a crime that played out on camera led to the acquittal of the seven accused police officers.
Captain Matshidiso Lesimola and Sergeant Kabelo Moroane were at the April 2011 protest where Tatane was killed.
And, after being shown footage of the incident by Independent Police Investigative Directorate (Ipid) investigators, both - in sworn statements - identified several of their public order police colleagues.
But on the stand in the Ficksburg Magistrate’s Court, both recanted those statements, claiming they had been threatened by investigators.
Now the NPA wants to know whether those threats were real, or if the officers deliberately scuppered the case. But the docket hasn’t been opened just yet.
“If the statements were shown to have not been made voluntarily, a charge of perjury cannot stand. That’s why they must investigate,” said the acting deputy national director of public prosecutions, advocate Thoko Majokweni.
Ordinarily, as with the Tatane case, police officers implicated in a crime are investigated by Ipid. But who investigates a police officer with claims against Ipid investigators? And who, in turn, investigates them?
“Yes… that is the question,” said Free State director of public prosecutions Xolisile Khanyile.
The NPA suggested the SAPS might take the lead, but this too would not be an independent investigation. It’s something Ipid could not answer either.
Gareth Newham, of the Institute for Security Studies, said an independent inquiry was needed to find out what went wrong.
“Somebody is lying, and the credibility of the police and Ipid is on the line.”
Only an independent inquiry would resolve this, and action had to be taken against those found to be in the wrong.
It was a “quite extraordinary situation”, he added.
Meanwhile, Ipid also would not respond to the blame laid at its door by the NPA.
On Wednesday, Majokweni said it was the NPA’s duty to prosecute, not investigate: “The NPA executed its mandate. We cannot correct other wrongs that have happened in the system.”
A total of 35 witness statements were handed to the NPA by investigators. Nine came from the community, four from the Ipid team, 19 from SAPS colleagues of the accused, and several more relating to the basic chain of evidence and the SABC footage.
“Our witnesses looked good on paper,” Majokweni said.
But in pre-trial consultations, only three of the police witnesses seemed solid enough to help the State’s case. Two of those officers were Lesimola and Moroane, who turned pro-defence in court.
“It’s not something we could have expected. We ended up relying on the evidence of a single witness, which appeared contradictory in court,” said Majokweni.
Senior prosecutor Sello Matlhoko, who handled the case, said he was taken by surprise.
“When you consult, you do not anticipate that in court your witnesses will change their evidence. The (perjury) investigation will guide us as to whether this was deliberate,” he said.
Meanwhile, the NPA has said it will not be appealing regional magistrate Hein van Niekerk’s ruling. “The court of appeal is a court of record,” said Majokweni.
The Star