Mr Suleiman

Mr Mogotsi says he was told by Advocate Chaskalson to get him anything against Suleiman and he would help, noting that Suleiman had implicated Mr Mogotsi and that he (Mogotsi) should find a way to defend himself; Chaskalson expressed belief that Suleiman was lying and had thrown Mr Mogotsi under the bus and wanted Mr Mogotsi to do the same.

“During the call, he told me, get me anything against Suleiman and I will help you ... he expressed his belief that Suleiman was lying, that Suleiman had thrown me under the bus, and that he wanted me to do the same to Suleiman”

Mr Mogotsi alleges that the Evidence Leader encouraged him to produce damaging information against Suleiman and offered help, believing Suleiman was lying and had implicated Mr Mogotsi wrongly.

“Mr Mogotsi says that: “The Evidence Leader says that get many thing against Suleiman and I will help you. He further stated that Suleiman had implicated me and that I should find a way to defend myself. He expressed his belief that Suleiman was lying, that Suleiman had thrown me under the bus and that he wanted me to do the same to Suleiman.””

Mr Mogotsi did not have any attorneys around the time Suleiman was giving testimony at the Commission, as per Mogotsi's own affidavit.

“paragraph 6.1 gives a picture of what happened when Mr Mogotsi reached out to the evidence leader. And he says that it was around that time he did not have any attorneys, which coincided with the time that Mr Suleiman was giving testimony in the Commission.”

Mr Mogotsi called the evidence leader and the evidence leader suggested that based on the evidence given by Mr Suleiman, he threw Mr Mogotsi under the bus and that Mr Suleiman was lying.

“The evidence leader asked him to get anything against Suleiman and he will help. And that Mr Suleiman had implicated him and that he should find a way to defend himself. And further that Mr Suleiman was lying.”

The applicant alleges that the evidence leader failed to investigate issues related to Section 252(A) operations, informant matters, and procurement irregularities, focusing too much on specific individuals such as Mr Suleiman and overlooking other evidence, including that about purchases of properties in the names of private individuals.

“the applicant makes a reference to credible information that he had made available to the evidence leader and leads thereto. And his take is that these issues, which he sees as important issues, have not been given sufficient investigative attention. And what is happening is that the interest has been directed towards specific individuals [Suleiman]. And further, there is also evidence that came to the Commission regarding the purchase of certain properties in the name of private individuals, and that has also been overlooked.”

Mr Mogotsi admitted to telling Mr Chaskalson that a meeting between himself, Morgan Maumela and Suleiman took place in the North West, which was false and intended to postpone Suleiman's testimony.

“Mr Mogotsi admits that he told Mr Chaskalson that this meeting took place, this meeting in the North West. He admits that. And then he adds this following startling addition to his affidavit ... I deliberately mentioned it to prompt a postponement of Suleiman's testimony”

The evidence leader has prepared hundreds of pages of spreadsheets and detailed analysis related to evidence, which Mr Bhana expected to deal with in relation to Mr Suleiman's evidence; defence counsel seeks more time to respond to this volume of evidence.

“I am holding it up. It is a file full of hundreds of pages of spreadsheets and detailed analysis that had been done. So we expected to have been sitting here dealing with Mr Suleiman's evidence yesterday, and I said to you, on the roof, expected to go through all of this.”