Madlanga Commission | IDAC Head Adv Andrea Johnson testifies: Canny Maphanga updates

[00:00:00]Let's bring in SABC News senior reporter Kenny Mapanga who's live for us at the Bridget Mapanga Justice College where the Matlala commission is sitting.

[00:00:07]Kenny, so let's start with the apparent contradictions that we're hearing already between the evidence delivered by the IDAC official last week. That's Mr. Pariachi, Brian Pariachi, and his boss Andrea Johnson today.

[00:00:25]>> Well, good afternoon to you Tembile and to the viewers at home. We've seen advocate Andrea Johnson complete her first day on the stand which is about three statements in which she addresses three separate different issues here before the Matlala commission. At the tail end what you saw is the commission shifting the lens back to Colonel Brian Pariachi and really trying to understand the operational methods of IDAC because Pariachi claimed before the commission that when he did that investigation into the Brigadier Dineo Mogwela appointment or actually a number of cases before IDAC, let's put it that way, that he actually doesn't have sight of the section 27 referral. That is quite confusing to the commission's bench because that is something that is the source upon which you initiate a trigger and investigation. And although she is first stating that she doesn't know how he didn't get to learn about that particular statement because it gets given to the team. She then also retreats from giving definitive answers on this particular subject and wants to consult with Mr. Perumal and Pariachi to get the facts on the matter. But as things stand, things are quite strange for someone to be part of a team that is given a section 27 referral and not to have sight of it when it is the very thing that informs the investigation that you're set to embark on. And as a senior IDAC investigator, in order for you to gather the information that the team would need in order to decide whether or not to take this matter forward, you would have had to have had sight of that section 27 referral. But Pariachi claims that he didn't and now it lays squarely on advocate Andrea Johnson to clarify whether or not he did and if he didn't why that is the method of doing things within ID Act particularly with the case of Brigadier Dino Mgwelo rather the appointment of Brigadier Mgwelo.

[00:02:10]>> And can you just on the Mgwelo issue we heard in the very early reading of these one of these three statements that ultimately Advocate Johnson removed herself or asked to be moved in fact from any involvement in these crime intelligence investigations that happened to my right in June. Why why did she she make such a move and what was the calculation?

[00:02:36]>> Well the debate here before the commission is whether or not she even enjoyed the powers to do so as an ID Act head. I'm not sure if that is a statement made before the probe in order to distance herself from the kind of controversy that surrounds this particular matter but I'm not sure that there is even a power to state that as an ID Act head you removed yourself from an investigation or case that falls under your watch. So I'm not sure how the commission is going to take that particular submission going forward because the case is already in court and when it was initiated she would have had some form of an alleged involvement in it prior to the controversy that has rocked this particular case before the commission's lens with the appearance of Brian Paliachi that raises serious concerns about the manner in which this case was investigated and the kind of allegations it points to which could be allegations of an allegedly a manufactured case because seemingly the scant A1 statement or for affidavit as one would put it doesn't match the kind of charges that were leveled against some of the individuals in this particular matter.

[00:03:42]>> And how does she ultimately explain justify contextualize the arrest of Dumisani Kumalo and some people from his office for the appointment of uh Mgwelo because just last week Parayachi was asked if that had any basis in fact at all to raise alarms of possible fraud and corruption, which are the charges that they now face in the criminal proceedings.

[00:04:07]>> Well, this is a difficulty that is a concurrent theme in all three statements that uh Johnson places before the commission. You have this case which is currently before court, and while she defends the case of the strength of the case and states that they had a prima facie case to against these particular generals, and that she speaks of thematic subjects of this kind of alleged capture within the criminal justice system, particularly within crime intelligence. She refuses to go into uh those details stating that the matter is sub judice K because it's still in the courts where it is going to play out, and she doesn't want to deal with the merits of the matter.

[00:04:45]Similarly, she also does the same for the witness O and uh Colonel Willersa allegations, which really point to her and also point to alleged commonality in her handling of a criminal complaint against Major General Forah Khan. There too, she is invoking the right against self-incrimination, which means we're not sure which questions she will be answering to and which she won't uh or rather will refuse to answer to because she is uh basically the foundation rather of this particular right that she invokes is against the backdrop that this particular matter is now before the NPA for a decision on whether or not to prosecute because witness O made allegations that point to now the alleged impropriety of her conduct in that regard. Because what she's saying is that she's accused of allegedly furnishing Major General Khan with the context of a assault and intimidation case against him, and also asking for it to be deleted from witness O's private uh email address. And the question is why.

[00:05:48]And she also went ahead upon learning of the protected disclosure and spoke to investigators, spoke to Barry Bateman, and chose to only speak to the latter on signal. And the question again is if it was above board, why then take all those steps after learning of that information? And all of that together points to allegations of defeating the ends of justice and of course interference. And this is now a matter that the Hawks is currently investigating and we she's just confirmed on the stand that it's before the NPA and because of that her constitutional right, she argues, must override the mandate of the commission to gather the facts in this particular fact-finding mission over how Idec plays out or how it centers himself in this alleged factional war within the South African Police Services. If there's anything untoward together from the conduct of Idec, the cases it takes, as well as her conduct as the then senior public prosecutor. But on that particular right against self-incrimination, she'll have to ponder on it overnight and decide how she takes this particular evidence forward because she's going to have to answer at some point as she continues on the stand to the allegations of witness O and the Hawks investigators because it speaks to Major General Khan and propriety of her conduct as a then senior public prosecutor and whether or not they can be connected to what we see playing out before Idec currently. That is the subject of much scrutiny before the public lens, but also the Mazibuko Commission.

[00:07:17]>> And just on on the Khan issue, the relationship with Major General Khan from Crime Intelligence Kenny. So, Andrea Johnson, it was interesting to hear just before lunch asked about the sort of relationship that she and Khan had. We managed to find out that she attended his 50th birthday with her husband. Not sure about the year, but she then also says in the same sort of evidence that she withdrew from the relationship with Khan after that complaint against him. So, how close are they really and what is the context of that closeness?

[00:07:55]>> Well, we do know that there is some form of a relationship that goes beyond the work relationship if indeed she was attending birthday parties of Major General Khan. And I think she does admit to knowing him both in the professional and the personal kind of nature of a relationship. But she also states that in a year and a half she has not spoken to him because of the allegations surrounding his involvement, alleged involvement in the Murray case. But she does admit to being I guess a plus one even though she waters it down to some extent. She admits to being a plus one to her husband to the birthday party of Major General Foroz Khan, but she states that because it was so busy, there were so many people there, they didn't even get a chance to see him and that she left quite quickly. So, she did attend and she states that she wasn't there for long and that she had left along with her husband. So, I'm not sure what the commission must make of that, but at the very least there is some form of an a relationship that existed between Khan and Andrea Johnson. She admits that she knew him personally as well along with her husband. But in terms of the allegations which points to the alleged Khan I deck cabal, she denies an existence of such and if such exists that she has no part in that particular allegation that was made by Vusi Xonga that is the MKM P that raised questions about Major General Khan and the kind of allegations that continue to swell him and whether or not I deck is allegedly being used as a tool to fight those factional battles or to further the alleged interests of Major General Khan.

[00:09:28]>> All right, Kenny Mapanga, SABC News senior reporter live for us at the Malanga Commission of Inquiry. For now, thank you, Kenny.

[00:09:50]>> Mhm.