TRC Cases Inquiry: Hearing Day 41 Friday 15/05/2026

Added: 2026-05-20

[00:01:59]Mhm.

[00:03:54]>> Mhm.

[00:05:49]>> Mhm.

[00:07:44]>> Mhm.

[00:09:39]>> Mhm.

[00:11:34]>> Mhm.

[00:15:24]>> Mhm.

[00:17:19]>> Mhm.

[00:19:14]>> Mhm.

[00:21:09]>> Mhm.

[00:23:04]>> Mhm.

[00:30:21]>> Good morning.

[00:30:23]Good morning, Chairperson. Morning, Chairperson. Mr. Sonny.

[00:30:28]Chairperson, we are going to hear the evidence today of Mr. Dyosi.

[00:30:35]Yes.

[00:30:37]Mr. Salukazana, you will be leading Mr. Dyosi. That's correct, Chairperson. Good morning.

[00:30:43]>> Mr. JOC, are you going to take an oath or affirmation?

[00:30:49]Yes. Do you swear that the evidence you will you will present before this commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? If so, raise your right hand and say, "So help me God." So help me God.

[00:31:01]Thank you. Mr. Salgaocar. Thank you, chairperson. Good morning, Mr. JOC. Good morning. Um counselor. You should have before you uh a file that is open with the rule 3.3 notice, and then an orange flag, which is um to your affidavit. Is that correct? That's correct. May you please go to your affidavit.

[00:31:26]Starting at page 1735.

[00:31:31]I've got it, chairperson. At 1739 is a signature just above what appears to be your name. Do you confirm that that's your name and that's the statement?

[00:31:42]That's my name and that's my signature, chairperson. Thank you.

[00:31:46]And do you confirm that what is stated here is what you remember about the activities in respect of which you are going to testify?

[00:31:54]That's correct, chairperson. And that what you have stated here is indeed correct and true.

[00:32:00]That's correct, chairperson. Thank you.

[00:32:02]May we start then with paragraph three of your affidavit. That's at page 1735.

[00:32:11]Could you please read that for us?

[00:32:14]On or on or about the 15th of October, 2025, I was served with a notice in terms of rule 3.3 of the rules of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into the allegations regarding efforts or attempts having been made to stop the investigation or prosecution of Truth and Reconciliation Commission cases.

[00:32:40]Indeed. And just before we go to the Rule 35, could you just briefly tell us when you started at the NDP and NPA and when your term ended?

[00:32:52]I started the at the NPA um I think it was uh January 1999.

[00:33:01]And I left the NPA in at the end of August uh 2004. Thank you. May we then go to the Rule 3.3 notice? Okay.

[00:33:14]The Rule 3.3 notice says that you have been implicated um in matters that have arisen before this uh commission.

[00:33:27]Particularly at page 315 headed particulars of the implication.

[00:33:35]It has a heading political or politicians interference. Do you see that? The politicians intervene I beg your pardon. Do you see that?

[00:33:42]Can you direct me to the page number uh concerned?

[00:33:46]>> uh 315 of what is before you. I've got it.

[00:33:51]Thank you, Chief. Thank you.

[00:33:53]Um so, we want to start in respect of the alleged uh polit- the alleged interference or intervention of the politicians.

[00:34:02]Um could you please read paragraph 221 for us?

[00:34:08]During 2006, it became increasingly clear to government that NDPP Pikoli and PCLU had Ackerman would pursue TRC cases when they were in a position to do so.

[00:34:27]The first complaint leveled by government functionaries against the NPA was that Akerman was seen as a loose cannon.

[00:34:37]Thank you.

[00:34:38]Um do you confirm that around 2006 you were no longer at the NPA?

[00:34:43]I was no longer at the NPA, chairperson.

[00:34:45]So, you cannot testify to whatever happened there. Am I correct? I have no knowledge of what happened during that time, chairperson. And am I correct in understanding that you've considered the rule 3.3 notice and is there anything stated there that relates to the time you were at the NPA?

[00:35:05]Yes, chairperson. Um the rule 3.3 notice that was served to me uh makes uh a statement that I attended a ATT meeting.

[00:35:24]I think it was ATT. Um Amnesty, yeah.

[00:35:27]ATT meeting.

[00:35:29]That's the allegation in the rule 3.3.

[00:35:32]In fact, in your statement, if you could go back there you Actually, before we get to the ATT meeting um I ask that you go to paragraph nine of your statement where you say Could you read that for us?

[00:35:58]Page 1736.

[00:36:01]Paragraph nine of my statement reads The Kalata affidavit alleges that on or about 2004 I was a member of the Amnesty Task Team in brackets ATT.

[00:36:16]And that Kalata affidavit is a Kalata affidavit filed in that before this commission. Am I correct?

[00:36:21]>> That's correct, chairperson. And so, is it then not the Kalata affidavit that makes the the statement about the ATT instead of the rule 3.3.

[00:36:34]Yes, chairperson needs the Talat affidavit. Thank you.

[00:36:38]Um may we then go to the Talat affidavit?

[00:36:44]And that So, the specific paragraphs are at 148, which are at paginated page 67 67.

[00:36:54]The heading is the Amnesty Task Team.

[00:36:56]There's a file just to your right.

[00:37:00]Yes, those are the bundles.

[00:37:04]So, it should be the first file at page 67.

[00:37:15]At page? 67.

[00:37:18]Paginated 67.

[00:37:20]Top right corner.

[00:37:47]Are you flying solo?

[00:37:48]>> I've got it, chairperson. Are you flying solo, Mr. Sandton?

[00:37:52]I understand that um uh my uh the junior with whom I'm working is online.

[00:37:59]I suppose I should have introduced them.

[00:38:01]I beg your pardon. Uh I'm flying solo in person.

[00:38:04]>> Okay, no, no, I was just wondering that if the witness uh maybe does not find something, your junior might assist, but we are not there. Don't worry. Yes, certainly.

[00:38:15]Thank you. Thank you, uh Judge Kollapen.

[00:38:17]Do you have it?

[00:38:19]I have it, chairperson. Thank you. Um could you have that open next to your statement? So, look at your statement in paragraph nine where you started about referring to the affidavit.

[00:38:31]And have that open next to you.

[00:38:35]I have it, Chairperson. Could you read for us, please, paragraph 148 of that statement of that affidavit?

[00:38:44]It reads, a Directors General's Forum chaired by Advocate Picolli, the then Director General of DOJ, met on the on 23 February 2004 to consider how to give effect to the President's objectives set out in his speech the year before.

[00:39:09]Essentially, this involved how to deal with the TRC cases, which Picolli described in his affidavit as being politically sensitive.

[00:39:20]I'm going to skip the citation in the brackets.

[00:39:24]>> The forum appointed a task team to report on the mechanism to give effect to the President's objectives.

[00:39:32]This task team was known as the Amnesty Task Team, ATT.

[00:39:38]Certainly. Could you then look at or read for us paragraph 10 of your statement?

[00:39:46]Paragraph 10 of my statement, Chairperson, reads, You know, in or about late 2003 early 2004, the NDPP, Ngcuka, requested that I attend a meeting of the Directors Forum in brackets DG's Forum, that was to be convened by the then Director General of the Department of Justice, Advocate Vusi Picolli.

[00:40:11]Ngcuka requested that I attend on his behalf as he could not attend at the time. Thank you. Is this the same Directors Forum that is referred to in paragraph 148 of Mr. Talat's affidavit?

[00:40:24]Chairperson, I think that's the same meeting.

[00:40:29]Thank you. And then, if we could go to paragraph 152 of Mr. Talat's affidavit.

[00:40:43]Could you read that for us, please?

[00:40:45]Paragraph 152 of the Talat's affidavit reads, "The ATT comprised the following members: Dion Redman (bracket) Chairperson D DOJ The next name is Yvon Mabulet National Intelligence (bracket) NIA Vincent Mothulwane NIA Gerard Nel NPA Lungisa Dyosi NPA Rey Lala SAPS Roy Ratabe Department of Defense DOD Having read that, do you consider that the Lungisa Dyosi referred to at 152.5 is you?

[00:41:33]That's correct, Chairperson. Is the assertion that you were a member of the ATT that is referred to at 148 and to which you refer as the DG's Forum?

[00:41:45]Sir, can you repeat, Counsel?

[00:41:46]>> Is it correct that you were a member of the ATT that is referred to here at 152 and at 148 of the affidavit?

[00:41:54]Chairperson, I was not a member of the ATT. At paragraph 10 of your affidavit, you mention that you attended a meeting of the Directors-General's Forum.

[00:42:02]Is that a forum that is different to the ATT that Mr. Talat refers to, or is it the same?

[00:42:08]The DG's Forum is different to the ATT, chairperson. What is the difference?

[00:42:17]As I understood it from the color affidavit and uh in my own understanding, the DG's forum uh was convened to consider how to according to the color affidavit, how to attend to the president's directive.

[00:42:38]Um and and it seems that then the DG's forum decided to constitute an ATT, meaning an uh amnesty task team.

[00:42:51]So, that's the difference.

[00:42:55]Thank you. When you say the directors generals forum decided to constitute the ATT, how did you come to know about that decision to constitute the ATT?

[00:43:04]I was present at the director generals forum meeting.

[00:43:07]This happened some more than 20 years ago. I do not remember if uh a decision was taken uh at that meeting to constitute an ATT.

[00:43:19]Um I read about that decision in the color affidavit. Uh it may well be so that the meeting may have taken that decision.

[00:43:31]All right. Uh we're going to go back now to your um affidavit.

[00:43:38]Um you've already said that you don't remember uh the what happened, but could you just read paragraph 11, which expands on that for us, of your statement?

[00:43:49]Paragraph 11 of my affidavit reads, "I do not remember being furnished with a draft agenda for the meeting if there was such a draft agenda.

[00:43:59]I was made aware that the DG's forum was going to discuss TRC cases.

[00:44:07]Please go on to paragraph 12.

[00:44:10]Paragraph 12.

[00:44:12]As far as I could remember, the context of this meeting at the time was that there was a lot of speculation in the media that the NPA was going to prosecute the then president of the Republic of South Africa, Thabo Mbeki, and some 37 other ANC leaders.

[00:44:28]13, please.

[00:44:30]I do not remember who else attended the DG's Forum meeting as I do not have nor have I been furnished with the signed register of the attendees to this meeting, but I do remember that Advocate Pikoli chaired the meeting of part thereof.

[00:44:46]What was your um what in what capacity did you did you attend this meeting?

[00:44:51]At the NPA, I was the strategy and legal advisor to the National Director of Public Prosecutions. At the time, it was Mr. Bulelani Ngcuka.

[00:44:59]So, it was in that capacity that Mr. Ngcuka could uh request that I attend the DG's Forum meeting because he could not attend.

[00:45:07]Did it fall within or under your um scope of duties as an advisor to represent the NDPP at meetings with the government? Yes, I've I've represented uh chairperson, sorry. I've represented uh one the NDPP and the NPA in a number of uh interdepartmental uh forums. I've represented the NDPP and the NPA in in in multinational agencies like the UN, the SADC uh committees against corruption and so forth. So, it was in my line of duty to to do so.

[00:45:48]Did any of these roles involve or deal with uh the TRC cases, so-called? No, I It was the first time that I was uh introduced to a meeting that dealt with the TRC cases, uh chairperson. So, to punctuate that point, before then you had not had any engagement with anyone about TRC cases.

[00:46:11]Outside of the organization. Yes. Not at all, chairperson.

[00:46:15]Thank you.

[00:46:16]Um could you then go on to paragraph 14 of the statement?

[00:46:21]Paragraph 14, I also do not remember whether I attended the meeting alone on behalf of the NPA or whether someone else was with me.

[00:46:30]Again, a sign register of attendees would have assisted in this regard.

[00:46:35]However, the Kalata affidavit makes reference to an unsigned minute of the DG's forum DG forum's meeting, which states that Gerrie Nel from the NPA had been a member of the amnesty task team, ostensibly formed by the DG's forum meeting.

[00:46:55]Based on this, it is possible that Gerrie Nel would have a accompanied me to the DG's forum meeting.

[00:47:03]Having read your statement and prepared it a month ago, Yeah.

[00:47:07]do you still are you still unclear about who it is you were with, or do you confirm that it was Mr. Gerrie Nel?

[00:47:15]I think I can confirm, chairperson, that Gerrie Nel was with me on behalf of the NPA.

[00:47:23]Thank you. And did Mr. Pikoli chair the meeting throughout, or was there a time at which it was chaired by a different person?

[00:47:31]Chairperson, I know um Mr. Pikoli chaired uh the meeting.

[00:47:38]Uh I seem to remember that uh halfway through the meeting, he had um a conference call to attend to, and asked the meeting to be adjourned.

[00:47:49]I do not remember if he came back and chaired again, um but the minute uh from the collector for David suggests that um, his deputy DG Deon Rodman chaired the meeting um, I would say after uh, Advocate Pikoli excused himself.

[00:48:14]All right, thank you. Um, could you read paragraph 15 for us, please?

[00:48:18]Paragraph 15.

[00:48:20]I do not have a signed I do not have signed minutes of the DG's forum meeting.

[00:48:26]But I do remember that the meeting sought to find a mechanism through which the NPA would have to make prosecutorial decisions relating to TRC cases either in consultation with or after consultation with the ATT.

[00:48:43]The meeting intended to form.

[00:48:46]I do not remember what my response would have been in this regard as the unsigned draft minutes I have had sight of do not make reference to detailed discussions on this issue.

[00:49:01]But knowing the NPA policy, no, but knowing the NPA Act and policy I would have directed the meeting to the NPA Act and policy which vests all prosecutorial decisions to the NDPP with delegations to prosecutors employed by the NPA.

[00:49:19]Consequently the envisaged ATT and or its members not being prosecutors in the employ of the NPA would not be consulted for and would have no say in prosecutorial decisions relating to the TRC cases or any other cases for that matter.

[00:49:41]Thank you. Limiting ourselves to the TRC cases, why do you say that the NPA Act and the policy do not permit the involvement of members of the ATT.

[00:49:55]Chairperson, does not apply only to the TRC cases. Prosecutorial decisions are made by the NDPP and with delegation to all the prosecutors beneath him. So, there could not be any outsider in in the process of making prosecutorial decisions.

[00:50:14]Do you have any experience of or whilst you were an advisor of how prosecutorial decisions were taken within the NPA during your term?

[00:50:24]Yes, I do, chairperson. What was it?

[00:50:25]Please explain it.

[00:50:28]In the normal course, in the lower courts, a prosecutor would take a decision, whether it's at the district court, would take a decision and proceed based on the act and the policy.

[00:50:41]The same applies to the higher courts and and so forth.

[00:50:46]Um there would be instances though, depending on the nature of the case, that a matter would be referred to the National Director of Prosecution for review um to determine whether to proceed with that uh prosecution or not.

[00:51:01]Uh in those instances as the advisor, there would be cases where I would sit as part of a panel reviewing uh the work that would have been done by investigators and prosecutors uh and and and uh for the NDPP's review and then would make a decision.

[00:51:22]Not we. The NDPP would make a decision based on the advice of of the panel and and the decision by himself. I know you have spoken about cases generally, but just focusing on the TRC cases and that which were discussed at the meeting, was it TRC cases in principle or was it specific cases of specific victims of apartheid crimes or was it certain individuals that had been identified?

[00:51:48]Chairperson, I think the biggest concern at the time, from what I could gather from the meeting, was because there was a lot of media noise or speculation about a possible prosecution of President Mbeki and 37 ANC members. And and and I think that caused a lot of consternation within the cluster, and which is why the meeting was then called. And so, chairperson, in my recollection, the TRC cases that the DG's forum was concerned about were the cases relating to the prosecution, what they call an imminent prosecution of President Mbeki and 37 ANC members.

[00:52:30]Thank you. When you refer to a cluster, what is that?

[00:52:34]The criminal justice cluster. That would be the NPA, um, national intelligence, the police, um, DOG, meaning the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense. The cluster in in in broad terms of the criminal justice sector.

[00:52:52]So, what was raised with you as a representative of the NPA at this meeting in relation to the prosecution of President Mbeki and the 37 others?

[00:53:04]Chairperson, I think that question was asked if there is a docket ready for prosecution of President Mbeki and 37 ANC members.

[00:53:13]And and I seem to remember that uh I told the meeting that we don't generally discuss prosecutorial decisions outside of the NPA, uh unless the matter is taken to court, uh but I would make an exception in this case and and and report that uh no such decision has been taken to prosecute President Mbeki and 37 ANC members. How did you know that the decision had not been taken.

[00:53:43]I would have known because such a decision was such of a nature that it would be taken to the National Director of Public Prosecutions for review.

[00:53:54]And as an advisor and other people in the office would be convened and other senior um members of the NPA uh would be convened to review that prosecutorial [clears throat] decision. And the final decision in that instance would be made by the National Director of Public Prosecutions. So, no such uh referral was made to the office of the National Director. And so, I knew that there was no such decision.

[00:54:22]Uh Mr. Seleka then maybe you you you're going to come to that point, but um looking at paragraph 148 at page 67 of the uh the latter um affidavit um the meeting of the 23rd February 20 2004, that is the meeting that is um occupying our attention now.

[00:54:54]If you could perhaps um direct our attention to it so that um uh particularly myself to refresh my mind and maybe the witness so that um uh o- one one can be more factual.

[00:55:18]Wha- what what what Where are the minutes? Those minutes.

[00:55:23]If you can direct us to those minutes.

[00:55:25]Certainly, chairperson. Um the minutes Yes. Sorry. Yes. Sorry to interrupt you.

[00:55:30]Carry on.

[00:55:31]Yes. The minutes are attached to the latter affidavit.

[00:55:38]And what I understand them to be is at least in so far as we understand them, they are titled first as the report, which is the secret report Amnesty task team, and that is at page 515.

[00:55:53]515 It's annexure FA24.

[00:56:24]Yes, okay.

[00:56:25]Yes.

[00:56:29]All right, yes.

[00:56:34]So, there's a recordal at paragraph 1.1 under the heading background of what took place at the meeting.

[00:56:48]Yes.

[00:56:54]Okay. You may You may proceed.

[00:56:56]Thank you, chairperson.

[00:56:59]Um you were telling us that you said no.

[00:57:05]Um is there anything else that arose after you were clear, at least in so far as your evidence is concerned, that you wouldn't be discussing prosecutorial decisions with the ATT, or was it the end of the meeting?

[00:57:21]Chairperson, I I made it clear that the NPA we would not discuss uh prosecutorial decisions with any structure outside of the NPA.

[00:57:32]Whether it's the Digis Forum or an ATT or any other structure that could be formed.

[00:57:37]Um The the color affidavit records that then an ATT was constituted.

[00:57:47]And my name appears to be one of the members of the ATT.

[00:57:54]I'm saying chairperson in in my affidavit that's not possible.

[00:57:59]Because I could not take a decision uh of that nature all by myself to appoint myself to an amnesty task team.

[00:58:13]Because that decision would have to be taken by the National Director of Public Prosecutions.

[00:58:18]On one, whether the NPA should participate in such a structure.

[00:58:24]Or two, who should then represent the NPA.

[00:58:28]Um After the meeting, I I reported to Mr. Ndouka um what transpired in the meeting.

[00:58:36]And and uh no decision was taken to participate in the ATT or to have a representative of the NPA participating in that in that uh forum.

[00:58:51]Thank you. Now that we're uh after the meeting, could we go back to paragraph 16 of your statement and may you read that for us, please?

[00:59:01]Paragraph 16 In the normal course of my responsibilities and events at the NPA at the time I would have verbally reported to the NDPP on the objectives of the meeting, the outcomes, and our contributions to the deliberations in as far as those relate related to the NPA mandate, NPA Act, and policies.

[00:59:28]After listening to the verbal report and if the NDPP deemed it necessary, he would have he would request a written report. I do not remember what the NDPP's response was to the verbal report and I also I also do not remember submitting a written report of the meeting. Could you please read 17 for us, paragraph 17?

[00:59:52]Although I cannot remember the resolutions of the DG's forum meeting, I know that the unsigned minute of the DG's forum meeting purportedly purportedly resolved to constitute the ATT as set out in the Charlotte affidavit. The unsigned minute also states that I was part of the ATT.

[01:00:11]I could not have consented to being part of the ATT.

[01:00:16]First for reasons stated in paragraph 15 above. Secondly, because I could not take such a decision by myself.

[01:00:24]The NDPP himself would have had to make the decision of who would represent the NPA the ATT if he agreed to the concept of the ATT.

[01:00:36]The unsigned minute of the DG's forum was never circulated to me.

[01:00:41]Had it been circulated, I would have corrected the insinuation that I consented to serving in the ATT without the required delegation by the NDPP.

[01:00:55]Paragraph 18, please.

[01:00:57]Other than the DG's forum meeting I attended, I never attended any other meeting regarding this matter.

[01:01:04]I certainly do not remember attending any ATT meeting.

[01:01:08]I have not been furnished with any signed register or minutes of an ATT meeting reflecting my attendance.

[01:01:17]Paragraph 19, please. Paragraph 19 and 20. So we conclude. In conclusion, as a South African and in my previous role as the strategy and legal advisor to the NDPP, I have always held in high regard the supreme sacrifices made by the martyrs and their families referred to in the Calata affidavit and many other unknown known and unknown South Africans to the liberation of our country in general.

[01:01:44]I therefore deny any suggestion or allegation that by attending the DG's forum meeting in February/March 2004, I in any way participated in or contributed to the efforts or attempts to stop the investigation or prosecution of TRC cases.

[01:02:05]Taking into account or having gone through the terms of reference of the commission, do you have anything to add about any activities or attempts of political interference that you may have heard about, may have witnessed, or may have been involved in?

[01:02:19]Chairperson, there was no such attempts or even uh Yeah, there were no there were not even attempts to influ- influence any prosecutorial decision uh of the NPA during during our tenure. Um we were quite strong on that. We would have rejected it uh immediately if not prosecute the person who's attempting to do that.

[01:02:44]Thank you.

[01:02:46]That's the evidence, Chairperson. Thank you, Mr. Simelane.

[01:02:51]Ms. Mkhwebane or is it Ms. Ms. Mkhwebane or Mr. Kwala?

[01:02:56]Mr. Kwala has delegated to myself, Chairperson.

[01:02:59]>> Yes, Ms. Mkhwebane.

[01:03:02]We just have two questions uh for clarification for this particular witness.

[01:03:09]At the end of your evidence, Mr. Gcabashe, um you're speaking to Ms. Mkhwebane.

[01:03:15]At the end of your evidence, you just indicated that if anyone had attempted to influence you, you would have prosecuted.

[01:03:27]Was that the standard operation and the NPA?

[01:03:31]If there was influence, then the decision would then be to either reject it or prosecute.

[01:03:36]Chairperson, we we regarded the independence of the NPA jealously.

[01:03:42]Uh we were coming from an era where uh prosecutors were viewed as persecutors.

[01:03:51]Uh in fact, in vernacular, a prosecutor umchuchisi.

[01:03:55]And and we wanted to transform the NPA and and there was a lot of distrust by members of the public, black people in particular, because of the history of of of the prosecution services during the apartheid era.

[01:04:10]We wanted to change that image. We we were clear and and our policies and and and um all were clear that we we prosecute without fear, favor, or or prejudice. And so, we guarded that independence quite jealously and and and I think the track record uh from the period that then the new National Prosecuting Authority was formed, which is 1998, to the period when we left in 2004, uh the track record speaks for itself in that regard.

[01:04:47]And then the most direct of questions, during your tenure then, do you know of any interference? Cuz I think the terms are quite broad. It's any interference with the work of the National Prosecuting Authority.

[01:05:04]Chairperson, I'm not aware of any interference or attempt to interfere with the work of the National Prosecuting Authority during that period.

[01:05:14]And then in your evidence you had spoken about during the meeting there was a question in relation to the prosecution of the former president in which you then responded that um and I paraphrase.

[01:05:28]>> Former president Mbeki.

[01:05:32]Yes. Well, former president um Mbeki.

[01:05:38]And then you indicated that in that meeting you were very firm about not discussing NPA decision to prosecute.

[01:05:47]If you can just elaborate for us, was [snorts and clears throat] the question that was phrased in that meeting one that sought to influence or was it a question seeking clarity on an or an update of what was happening in relation to that matter?

[01:06:06]Chairperson, um as I've mentioned the context was that there was media reports at the time uh that the NPA had taken a decision to prosecute uh former president Mbeki and some 37 ANC members.

[01:06:23]And and that caused a lot of noise within the cluster.

[01:06:27]Uh at least that's was our understanding at the time of of why this DG's forum meeting was called.

[01:06:35]To one understand whether such a decision has been taken or maybe to Yeah. To understand what whether that decision was taken and and Yeah.

[01:06:52]Then one final question just to close that off. So, there was no particular person in that forum that then indicated that you cannot take that particular decision, was there?

[01:07:05]No, Chairperson, I don't think it got to that point because, as I've said, I've made it clear that we do not, in the normal course, communicate uh decisions before a person is brought to court.

[01:07:19]Uh but, I made an exception to confirm that no such decision had been taken with regards to former President Mbeki and the 37 ANC leaders.

[01:07:34]I know I said that as the last question, I think. We just want to clarify. When you say you made the an exception, um what was the Why would you have made the exception?

[01:07:48]Because because it was a high-profile matter and and um we it was not a secret.

[01:07:58]Uh And and we wanted to quiet the noise, so to speak.

[01:08:06]Thank you. That would be all our clarification questions.

[01:08:09]Thank you, Mr. Profitt.

[01:08:14]Thank you, chair. No questions. Thank you.

[01:08:17]Mr. Sahai.

[01:08:19]Thank you, chair. No questions from my side. Yes. Mr. Vani.

[01:08:24]Chair, just a few questions. It was more of a word of clarification.

[01:08:29]Uh Mr. Duze, firstly, thanks for cooperating with this commission.

[01:08:35]Uh now that we've heard your evidence and seen your statement on behalf of the families, we don't regard you as a person of interest or implicated in any fashion.

[01:08:45]Uh and we also thank thank you and the NPA at the time for taking a principled stand in relation to the amnesty task team.

[01:08:56]Um you made reference in your evidence-in-chief um to the fact that you would have reported to then NDPP Advocate Bululani Ngcuka.

[01:09:09]Um but clearly that was more than 20 years ago and you can't quite recall um uh what happened.

[01:09:17]Uh but I would like to put to you what Advocate uh Ngcuka said when he appeared before this commission and and just to hear from you whether uh you're on the same page as uh Advocate Ngcuka.

[01:09:31]He said that when he received the report from or received we met with you and I think Gerrie Nel.

[01:09:39]He said his instructions were very clear that they should not participate any further in the amnesty task team.

[01:09:46]Is that also your recollection? That's probably correct, Chairperson, because as I've mentioned, we never attended any meeting, whether it was the DG's forum or the ATT thereafter.

[01:10:01]And >> [clears throat] >> and Advocate Ngcuka also put up essentially two reasons for his decision.

[01:10:08]Uh the first one was that uh individuals participating um in these meetings uh may well be implicated in cases that the NPA was looking into.

[01:10:22]Is that Is that also your recollection?

[01:10:24]That's correct, Chairperson.

[01:10:27]And then his last reason was that participating in meetings where decisions to prosecute or not to prosecute uh that would have uh fettered the discretion uh of the NPA, which he found objectionable.

[01:10:48]That's correct, Chairperson.

[01:10:52]Now, you were referred to the undated uh 2004 secret report titled uh report of the Amnesty Task Team.

[01:11:05]Uh Commissioners, that's the report at page 515 of bundle one.

[01:11:17]Did you ever have sight of of this report um back then uh in in 2004?

[01:11:25]Chairperson, no. I saw this report for the first time in the Talat papers.

[01:11:34]So, I just want to put to you just one or two aspects in this report uh and and I want to hear from you whether it confirms uh your fears around uh fettering the discretion uh of the NPA.

[01:11:48]The report recommended the creation of a departmental task team comprising representatives of the DOJ, intelligence agencies, >> Where where are we exactly, Mr. Venter?

[01:12:02]>> Uh um I can refer you to page 69 of bundle one.

[01:12:08]Yes. At paragraph 155.

[01:12:18]Yes, thank you.

[01:12:22]So, that report recommended the creation of a departmental task team comprising representatives uh of the bodies with listed in 1551 to 7, which is Department Department of Justice, intelligence agencies, uh SANDF, SAPS, correctional services, um NPA, and the Office of the President.

[01:12:48]I'm not going to go through um uh all the recommendations, but let's look at the first one, the proposed task team um, would have the responsibility of considering the advisability of the institution of criminal proceedings before the institution of criminal proceedings for the offense committed during the conflicts of the past it must consider the advisability of the institution of such criminal proceedings and make recommendations to the NDPP.

[01:13:24]So, this body in in each, uh, TRC case would be required to make a recommendation to the NDPP uh, before he makes a a decision.

[01:13:39]Um, what what what is your response to to that requirement?

[01:13:44]Chappies would never agree to such, uh, a process.

[01:13:50]The NPA Act is very clear that all prosecutorial decisions are taken by the NDPP and and delegated to prosecutors below him.

[01:14:01]Would never agree to.

[01:14:04]Um, and then one more aspect, um, that arises from that report.

[01:14:13]Uh, the report proposed that, um, the prosecution policy uh, could be uh, amended to include new criteria uh, to decline a prosecution in the TRC cases.

[01:14:31]And and several new criteria were proposed. Um, I'm not going to take you through all of them, but they included criteria such as whether the um, suspect uh, might have been subject to indoctrination uh, whether a prosecution would promote nation building and reconciliation.

[01:14:53]Your response to the proposal which in fact happened because the prosecution policy was subsequently amended and it included such criteria to the carving out of a special legal dispensation just for the TRC cases in which fresh criteria were provided to not to prosecute.

[01:15:13]Sorry, chairperson. Um I apologize for doing this, but I just want to clarify if the questions are being put as a hypothetical matter that he can opine on because he's already um indicated that he does not at least did not know of the report and its contents before and whilst he was in office. So, I just want to understand the context within which they are put. Is he assisting at a theoretical level as someone who was within the NPA and advising the NPA or is he commenting on the report as someone who was involved in its conception?

[01:15:46]Um yes, no no no no to chairperson and and and we accept that um this witness had already left the NPA by the time the policy amendments um came into force.

[01:15:59]Um but we simply wish to hear from him um as a senior legal advisor to the NPA at that time uh whether these proposals which were affected uh confirmed his fears um around why the NPA took a decision not to uh stay in the amnesty task team. But, Mr. Vannie, is it really a clarificatory question to what he has given evidence to?

[01:16:29]Um chairperson, I I I accept uh I might be skating the the boundaries in that regard. I think I think you are on dangerous territory.

[01:16:38]Okay. Let me step back from the edge, uh chairperson.

[01:16:41]>> from the precipice.

[01:16:43]>> From the precipice.

[01:16:45]Cuz once one goes down, there's there's no turning back.

[01:17:00]I have no further questions, chairperson. Thank you, Mr. Barney.

[01:17:04]Mr. Sony.

[01:17:06]Chairperson, Mr. Simelane will ask questions on behalf of the evidence leaders, but may I place on record that we've been told that Advocate Rikhotso, who represents Advocate Simelane, is on Teams, and I don't know whether he wants to say anything.

[01:17:26]Yes.

[01:17:27]>> Ask anything.

[01:17:28]Mr. Rikhotso, can you hear us?

[01:17:33]Um, thank you, chair. I can hear, and I just place on record that I have no questions. Thank you.

[01:17:42]Mr. Simelane.

[01:17:44]And we understand that uh Advocate Mthambeleni is also on Teams.

[01:17:49]>> On Teams. Mr. Mthambeleni.

[01:17:54]Thank you, chair. I also have no questions for the witness. Thank you.

[01:17:58]>> Thank you.

[01:18:02]Mr. Simelane.

[01:18:05]Thank you, chair.

[01:18:09]Mr. Josie, you say that you were advising the NDPP at the time, um, on internal NPA prosecutorial decisions.

[01:18:22]And I would like to just for you to clarify for this commission when the report was handed the final TRC report was handed over to the to the president, and the president makes the speech.

[01:18:39]And following that, there is the decision taken during your tenure to deem the TRC cases priority crimes to be investigated by the PCLU.

[01:18:59]Uh would you recall that? Maybe clarify.

[01:19:05]Chairperson, I think the sequence um because the names, it seems to me, changed uh with time. What I do know is uh in 1990 nine Mhm. 1998 late soon after Mr. Ngcuka was appointed National Director of Public Prosecutions, one of the first things he did was to form um a TRC unit. We called it the TRC unit.

[01:19:36]Um constituted of three advocates from the NPA.

[01:19:44]Uh I think it was uh Uh we brought one uh deputy from Free State, and then two were were internal, and advised by um is the judge now in Cape Town. Would it be Saldanha? Vusi Saldanha. Yes. That's what we did to respond to analyze first all of the TRC cases and to develop a strategy on how to to deal with them.

[01:20:15]With with those cases?

[01:20:17]>> Yes.

[01:20:17]So, as part So, that's the period in the 1990s.

[01:20:21]>> Yes. I'm now talking about the period in 2003, when the final report from the TRC is handed over to the president, and the president assigns the NPA a the responsible um entity to deal with the TRC cases, investigate, and prosecute.

[01:20:43]There is a proclamation that was made and um Ackerman is appointed to be to head the PCLU.

[01:20:53]Then later on during your tenure as advisor the TRC uh cases are are allocated to the Priority Crimes Litigation Unit.

[01:21:06]And the task is to investigate and prosecute TRC cases.

[01:21:12]So I would like you to explain to this commission the thinking behind that and who was going to investigate these cases according to your knowledge.

[01:21:24]Chairperson, according to my knowledge, um advocates were assigned to the unit and I think the investigators would come from the DSO. Uh directors directorate of special operations, the Scorpions, and and some would be investigated by the police. I don't quite remember how how the the the unit worked uh in the allocation of investigators.

[01:21:58]Yes, I'm merely asking this question because we've had evidence here that after the decision was made that it is the PCLU that will investigate and prosecute TRC case, there's been challenged there were challenges relating to investigators.

[01:22:19]Um and that is why I'm just trying to probe that. According to you, your evidence is that it was the DSO that was um meant to investigate these cases. That's correct, chairperson.

[01:22:36]Further to that, when you say TRC cases, now you've got the report, what what cases are you referring to?

[01:22:44]It's cases, chairperson, that relate to the conflict of the past uh where people either did not go to the TRC, where perpetrated uh atrocities in the past, who either did not go to the TRC or were not granted amnesty. Those people would be prosecuted.

[01:23:10]No, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Josie.

[01:23:12]No further questions. Thank you.

[01:23:15]Mr. Salu Gasa and I just say, following those clarificatory questions, there is no re-examination.

[01:23:25]Yes, you may proceed.

[01:23:27]Um you were asked about why you made an exception.

[01:23:33]Thank you very much. You were asked about why you made an exception and gave a response to say there were no prosecutions intended against Mr. Mbeki and you referred to quieting the noise.

[01:23:45]Could you expand on what this noise was?

[01:23:48]Please.

[01:23:50]Chairperson, during that time we were not trusted as the NPA uh by our colleagues in the cluster because of decisions we had made uh relating to other matters.

[01:24:05]And so people thought that it's possible uh that in inverted commas this rogue NPA would prosecute President Mbeki and the 37 ANC members. So uh that was the context.

[01:24:25]That's the noise I'm referring to within the cluster.

[01:24:29]Thank you. And were there any other people in respect of whom there was a concern or was the focus primarily on President former President Mbeki?

[01:24:40]No, the DG's for a meeting chairperson only dealt uh referred to President Mbeki and 37 ANC leaders.

[01:24:49]Were any of those leaders in the meeting?

[01:24:51]I don't know, chairperson.

[01:24:53]Uh that's part of the problem because um I knew only a few people uh who were there. Um I knew the DG Advocate uh Vusi Pikoli. I knew Deon Rodman uh was the deputy to to Vusi Pikoli. I knew Ray Lala who was, I think, head of crime intelligence in the police.

[01:25:15]Um there was a lot of people in that meeting and and I did not know most of them. I did not know the people who accompanied Ray Lala. I did not know the people who came from the NIA. I learned from the minutes that there were even people from DOD, Department of Defense.

[01:25:33]I didn't know any of those people.

[01:25:35]Uh we hardly attended uh or invited to criminal justice cluster uh meetings of that nature. Uh >> [cough and clears throat] >> Again, it was to protect our independence. Um So, our involvement with colleagues in the cluster would be on a case-by-case basis. So, if we need intelligence resources to assist us in an investigation, >> [clears throat] >> we'll call on that. Um we had a concept uh it's prosecutor-led investigations. And and And so, we would always take charge and take the lead.

[01:26:10]Uh Thank you very much, uh chairperson.

[01:26:14]That's That's my questions. yes.

[01:26:17]Mr. Josi, um you you left the NPA, um in in 2004, did you remain in in government service?

[01:26:35]Commissioner, I left the NPA at the end of August 2004, um and went to the private sector. In fact, we left on the same day with the national director of public prosecutions, Mr. Vusi Mncwabe.

[01:26:47]Oh, yes. I I I thought maybe you you you left because you you retired, but you did not leave because you because of frustrations in the NPA.

[01:27:04]That's a different, uh issue altogether, chairperson.

[01:27:08]>> [laughter] >> When Mr. Mncwabe decided to leave, it's because and and again, as his advisor advised him as well, it was to protect the NPA because Mr. Mncwabe's presence in the NPA was like a lightning rod. And so, there were all sorts of attacks to the NPA via Mr. Mncwabe. You'll remember there were even spy allegations against him that resulted in the Hefer Commission. And so, to protect the NPA, we had to take Mr. Mncwabe out and hopefully the attacks would subside and and the NPA could continue doing its work.

[01:27:42]Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you.

[01:27:48]Mr. Josi, thank you very much for having agreed to come and give evidence before this commission.

[01:27:56]You are excused as a witness for now, uh but there may be an application to cross-examine you, in which event would request you to avail yourself for such cross-examination.

[01:28:12]Thank you, Chairperson.

[01:28:14]These proceedings are adjourned until Monday What do you think?

[01:28:21]the 13th of May 180 6 1 18 18, the 18th of May 2026 at 10:00. Thank you, please.

[01:32:04]>> Mhm.

[01:32:30]>> Mhm.