THE man who allegedly pushed Ahmed Timol to his death has approached the Supreme Court of Appeals in an effort to keep himself out of the dock for the 49-year-old murder.
Joao Rodrigues, an ex-clerk in the police’s notorious security branch, has applied for a permanent stay of prosecution.
His argument to the court yesterday centred on an apparent amnesty he received and the fact that because it has taken 47 years for the case to come to court, it has infringed on his constitutional right to a fair trial.
But as to the amnesty claim that apparently cleared the policemen of wrongdoing, even Rodrigues’s advocate, Jaap Cilliers, had to admit it was a little shy on evidence.
“Justice Cachalia, I agree with you there may be a lack of sufficient facts, but what you need to consider in this regard is that probably the reason for that is that the Minister of Justice has not compiled and provided the relevant facts,” Cilliers told Justice Azhar Cachalia.
The justice however replied that an amnesty would have been the responsibility of the Presidency.
It was pointed out that Rodrigues had in the past the opportunity to get amnesty through the TRC, and had been approached, but declined to take up the offer.
Rodrigues’ application to the Supreme Court of Appeals comes after he was in 2018 charged with murder and defeating and obstructing the administration of justice. This following an inquest the year before where Judge Billy Mothle recommended that the NPA consider prosecuting Rodrigues for his role in the activist’s death.
The inquest had come about in a large part due to the efforts of Timol’s nephew, Imtiaz Cajee. It was Cajee who for years investigated and traced the final days of Timol’s life.
Timol was arrested at a roadblock in Johannesburg and was taken to John Vorster Square police station where for five days he was beaten and tortured. Police would later claim that Timol leaped from the building to his death. An inquest in 1972 exonerated the police.
According to Rodrigues, on that day two security branch policemen had left him with Timol in the room. He claimed that Timol had rushed to the window and jumped out. Rodrigues had tried to save him, but tripped over a chair.
Cilliers said part of the reason it took so long for the case to come to trial was because of Timol’s family.
Advocate Howard Varney, acting on behalf of the Timol family, countered: “I simply want to point out that you can’t say that the Timol family were sitting on their hands. In fact, from 2003, following the winding up of the Truth Commission, and in particular, the amnesty process, Imtiaz Cajee took deliberate steps. He approached the NPA, he pushed them to investigate.”
Rodrigues’ advocate also argued that there had been political interference in the prosecution of apartheid-related crimes. He also told the justices there was insufficient evidence to prosecute his client for the 49-yearold murder. Cachalia stressed that evidence for the murder would relate to the trial, not the Appeals Court’s decision.
The Southern Africa Litigation Centre as a friend of the court also made a submission to the Appeal Court yesterday where they argued that it was South Africa’s international duty to prosecute crimes against humanity and that time delays cannot violate the right to a fair trial. They pointed out several war crime trials, where in some cases the perpetrators were in their nineties, and were being tried for atrocities committed over 70 years ago.
Rodrigues will have to wait to find out if he has been successful in his application.
The Saturday Star