Ex-Deputy director-general of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF), Siphokazi Ndudane will head to the Western Cape High Court to have criminal charges against her scrapped.
A DAFF whistle-blower, Ndudane is charged with two counts of contravening section 34 of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act (PRECCA), 2004 (Act 12 of 2004), according to the Hawks.
The Hawks said it was alleged that between 2016 and 2019, Ndudane committed acts amounting to contraventions in terms of section 34 of PRECCA, in that she failed to report incidents of fraud that were brought to her attention in her capacity as deputy director general.
Ndudane, currently out on bail of R100 000, made a brief appearance in the Bellville Specialised Commercial Crimes Court on Tuesday, where the matter was postponed to October 30.
Legal counsel for Ndudane, Barnabas Xulu, said the postponement was for legal representations to be made.
The postponement comes days before Ndudane will head to the Western Cape High Court where her application to have the case scrapped from the roll will be heard on September 28.
Ndudane disputes the charges against her and has argued that it was a “smear campaign”.
Xulu had previously labelled the charges a “witch-hunt” against a whistleblower and an attempt to “soil” and to discredit her as a credible witness in the cases which she reported, which are also before court.
Xulu said they intended to submit that the case against Ndudane was an “abuse of court process” and victimisation and mischaracterisation of Ndudane.
“All of the issues relating to Ndudane’s arrest point to malice of the SAPS and Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP),” said Xulu.
Hawks spokesperson Zinzi Hani previously said: “Ndudane, in her official capacity as the former DDG: Fisheries, filed affidavits in high court, in which she prayed that the court set aside the contract (approximately R32 million) awarded to a service provider on the basis that the contract/ tender between company and department was concluded due to material and fraudulent misrepresentation.
“In addition, Ndudane, received information that a company had made misrepresentations in their application for fishing rights.
“This was brought to her attention for her to immediately revoke their fishing rights and this would also disqualify the company from receiving any future fishing rights.”