Madlanga Commission | Prof Nirmala Gopal weighs in on Johnson's testimony

[00:00:00]Let's bring in Professor Nirmala Gopal now, criminologist from the University of KwaZulu-Natal joining us now to weigh in on this. Prof, a very good afternoon to you. So, you know, today's testimony was rather sharpening one of the commission's central questions, whether there was abuse of power and even legal justification to conduct, you know, such an intrusive, as one of the commissioners said, investigation into these eight officials at Crime Intelligence, including a General Kumalo, using only the Section 27 affidavit with no legal basis or grounds. If an investigation begins without the required legal foundation, I mean, what does that firstly tell us about just how Advocate Johnson's conduct was as the head of Idec and in fact the institution itself?

[00:00:53]>> A very good afternoon, Unathi, and good afternoon to your viewers. Yes, I want to agree that very interesting, I think, powerful, uh perhaps even disappointing evidence that's coming through by Advocate Johnson. So, I think, Unathi, at this point, um you know, in the absence of all of the evidence that we would like to hear, I think we can speculate. And one of the, you know, one of my speculative uh ideas at this point is that it does appear as though she um abused her office, abused her power.

[00:01:24]What I What I find very difficult to comprehend is I I'm just wondering how often does she have to manage these kind of cases that she, you know, seems to have lapses in her knowledge, um especially specific knowledge in terms of this particular case. So, um you know, just the fact that uh she can't remember the conversation between herself and I think it's Advocate Ramsamy, >> Yeah.

[00:01:57]>> which which is really fundamental to understanding how those additional eight people appeared in the you know on the charge sheet. So, very interesting I think, but at the same time I believe that it seems as though that she's abusing her position.

[00:02:15]>> Yeah. Uh to what extent then do these irregularities that we are you know hearing and it's been a while and not only in during her two-day testimony. To what extent then do they undermine the integrity of the investigations themselves? You know, from a criminal justice perspective for instance, what are the safeguards that exist specifically to prevent investigators from appearing to manufacture uh that's the word that was also used or even strengthen complaints themselves?

[00:02:46]>> So, Annatjie, I mean I think at the at the basis at the very foundation these institutions have been set up and you know as entities to protect the public and protect them uh against injustices within the law enforcement agencies.

[00:03:05]But of course we know that one of I deck's um big mandate is to ensure that there's um that there's no corruption, police corruption and to investigate police etc. So, I think the you know the fact that this is if if at the end of the commission or her testimony we are able to uh decisively say that she was actually abusing her role and her power, then I think it certainly to a very large extent undermines I deck as a as a law enforcement or as an agency within the criminal justice system. So, I think it absolutely doesn't augur well both for uh South African Police Services, but also for the country at large.

[00:03:48]>> Colonel uh Brian Perumal Naidoo testified in fact he testified before Johnson um given the fact that she was ill. He testified you know, him being the lead investigator here that he investigated matters following this internal committee decision which was taken. I think he mentioned Advocate Perumal at the forefront of that. Advocate Johnson now saying and refuting that there was such a committee. I mean, what does that then tell us and even expose in so far again as to how decisions at Idec have been taken.

[00:04:24]>> So well as um Pediacci, Colonel Pediacci, yeah, Colonel Pediacci. It sounded as though you know this the processes within Idec seems very ad hoc, very random and I don't necessarily think that they realize it would get to this stage where the processes will be scrutinized and interrogated at the level it is. So to me it would seem as though they've been doing this for a long period of time but certainly it has to be investigated and you know their procedures, their their policies, their procedures etc. have to absolutely be in be aligned to what the institution to the institutions policies. So suddenly for me it seems as though they randomly do they have done things in the past.

[00:05:17]>> Uh and can you comment on you know the Idec on board confirming of course that they have received the complaints against Advocate Johnson. I mean, the oversight judge confirming receipt receiving these complaints and this of course comes amid this growing public scrutiny around particularly you know the integrity of the leadership within Idec.

[00:05:42]>> So Nathi, if he has received that I'm not surprised that he would especially given the evidence that's public at the moment. And I'm sure that whoever has, you know, laid those complaints would have enough prima facie evidence to, you know, to hold her accountable. So, it's not surprising that he would have received those complaints.

[00:06:06]>> Yeah. Thanks, Prof, for your time.

[00:06:08]That's where we have to leave it for now. Really do appreciate your analysis, Professor Namala Goopal, a criminologist [music] at KZN.