“POSTPONEMENT DENIED!” 😳 Malatji’s Lawyer Slammed for ‘Weak’ Defence in R2.9 BILLION Tender Scandal

Añadido: 2026-05-07

[00:00:00]Perhaps let's take the oath again.

[00:00:03]Um, do you swear that the evidence you're going to give is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? If so, please raise your right hand and say, "So help me God."

[00:00:15]Your mic is off.

[00:00:18]>> So help me God.

[00:00:20]>> Thank you, director.

[00:00:25]>> Thank you, chap. Um ordinarily we'll start with the evidence of Mr. Malachi to continue. However, I've been advised by Mr. Mossi that they intend to raise an issue about uh which seems to be a postponement. Um >> my apologies.

[00:00:47]>> Yes, chair. And uh that discussion uh commenced yesterday but uh I believe he is going to um maybe address the commission about that postponement.

[00:01:00]>> Missed thanks commissioners. Yes indeed. Uh we had some engagements with the the gentleman leading evidence yesterday and also with some other people involved uh in the commission to assist in facilitating the process including the instructing attorneys.

[00:01:31]Commissioners with all due respect we had serious predicament uh when we were assisting Mr. Malage to obviously prepare for the proceedings of today and um well I saw the email when I was trying to negotiate an agreement at least for these proceedings of today to agend because we are quite certain that the issues that we're going to bring before this commission are genuine and are quite substantive for us to be given an indulgence especially um serving in the best interest of Mr. Malaj and the commission as well. So the long and short part of it commissioners we are humbly seeking an indulgence for today and we are ready to give submissions. Why are we requesting that indulgence?

[00:02:29]>> Ple please do because thus far you have not stated any grounds. Please uh do so >> commissioners after the evidence of Mr. I think it was the 9th of April this month.

[00:02:50]We noted that of course there were some questions which were posed to him and from our own observation. We noted that uh commissioners were quite not happy. It was our own view as we were assessing the testimony and what transpired on that day. Of course, Mr. Jali has been given now the second chance just to give the supplement our supplementary statement you just to clear whatever that came previously but as we were watching commissioner we noted that Mr. Mr. Malachawatlant was constantly referred to some certain bundle of documents uh which we were not in possession of at the time when we were assisting him at that time. Of course, we understand the protocol.

[00:03:42]>> Sorry, just to be sure of the timing when you were assisting him at at what stage exactly or when exactly? We assisted him briefly when he appeared for the first time but he came alone of course obviously we didn't anticipate what will transpire when he was giving testimony but we he also gave us an instruction for an advice especially on what transpired after he gave testimony commissioners and >> or just to make sure that um taking everything one step at a time >> you also referred to documents that you did not have at the time you assisted him. Uh that from your last response being a reference to uh before he came to testify. But my my understanding is that uh witnesses get bundles of documents before they come to testify with a few exceptions.

[00:04:46]um when certain documents which are usually not that bulky will be given during the testimony of the witness or sometimes even a day or so before the witness testifies. So when you when you refer to documents that you did not have, what exactly are you referring to?

[00:05:06]because it can be the the bundles um that the witness would ordinarily have received before coming to testify here.

[00:05:17]>> Commissioners, the documents that I'm referring to as I was informed by Mr. knowledge. These are the documents which the commission referred to which were in possession of the commission at the time when he was giving testimony previously and just to make sure that I may I understand correctly. I wrote an email commissioners. It was the 13th of April where I was very clear to say I am requesting among other things which I'm I've indicated in the email I requested the commission to furnish the documents which I am talking about and which we were not in possession of.

[00:05:59]I consulted with Mr. Malachi and it transpired commissioners that indeed he was not in possession. And I'm specifically referring to those that he was being referred to when he was giving testimony. It was the 13th of April. Of course, Commissioner, there's quite a lot which transpired after that because soon after I have communicated through that email, Mr. Malaji received a confirmation from this commission to say we have allowed you to have access to your workplace because one of the issues and which was quite making things difficult for him to give proper answers that he was not getting the documents that he needed from his workplace. We are all aware commissioners is is on suspension and is currently undergoing a disciplinary process there and I'm I must safely indicate commissioners that after noting the permission that he was granted to go to his workplace he he obtained whatever documents that he could though he had some predicaments and I I think it's fair that I must indicate this because when Mr. Mr. Malaji is in management and all along he's been working through the assistance especially when it comes to admin issues because it's a question of throwing some emails some of which were not specifically written by him but but from his instructions while he was still in active service at work but I was astonished to learn that the people that are supposed to help him are being threatened to be charged but anyway >> what what we have uh always said to witnesses uh I'm not sure if we said it to Mr. Malaji, but I would be surprised if we didn't, is that if a witness wants information from their employer and they encounter difficulties, they must seek the assistance of the evidence leaders um and that there's no way that they will not get whatever it is they are looking for.

[00:08:20]>> Commissioners, I'm I'm taking that point. It's quite valid and it's reasonable.

[00:08:26]What I'm indicating it it it's within that short period of time. The 14th of April commissioners was on Tuesday and then I advised him to say okay much as you are having challenges but at least you've got >> Tuesday the other week.

[00:08:41]>> Yes. That other I said as much as you having challenges >> and and from then from then um or before then >> yes >> or shortly before then Mr. Malaji would have had the documents that or at least the bulk of them that were used during his testimony or not.

[00:09:01]>> No, no, no. He from my understanding as I consulted with him, he was not in possession of that. He only saw >> on the day on the day of testifying.

[00:09:09]>> No, except being referred on that. But he never went back with the hard copies or the document of that sort. He was as I was informed by him commissioner he was only referred to those documents and it ended that that's why I wrote an email after having a consultation with him to say finish us with those documentation as it pleases commission.

[00:10:39]Yes, please continue.

[00:10:41]>> Yes, Commissioner. So after that in that week of the 14th as I indicated commissioners, I I just requested him to try as much as he can which he tried commissioners. I must safely say that because um he has been constantly indicating to me that as the day goes I'm I'm able to get some documents there and there though I'm having some >> did he seek the assistance of uh the evidence leaders as I believe I would have indicated he should >> commissioner he did not seek the evidence what what what we agree >> if if I'm mistaken director Malaji will just will will will correct me but I would be surprised I always say that to especially to witnesses who need documents >> there will be some who just say they want to supplement their statements >> commissioners >> and just a minute.

[00:11:34]>> Okay. Oh, sorry. Sorry.

[00:11:35]>> And we grant them leave to do so. But with witnesses who require or who need documents and especially those who are on suspension, I always say if you encounter any difficulties, seek the assistance of the evidence leaders. So I would be very surprised if I did not say the same to director Malachi. Please continue.

[00:11:58]>> Let let me address that point.

[00:11:59]Commissioners, it's not that he was unable to get documents at all. it was going to be easy for him when he leers with the people that he he worked with. But it's not that he was getting zero. He was getting documents and he was indicating to me and that's not really the main issue why we bringing this postponement application. He managed to source some documents and uh which were able to assist us when we were trying to assist him. Anyway, what I'm trying to indicate commissioners is that when the week of the 14th came to an end the Saturday, of course, we have to recollect the information and see how far we are and commissioners at that time I'm requesting the commission to have an understanding that we don't have a subpoena by that time though we are aware that it is imminent. It might come anytime that week starting on the 20th.

[00:13:00]Commissioner I had an engagement with him and at that time commissioners we were preparing for an internal disciplinary hearing which was scheduled for Friday noting that we might run >> last last Friday >> last last Friday. The week started last week on Monday. Of course, commissioners, these matters find us when we are attending to other pre-arranged matters. It's not a secret, but it's not. We always prioritize the work of this commission, noting the importance of it and the extent of which we are required to cooperate just to assist the commission in doing its work.

[00:13:42]the 20 Monday 20th we noting that because we haven't obtained mainly the documents that we requested and we are running out of time we don't want to find ourselves running when the commission say come next week and give your testimony >> can can you be specific what documents uh do you require or did you require >> commissioner >> please itemize them >> there's quite there were emails there were some statements though I didn't get a chance but I was coming to that commission if the commission can allow me to address I'll come to that point >> when when we realize we don't have time commissioners we were giving the effort and I must say commissioners that Mr. Malaji has been very much active showing us that he wants to meet whatever deadline he did not want to be caught napping. It's not that he was keeping quiet. Yes, I was a busy man but I was in you know helping in as much as I can.

[00:14:44]Now noting that we're not going to have enough time commissioners, I must say this.

[00:14:53]I request the city to say we understand there's an undergoing disciplinary process and we understand that we need to prioritize it but remember that you have also not once not twice you've requested us to give you an indulgence to accommodate the activities or the directives of this commission. I can safely say that Mr. Peace who testified in this commission requested us in the internal disciplinary process through the representative of the city for an indulgence to postpone the disciplinary hearing in order to accommodate the proceedings of this commission and we commissioner we we quite you know well aware that of the importance of the and the agency thereof to make sure you know this process is being finalized.

[00:15:54]We don't have any issue say it's okay go and attend there but now why I'm bringing this point commissioner when it is our turn to ask for the same favor so that we accommodate this commission we don't just get an objection it's a vehement objection to say you're not going to see that you know I I take the kes from the city from the city rep okay okay I will say through their representatives but is the city. I'm I've got proof here. Commissioner, >> was there no postponement on Friday?

[00:16:29]>> There was no postponement. I I made I I I I made a substantive request through an email after having made made a telephone call, negotiated on Tuesday. I I I requested that postponement. It is rejected. I don't have an option after consult because I'm getting frustrated. We don't have time.

[00:16:47]>> When is when is miss when is director Malaja supposed to appear? on Friday the 24th commissioners at >> we are past that date now I'm asking when is he supposed to appear there >> in the hearing >> yeah when next when >> no it will be May we we it was agend I I can check but it's I think it's the second >> I I don't think we need to go into any detail about that then if that's passed and >> commissioner the reason why I'm raising that point is to show that we were at all times trying to negotiate for time but we not given that time and then we didn't have enough time and what I why I'm raising these commissioners is that we had to go and give a specific attention to this internal disciplinary process which we are being rejected to get an indulgence even if we made an official postponement applica application they just rejected us >> on Friday commissioners >> what's the point for our purposes What's the point for our purposes?

[00:17:52]>> The point is that we only got the subpoena on Friday after the proceedings of the internal disciplinary proceedings have agenda this last Friday and commissioner I'm sure you are all aware it's a long weekend but we still gave some time one or two days during the long weekend to prepare for the supplementary statement. We received it in the afternoon and coincidentally I was not feeling well but I worked commissioner I've got proof that of that effect >> and then over the weekend I think we had >> Saturday >> or if or Monday to to just to assist Mr. Malachi to craft the statement but it it transpired that we still have don't have that bundle which you requested on the 13th.

[00:18:42]>> I think I must go back to my question.

[00:18:45]Can you please itemize the documents that you are complaining about? Please, please give us because because >> it's quite crucial the nature of the documents is quite crucial for the determination of your your request or application because for example um off the top of my head I I I remember that director Malaj said he never gave any instruction to um major piri um to do anything with regard to the ad hoc um appointments.

[00:19:26]Um Major Piri showed us emails which he interprets to mean that director Malaji actually did give him instructions with regard to ad hoc appointments. I'm just giving that by way of example to make the point that to go through you can't even take more than one minute to go through those emails.

[00:19:48]>> Commissioner Please, please, please hear me out.

[00:19:52]Please hear me out. Yeah, I think you are given to responding whilst I'm talking. My apologies.

[00:19:59]>> Yes. The point I'm making there is to say specificity with regard to the nature of the documents is necessary because um depending on the nature we may be able to say from such and such a date whatever the date you receive the documents on you should have been able to go through those documents you should have been able to consult with the director Malaji on those documents I'm just giving that one example to say less than one minute to read. If you give us all of them, maybe we will be able to engage you on all of them. Please itemize them.

[00:20:39]>> Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, there's a document which we received only yesterday. It's it's appearing on the bundle that we received from the commissioner. It's 418 page document which Mr. Mal >> what's its nature? It's a it's it's the it's the dend tender documents tender TMPD 2 2015 15 of 2016 the main document in which the crux of the testimony of Mr. was based when he was giving testimony previously. It's here. It's in our position. It was only given to us in the midday of Tuesday, a day before yesterday, commissioners. And um of course when we had a quick browse on it, it was after we've already submitted the supplementary statement >> and and you say it's what 400 pages.

[00:21:30]>> It's a it's the document >> 400 plus. It's it's got 418 pages uh documents uh commissioners and >> you say and you say that's the tender document is >> that is the tender documents and like I said commissioners >> but but uh but uh I I don't know of course I'm still going to give Mrs. Kakan an opportunity to respond but I would be surprised that for purposes of Mr. Malaji's testimony, there will be an a need to traverse a tender document from beginning to end. I would be very very surprised.

[00:22:10]>> Commissioners, there were questions about this tender which were at quite length posed to Mr. Malaji and when we were doing the >> I'm making a different point.

[00:22:21]>> Commissioners. Yes.

[00:22:24]>> Yes. Surely there would have been questions relating to certain aspects of the tender.

[00:22:29]>> But my point is I'll be very surprised if the tender document itself the nittygritty of the tender document itself will be dealt with from page one to page 418.

[00:22:42]>> I'll be I'll be but but as I say um we'll we'll we'll hear what Mr. Skakan says as to the purpose.

[00:22:51]I'm looking at your face. You you you Well, commission say I'm very stressed.

[00:22:56]I'm I'm getting stressed.

[00:22:58]>> Yes, you do.

[00:22:59]>> It's a common practice that if there's a if there's a quite voluminous document which is presented, you need to look into the documents committ.

[00:23:10]>> That's all right. Let's go. Let's go to the next one. That's that's that's the first one.

[00:23:15]>> Yes. And then now there is also the other pageated document again which was submitted late. It's 122 pages. It talks about the statements of Rivos. It talks about the statement of Sean Bles.

[00:23:37]There are also transcripts that are involved. You know >> just you know no one wanted time. So a 122page document talking about uh >> SP and Paul Hayes.

[00:23:52]>> Yes.

[00:23:53]>> Um they are what their testimony.

[00:23:57]>> Yes. Their statement the testimony the transcript there's also copy of the CDR and commissioners I must say we never got a chance to have >> the last thing you said is that a separate document which we must >> Yes it's a separate document. Can you please articulate it again?

[00:24:14]>> Okay. Can I start from the beginning commission?

[00:24:16]>> No. Go there. There's >> there's copy of the CDR trying to >> tender the 418 page tender document.

[00:24:23]>> Yes.

[00:24:33]>> Was the third document you mentioned the CDR contact analysis? Yes.

[00:24:41]>> Okay.

[00:24:41]>> There's also contact summary.

[00:24:43]>> Just just please please see.

[00:24:45]>> Thank you commission contract analysis and uh okay that's number three. Number four.

[00:24:58]Number four.

[00:25:00]Well, it's not really much. It's it's going to be contact summary plus cell phone number index. It's not really much. Two pages for that. But you know >> index.

[00:25:09]>> Yes. But in essence the the the document has got 122 pages.

[00:25:18]>> Okay. What else >> commissioners in the >> what else?

[00:25:24]>> In the early hours of it is it it I think it was let me just I'm quickly browsing to that email.

[00:25:32]Um uh commissioners um just a second.

[00:25:38]There's an email which I received from Dukashu attendees this mo it was almost 12:00 but I saw it in the early hours of the morning where they were addressing the same point which we addressing now the issue of the outstanding documents but what is very surprising >> so a a response >> a response to the instructing attendees now there's a paragraph which is also upsetting ing us because in the in that email after having addressed our concerns and they responded they are again they are saying kindly we hereby provide the link containing additional documents and they give us the link and we saw this email in the early hours of the morning. I can even safely say commissioners, we have not even been able to look into what is being attached in the email which they sent at 23:52 yesterday just before 12:4 that serve another as as another indication commissioners that we are not prepared because if there are some other documents that are still going to be produced at the last hour uh when we should have already prepared and finalized our preparations for these proceedings it becomes a problems and commissioners the fact that it's a link because I tried to download this document I was just struggling but anyway I had to prepare to come to this commission as well it shows that the document might be quite voluminous as well we haven't read and I believe they wouldn't have just sent us the document if there was no purpose in sending it to us of course commissioners I think it will be fair for Mr. to be afforded that opportunity to look into what has been sent through there and a commissioner another quite aspect which I need to indicate while I'm on that in total these documents are just over 600 pages excluding these ones which have been sent this morning and we saw the need through the instruction of Mr. Maj of course because there was quite a number of things to do to engage the council to say let's get the second opinion on how we can fast track this issue going forward which is why the council accompanied me today and we formed the legal team for Mr. just to fast track the process and make things easy. She's still going to go through the documents and see what is happening and give the inputs. In fact, commissioners, I can safely say that the statement which was submitted on Monday, it was not to our satisfaction and even for the satisfaction of Mr. Malaj. We were under extreme pressure.

[00:28:29]But of course, commissioners, we understood Mr. the Malaji's concern because he did not want to find himself on the wrong side of the commission's directive even though it transpired that we are not ready to submit this statement but he just insisted and and we understood his frustration of course to say at least because we've got something to submit let's do that to respect and comply with the directive of the commission even though the subpoena and the director Ive was given right towards the close of business on Friday when it was a long weekend and so on. But at least they submit something to make it a point that we we we submit commissioner and commissioner honestly really we are not prepared and Mr. Malaj is also not prepared and I don't think the commission will suffer prejudice.

[00:29:23]We're just asking a reasonable time.

[00:29:25]We're going to band oursel commissioners to make it a point that we come back with a very well-informed statement fully prepaid and and and and make it a point that we give the information that is required and commissioners. This is to the benefit of the commission as well because we might have very valid inputs which we are not aware at this stage which will assist the commissioners in you know making its correct finding and and and making the work of the commission to be quite easy commissioner. So based on that commissioners I I can add I see my council is also taking some notes but it's a humble request commissioners we are not prepared I mean we are humbly requesting to be afforded an opportunity we will come back within reasonable time we promise we're going to try our utmost best to make it a point that we we come back ready we understand it's the testimony of Malaj He definitely needs to be advised. We've got all the documentation as we speak now and I'm sure it will we will be in it will be quite easier going forward to help him have a final and a full preparation properly so that he gives a very informed you know you know evidence before this commission. Those are my submissions for now. Um, otherwise I I will address the commissioners at later stage if it's necessary.

[00:30:54]>> On a on a light note, there has been somewhat of a refrain that you grudgingly had to work over a long weekend. I was a practitioner once and for many years uh those are the hazards of uh legal practice. I also had to work over weekends, work until the early hours of the morning, 3:00 a.m.

[00:31:19]during the week and you know hazards of the profession. So you should not >> be grudging over there.

[00:31:27]>> Commissioner, I'm in full agreement with that.

[00:31:31]Of course, I'll have to mention it in passing. It's not a normal day. You know, I'm not well. I'm from the doctor.

[00:31:39]I'm on meditation and all those things.

[00:31:41]>> No, I I heard you. I heard you. And as I say, >> on a light note.

[00:31:51]>> Yes, Mrs. Kakan.

[00:31:56]>> Thank you, Chair. Um, just to be clear that two things. One is that I only engaged Mr. this morning about um about the issue of the postponement.

[00:32:11]Um Mr. Manachi appeared last and his appearance is not a new appearance.

[00:32:20]It was on pointed questions which I think with the evidence it will be clear that what is being requested are not issues that would help um or supplement the answer there. But in any event, the issue of the bundle that was given to him, it was given on the 28th, which was the Tuesday, the bundle that was uh used in his last testimony.

[00:32:50]Then in respect of the documents, the additional documents, I'll itemize what they are briefly, which was communicate yesterday with Mr. Gos by the attendees. It was essentially the supplement the additional transcripts and those additional transcripts are m in the majority his testimony >> whose testimony >> Mr. Malachi's testimony extracts of Mr. Kir's testimony and even there it's I'm relying on a very narrow point and that narrow point is on the issue of the instructions that was that there's some dispute about about having been given to Mr. Malaji I mean given by Mr. Malachi I beg your indulgence so it's a very narrow point and then the other issues of documents that my my Leonard friend says they were provided late for example the 400 and odd pages with the tender documents >> so so transcripts is only to Mr. Malajis and Mr. Pirius >> and Mr. Nissi I think >> Mr. Nissi Mr. >> and on Mr. NY what >> it's it's again a very narrow point it's >> which is what >> the the point is about the property report that was uh that in relation to tender 3 TMPD3 >> a lot was said especially by Mr. Ni on the property report. So is does what you want to cover relate to all of that or does it uh relate to something that's within a narrow ambit?

[00:34:32]>> It's very it's a it's a very it's two very narrow points and maybe one of them will dispose the other. So it's just the issue of Mr. Malachi's presence in the BC meeting. Um if he indicates that he was not present then it disposes of the follow-up questions. Um that's a that's just on that um point. Um and then the other issue and and again it was just on his view about the cancellation of that tender but nothing really turns on it. Um then the tender document that is being relied on it's document that were part of the initial bundle. So the the reference to the tender documents these are the documents that were already provided on the 20. Yes, that's what Mr. uh Malachi testified on and in any event I do not intend to probe him on on them any further that much. So essentially So, are you saying >> I'm sorry, Max. Are you effectively saying you will not be dealing with a tender document >> in great detail? I I don't want to take that right away, but in great detail.

[00:35:51]If, for example, a dispute about it.

[00:35:55]A difficulty I see if you say not in great detail is um where must uh where in that document must director Malaji and his attendees focus for their are you able to zoom in on any particular section of the document or part of >> it it largely depends on on the well it's more so about the court order the appointment of the that's one of the focus areas that I have the appointment of the 22 contractors by a court but even then it's just another >> is is that in in the is that in the tender document itself is that not or is it not extraneous to >> the to the tender document I would have imagined is extraneous to the tender document >> yes no if If your focus is >> the award through >> through the court process >> through the court order that would be something else or something outside of the tender document. So perhaps you would then have to direct um your colleagues attention to to that part specifically >> and it yeah I hope I'm making sense.

[00:37:19]Yes, chair. It does. In fact, it would then take away the reliance >> the reliance to rather the complaint >> the complaint about a 418page tender document.

[00:37:33]>> What the point I was trying to make ch is that this is this file containing not just the tender document.

[00:37:40]>> It's various documents which Mr. Malaji has testified on. It's the tender documents, the declarations. We've got the correspondence of 12th March which he's already testified on the termination of ADOC um the letter that is the letter by Mr. SP by commissioner SP and that's essentially what I'm relying on but he has had sight of those documents even prior and has testified on it. It's just a matter of rehashing in linking to what his supplementary statement says. So it's nothing really new on that. Um >> then um aren't there new documents? If they are, can you please identify them and uh and deal with them?

[00:38:27]>> Thank you.

[00:38:28]>> In terms of uh why um if at all there isn't going to be prejudice to director Malaji if we do not postpone.

[00:38:40]>> Sure. the the additional documents is the I think I've addressed it which is the property report. Um I wanted to point him to the BAC the cancellation of the tender that was Mr. Misa relied on um and then it was on the correspondence between Gobis and Mr. and the city about the late payments which in a sense he has already identified. it may not be an issue that I need to reconvverse as well. And then it's the statement of Mr. Piri and the annexures that have to deal with um the emails those emails to him and Mr. Perry testified and I would presume that >> is the focus not going to be on on the emails >> it's on less about less about the statement itself but more more the emails themselves >> on which Mr. Piri relies in making the point that I was instructed by director Mali >> that's that's the relevance of Mr. Pir's reference I mean the statement the other issues canvased but the reason also >> I tend to include the entire statement is that I'm not accused of sort of pulling a page it's just a matter of a context to provide context >> and the the 1152 documents of uh last night what exactly are those >> 11:52 p.m. uh p.m.

[00:40:16]>> that uh yeah close close to midnight and which include a link that Mr. Enosi could not download.

[00:40:27]>> It's essentially it would appear when I look at it these very these documents that I'm referring to so that I I've I've come to learn about them.

[00:40:35]>> Are you can you can you explain why they were given to the other side at 11:52 last night?

[00:40:43]Chair, I have some sort of difficulty myself, but the it seems that there was some process to redact some of the documents that I advised that was engaged on, but um that's as far as I can take the >> C can you again can you again um um you say the 1152 documents are part of what you had already referred to just Before I specifically referred to documents served at 11:52, can you just focus on the documents served at 11:52?

[00:41:24]What exactly are they? Are you going to be relying on them at all? Are you in a position to forgo reliance on them at all? Just what's their nature and uh how crucial are they for today's proceedings?

[00:41:43]Ch the the one document that is crucial is the property report um which is essentially even there I'm relying on a page of it.

[00:41:55]>> I thought that was sent on Tuesday.

[00:41:57]>> No no yes it was sent last last >> last night at 11:52. You say you're going to rely on one page.

[00:42:08]>> Just on one page.

[00:42:09]>> What what what does that page deal with?

[00:42:11]It relates to the sitting of Mr. Malaji and his submission of his score sheets in the in a tender process.

[00:42:21]>> Submission or lack of it >> or lack of it >> because I'm saying or lack of it because was it Mr. >> Mr. Mi >> Mr. Mi who said that director Malaji had not submitted his score sheets even though he was part of the BEC. Am I correct?

[00:42:41]>> Yeah.

[00:42:42]>> So, so essentially, >> so you say that's one page.

[00:42:46]>> That's that's one page essentially if his answer >> is that is that part of the document that was sent in the form of a link.

[00:42:55]>> Yes.

[00:42:56]>> So in the link that could not be downloaded by Mr. C, you'll be using only one page.

[00:43:06]Um it's the annex but essentially it's the annex to Mr. K.

[00:43:11]>> Sorry sorry sorry you referred or rather you said that there's a document uh uh from which you are going to be relying on only one page.

[00:43:25]>> Yes.

[00:43:26]>> Which document is that?

[00:43:27]>> It's the property report.

[00:43:28]>> It's the property report which is um and then and then the the emails uh from Mr. Malite to Mr. period uh which we have >> that's part of 1152 part of 11 but the property report you say you'll be relying on >> just a page in fact >> just a one page >> question one qu one answer to to to my to my question will then not invite follow-up questions but essentially turns on one issue >> but but of course you you never know what uh my co-commissioners may uh may require Oh yeah.

[00:44:14]>> Yeah. So >> which Yeah. Which may also turn on what what Mr. Malaj says.

[00:44:22]>> May May I propose this uh chair to be to be to be to be constructive um and also not uh to be fair to my learned friend.

[00:44:35]Perhaps I may join him in the indulgence seeking of the of requesting maybe 30 minutes to to peruse through these documents and see what it is that is a prop.

[00:44:48]>> Yeah, I don't think 30 minutes will be enough will be enough if we are inclined to go that route because Mr. and council will not only want to go through will not will uh want to go through the documents but at the same time also consult with director Malaji on them. So I don't think 30 minutes will be enough if we we choose to go that route. Just just just a minute.

[00:47:51]Oh, Mist Kakani, you did not come to a point where you said you were done.

[00:47:57]We're just discussing the the issue you raised or the possibility you raised.

[00:48:03]We are still going to hear Mr. Enos but for not more than 3 minutes please. Yes Mr. Skakan >> chair. Thank you. It was truly I think we're engaged about the adequacy of the time if we were to postpone I mean if we were to stand down if we were to my >> leave leave that to us if if we do go there. Yeah. If we have to go please leave that to us.

[00:48:28]>> In any event we are still going to hear Mr. event is >> my question I would seriously be opposed to to postponing to postponement. Um I think in any event his statement Mr. Malachi's statement and the annex do I I would be able to go through them um and at least for the first part of the day and then either at lunch they can then see whether there's anything. I was I was hoping we would be done by lunch but anyway anything else Mrs. Kaka >> we may be done even thank you >> thank you thank you >> Mrs. Kaki in the in your explanation of the documents I had Mr. Does he refer to a 122 page document with about SPE and B haz and then he said something about a CDR contract analysis if I'm not mistaken have you dealt with that is that all in the link is that documents given previously is it new documents and new as in Tuesday or last night >> so two two two points on that one is those are the documents ments that um were provided to Mr. Malachi when he was testifying.

[00:49:48]>> He's had them previously from the previous appearance.

[00:49:51]>> Okay.

[00:49:51]>> And and then they were in any event provided by a link on Tuesday at around 3.

[00:50:02]>> But you say when he testified previously he had been provided by >> Yes. It was a statement about the authority of Mr. of Inspector Pier as he was then.

[00:50:15]>> Thank you.

[00:50:19]>> I'll I'll be generous instead of the three minutes I indicated earlier, I'll give you five.

[00:50:25]>> Thank you.

[00:50:28]>> Commissioners, just to start with my friend is commissioners. While my learned friend was giving submissions to the commissions regarding our application, I managed to download what has been uh given to us yesterday at night before 12. Commissioner, there's quite important documents that are there.

[00:50:58]I'm sure you'll recall commissioners that especially these transcripts of Mr. Piri um a person who is working directly with Mr. Malachi I don't even want to comment on the issue of one page commissioner's evidence control itself we've seen it happening for quite some time questions come up as and when the testimony is being given so for my friend to say on that document which was provided on the last hour that I'm going to use one page I mean practically part of it is just impossible the fact remains on on on transcripts. I think uh direct you and director Malaji should actually consider yourselves fortunate that you were finished with the transcripts of the testimony of other witnesses. We have countless times here confronted witnesses with what was said by other witnesses um on issues that we think of as the witnesses testifying and we will say but witness uh ABCD said this and this on on this issue.

[00:52:12]What do you say about that? So uh I I don't think it was even strictly necessary for for for you to to get that transcript.

[00:52:22]Commissioners, it's not only the transcript and and it's quite clear that I'm just giving an abrupt response based on what I see now in a minute or two.

[00:52:32]Fairness dictates that I should be afforded an opportunity. I hear my colleague talks of 30 minutes. That's quite impractical. Commissioners, I will have to we'll have to read into these documents. If one were to make just a >> but but the transcripts uh I believe you had the transcripts from Tuesday already or not.

[00:52:53]>> No com that's not correct. The transcripts are the documents that were submitted through in a form of a link at 12 at 11:52 yesterday just before 12:00 noon the very same documents that I'm saying I struggle to to download because at the same time I was preparing to come here >> but if I understand Mrs. Kakana correctly. If we for example look at uh Mr. Ness's uh transcript he says all that he's going to be dealing with in that regard is what relates to um the lack of scoring if that is true by director Malaji when he sat on the BC so he sat there but he did not do any scoring that's the allegation. So it's that's something within a narrow ambit and uh Mrs. Skak could direct you to that part of the of the testimony. So that's something within a very narrow embit. Um and then regarding what's the other issue major piri or regarding his testimony there again is something within a very narrow ambit and it relates to whether director Malaji did give uh major piri an instruction with regard to ad hoc uh uh postings.

[00:54:32]Um that's that's and he says the major major focus there is going to be on emails and email thrill and I said to you earlier that you can read those emails within in less than a minute. So there again is something that's within a very narrow ambit. That's how I understand Mr. Mr. Mr. Skakani >> Commissioners.

[00:55:01]So on both issues, I think he can actually even assist and direct you exactly where you should look on on on those transcripts. Anything else, >> Commissioner? It's quite common that much as my Leonard friend is saying he's going to use, it's his case.

[00:55:21]I want to read the whole documents. I want to get the gist of what is being given there.

[00:55:25]>> As I as I as I said to you, you are very fortunate that you got the transcripts.

[00:55:30]Anyway, ordinarily ordinarily witnesses are confronted uh um with what other witnesses said without any transcript having been having having been given to those witnesses.

[00:55:42]>> Commissioner on those documents there's there's even a bundle statement of bundle an extras that were submitted by period and it has been >> the five minutes is up should I give >> just the last one commissioner it has been common point that Mr. has been working with with Mr. Malichu quite a number of time there's quite quite voluminous bundle that are talking about that information and information which we have not even perused at this stage or not it's it's just not doable commissioners that we can just have 30 minutes an hour or so to look into >> can that be addressed by filing a supplementary affidavit that you may be minded to file based on what will be traversed with the director Malaji >> our main aim was to replace that supplementary after having gone through what we're looking for in this quite a number of documents that were sent to us and filed this supplementary statement a fresh and and and and and in that way we would have a >> I'm talking I'm talking about a supplementary affidavit that will be addressing whatever you may feel was not sufficiently addressed as uh director piri is testifying that's that's that's the supplementary I'm talking about >> I'm noting that commissioners but the fact remains he would have testified by that time he would have not been given got a chance to get a proper advice after we have gone through what the evidence leaders are going to use in this man that's all I'm asking >> m yeah mi this is not uh these are not court proceedings.

[00:57:29]So you you you should not necessarily expect um what you would ordinarily get in a in a in a court process. We try as far as possible to to be fair to witnesses or to witnesses. And uh my feeling our feeling is that whatever unfairness may be visited upon uh director Perryi will in my view be sufficiently addressed by whatever you may say by way of a supplement.

[00:58:11]depending on what will come out during his uh his testimony also. Also you you have the right to to re-examine but I know you will say I will not be able to to to exa re-examine sufficiently if I have not read the documents uh at leisure and according to the sort of comfort that I that is you would have would have wanted. So you have you but I still say you do have the right to re-examine and maybe by the time that comes there is the opportunity to re-examine you will have had a bit of time to to rush through through the documents but but the main point is that you will have an opportunity to prepare a supplementary affidavit with director Malajian address whatever shortcomings you feel there may be um during his testimony.

[00:59:22]>> Commissioner noted >> yeah I think we we we we should close the debate now.

[00:59:27]>> Yeah. Just the last point I noted that commissioner but correctly as you are saying there won't be sufficient time even if I were to be afforded that re-examination. Why don't we shorten this process and avoid even giving further documents or supplementary statement and come at you know at once when everything there won't be any complaints but those are my submissions commissioner I don't intend to spend more time on that when I respect the decision of the commissioner >> you've taken up about a minute of your time I wanted to give you an hour to to look at the documents may we may we adjourn and resume just a minute just a The application for a postponement is uh refused. Um, director Malaji is afforded an opportunity to go through whatever documents he wishes to uh between now and 11. Let's adjourn and resume at 11.