General Mosikili

The affidavit in a docket had been tampered with, defeating the ends of justice.

“we first found that the affidavit had been tampered with. We found defeating the ends of justice”

Mr Nku decided to produce a further statement after consultation regarding matters raised on Thursday, indicating he wants to address those issues and will read the statement into the record.

“he has produced a further statement which he will read into the record, Chairperson, and he will explain, Chairperson, the circumstances that made him decide that he wants to do a further statement and why he wanted to come forth on the issues that we were raising with him on Thursday”

ADV Mosikili submitted that a nickname of a person referenced in Mr Nku's statement should not be redacted as it is relevant and has been mentioned by other witnesses including Chief Mashaba and Colonel Sebola.

“my submission would be that that name , first of all , is quite relevant and connects the dots . And without any reasons being given why that name should not be mentioned , we should not protect the name without any basis . ... it is out there in the public any way , the nickname that I seek to refer to .”

Mr Nku came across information from a confidential source but did not mention the source's name in his first statement due to safety concerns.

“In your first statement you state that you came across information from a confidential source. And then in your supplementary statement you now introduced this person by name as an original source of information. And the real question was that why was his name not mentioned in your first statement?”

There is information and testimony suggesting a theory that Mr Nku is a confidential informant, and the Commission has prepared extracts of the Operational Management Process for Crime Intelligence Collection Environment document to test this theory.

“Now, there has been information and testimony to this Commission to the effect that there has been a suggestion that you are a confidential informant, and we want to test that theory. Chairperson, we have made available to the Chair a copy, and Mr Nku should have one as well. It looks like this...It is called the Operational Management Process for Crime Intelligence Collection Environment, and says Division Crime Intelligence.”

The process of recruiting informants involves profiling individuals or groups who might be potential sources, including recruitment approaches and the sensitive face-to-face recruitment stage.

“this deals with the process of recruiting informants ... it is a profiling ... recruitment approach strategies ... actual recruitment is the most sensitive stage of recruitment process”

The handler is responsible for managing informants professionally and must avoid unacceptable conduct such as socializing, romantic involvement, borrowing money, or paying informants without a witness.

“The handler is responsible for the achievement of set objectives ... Ensuring professional conduct at all times ... Unacceptable conduct ... includes socialising, romantic involvement, purchasing from or selling to, borrowing money, accepting gifts, paying monies to human source without a witness”

Advocate Mosikili accuses Mr Nku of tailoring his evidence regarding his alleged wanting to leave and being present at a scene, presenting new evidence inconsistent with prior witness statements and his own earlier statements.

“You see, that is my difficulty with your testimony all along, is that you tailor evidence as you go by. None of the witnesses who came to testify, not Chief Mashaba, said anything about you leaving. You have provided three statements. None of those statements mentioned you ever wanting to leave. It is now that you are cornered as to why you insisted on being there. You are being faced with black and white evidence as to why you insisted on being there. Now you are giving us completely new evidence that, in fact, at some stage, you wanted to be relinquished. And I put it to you, that is a typical case of tailoring evidence as you go and that is highly unsustainable because it is not supported by the true facts.”

ADV Mosikili challenged Mr Nku's contradictory reasons for having the R6000 cash amount and the use of that money.

“Mr Nku, perhaps we can wrap up the topic on reasons why you had the R6000 cash on you. And I still persist that you keep on giving contradictory reasons for various questions that I put to you...And then later on, you said, no, this was a petty cash...Then later on, again, you said, no, not no, that amount actually is the entire amount that you received through your clients who were paying you in cash...And if we were to look at your bank account and find you have actually not telling the truth because you have been swiping that card going to Durban, that means it is not true that amount was, you had that amount because you wanted to remain discreet.”

Advocate Mosikili contends that the money Mr Nku kept was not merely to remain discreet by avoiding card transactions, implying the money had a specific purpose possibly connected to payments to Mr Mashaba.

“...your reason that you wanted to remain discreet does not hold water. And we will make submissions... that R60000 had a particular purpose it had to serve. It was not merely there to be spent...”

Adv Mosikili suggests that the money found with Mr Nku on the day and his previous dealings with Mr Mashaba imply the money could have been used for those who assisted him, including Mr Mashaba.

“hence, I am saying, on the scene on that day, you being found with that kind of amount and having dealt with, or at least having in this Commission been informed of your previous dealings with Mr Mashaba, the idea that, for now at least, that money could have been used for those who assisted you, including Mr Mashaba, is not far fetched”

Maj-Gen Senona confirms the affidavit mentioned by Adv Sello is the one made immediately after the incident requested by Lt Gen Mosikili.

“It is a statement that he made immediately after the incident where we were requested by Lieutenant General Mosikili to provide affidavit of the incidents.”

Maj-Gen Senona prepared a factual report about the theft of drugs at Port Shepstone for General Mosikili, based on information provided to him by Brigadier Nyuswa.

“I requested him to get me the information, and he gave me a draft. And then out of the draft, I did rectify whatever I had to, and then I read it. I was satisfied and then I sent it to the Deputy National Head by then.”

Maj-Gen Senona disagreed with the assertion that he misled General Mosikili about the events and circumstances of 22 June 2021 and the subsequent theft.

“I disagree with the fact that I misled the General.”

In the report to General Mosikili, MAJ-GENSENONA claimed the seal breaking happened in the presence of DPCI and ORS members, but this is factually incorrect according to the statements provided, including by Colonel Jacob and Sergeant Govender.

“the claim you made in your report to General Mosikili that at the operation when the seal was broken, that happened in the presence of DPCI members and ORS members. And I say that is factually incorrect”

ADV SELLO SC maintains that MAJ-GENSENONA misled General Mosikili regarding the presence of ORS members at the operation, despite possible being misled himself due to inaccurate reports.

“I maintain that you misled her because that is factually inaccurate, what you have set out in the report about presence of ORS members... I suggest to you that to the extent that you misled General Mosikili, would be due to the fact that you, in turn, were misled because the report was prepared for you”

ADV SELLO SC suggests any misleading of General Mosikili by MAJ-GENSENONA was due to MAJ-GENSENONA being misled by prepared reports, not intentional deception.

“I suggest to you that to the extent that you misled General Mosikili, would be due to the fact that you, in turn, were misled because the report was prepared for you”

MAJ-GENSENONA states he has no reason to mislead General Mosikili as all reports leaving his office are prepared by others who report to him, and any mistake would not be intentional.

“All the reports that leave my office are prepared by people who are reporting to me... if there are mistakes, it is not that there was an intention to mislead any person”

Statement in report that ORS members witnessed the seal being broken is factually incorrect, as confirmed by evidence and statements of Govender and Colonel Jacob.

“The container was open. The seal was broken in the presence of ORS members. We now know from other evidence, including that statement of Govender, but we also know from Colonel Jacob who has accepted that ORS members were not present when the seal was broken.”

Adv Baloy explains to Senona that the statement in the report about ORS members witnessing the breaking of the seal is factually incorrect.

“A statement that says to General Mosikili the seal was broken in the presence of ORS members is an incorrect statement, right? ... that statement is incorrect factually, because members of ORS tell us in their statements, and Jacob accepts that, that they did not witness the breaking of the seal. They were just brought in to transport, to provide transport.”

General Senona expressed in a report to General Mosikili awareness that there were failings in how the scene was managed, implying he is aware of the applicable prescripts and non-compliance.

“I depart from the premise that he is aware of the prescripts, applicable prescripts, as to how the scene should be managed, and that there were failings in that regard. ... He expressed himself in the manner that he did in his report to General Mosikili about the handling of the scene.”

MAJ-GEN SENONA confirmed he sent a report to General Mosikili about the theft of drugs.

“Correct, Commissioner. [re General Mosikili report]”

The disciplinary report by General Mosikili in 2021 recommended disciplinary proceedings but the speaker cannot discuss the report and was not aware of it at the time.

“General Mosikili's report and recommendations ... report to General Lebeya ... I cannot talk to that report ... I had never seen this report until provided by the Commission”

General Lebeya directed General Mosikili to have further engagements on the disciplinary recommendations in the report.

“General Lebeya directed to General Mosikili that further engagements be had between the two of them. I confirm that is in the report”

The speaker only learned of General Mosikili's investigation after seeing a newspaper report about it.

“The only thing I know, I saw in the newspaper that General Mosikili was appointed to do the investigation ... maybe hence that report was produced”

Brigadier Nyuswa was told by General Mosikili, Deputy National Head, that the DPCI Head Office would be investigating the theft.

“General Mosikili, who at the time was the Deputy National Head... she indicated to you that the DPCI Head Office would be investigating the theft”

Three Generals, General Kadwa, General Khan, and Mr Mosikili (another General, Lekalakala), intervened at a crime scene where police officers were doing something unauthorized and unlawful.

“if that is the picture, what is it about what these three Generals did, being General Kadwa, General Khan, Mr Mosikili, who was the other General who was there? There were three. There was another general who was, Lekalakala.”

Advocate Mosikili expresses concern that the summary of allegations does not appear as investigative questions directed to the suspect and that there is no request to provide the statement mentioned in Booysen CAS 97/7/2021 in the response letter.

“I have difficulties with that summary not being aimed at or at least appearing as investigative questions that ought to be put to a suspect. And then at paragraph 3, he has told you that he has a statement or he has provided a statement before under the CAS number 97/7/2021. Why, in your response, why is it that you do not ask for him to provide you with that statement as well?”

Advocate Mosikili criticizes that IPID’s response states only that they do not have the statement and leaves it hanging without expressing wanting or requesting the statement which they deem important.

“You do not say in this regard when you come, bring that statement or please give us a statement while you are coming to consult with us. Is there a reason why you do not ask that, because you do have the tools to ask or to demand even? ... You just simply tell him we do not have the statement. And I would have expected at least IPID to say we want that statement, whether you bring it before you come for an interview or you bring it with you, but we want it because we regard it as important.”

Advocate Mosikili clarifies that calling for a warning statement is voluntary and a suspect may choose not to provide it, but complains that IPID should have requested the statement formally rather than leave it to chance.

“Calling for a warning statement says you may or may not. And he might as well have chosen not to give them. But there is this statement that they could request and they should have requested. That is really my issue, and not to depend or rely on him coming or not coming ultimately. That is as high as I could, I am trying to take it with the Assistant Director, Commissioner.”

The summary of allegations compiled by IPID only reflects the complainant's version and not the suspects' version, which is a deficiency accepted by Assistant Director Maphosho.

“your summary still reflects only by and large what you are told by the complainant, and not the version by the other, by the suspects ... I accept that”

Assistant Director Maphosho rejects the recommendation that Brigadier Sekgobela should be charged despite evidence and believes the recommendation is not supported by the facts discussed.

“I want to put to you that in light of what we have discussed and the lack of evidence in support of that conclusion, that recommendation of yours is not supported by the facts that are at least discussed with you today. Can you accept that? No, I do not accept that, Commissioner.”

There is a potential for police to weaponize the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) against one another, suggesting risks of internal conflict and misuse.

“there is a potential or possibility of the police using or weaponizing IPID against each other.”

There is a suspicion that there could have been about three containers involved in an incident at Aeroton, one containing guns and another containing drugs.

“there could have been about three containers containing, I think other ones containing guns, the other one containing drugs as well”

The stopping of the dogs at the incident at least shut that window of opportunity for more container searches.

“the stopping of the dogs at least shut that window of opportunity”

Information from people at Scania indicated they were expecting three containers, but only one actually arrived at the premises to become an issue in this case.

“we get affidavits from people from Scania that were expecting three containers... only one came up to Gauteng to become an issue in this case”

There is no evidence to suggest that there were more than one container present at the time of the incident at the Scania premises for the dogs to sniff out.

“there is no evidence to suggest that there were more than that”

According to the evidence, initial false information was given about bogus police trying to hijack a truck and later drugs were discovered, prompting Warrant Officer Phakula’s involvement despite limited experience in huge drug busts.

“initial call was made ... bogus police who are trying to hijack a truck ... later drugs discovered ... you are called ... you are not particularly experienced in huge drug busts”

The truck was parked with other trucks at Yellow Jersey, and the team moved from one potential crime scene (premises of the truck) to another (destination) without searching the entire premises with full resources.

“there were other trucks that were parked there ... you see my difficulty is that if you moved that truck as you did and you followed it to its destination ... had you brought in the entire team, including the sniffer dogs and whatever, they could have searched the entire premises”

No letter confirming final withdrawal was available; only an order of provisional withdrawal existed.

“What we have is an order of provisional withdrawal, nothing else.”

Warrant Officer Magane did not fully appreciate the magnitude and seriousness of the situation at Aeroton and admits to committing many errors and oversights because of it.

“WARRANT OFFICER MAGANE, ADV MOSIKILI”

Warrant Officer Magane accepts that in the incident he did not handle the situation as required and acknowledges multiple errors and oversights.

“ADV MOSIKILI, CHAIRPERSON, WARRANT OFFICER MAGANE”

Lt-Col Prinsloo was summoned on 11 November to Major General Senona's office in Durban and interviewed about the break-in by several senior officers including Lt Gen Mosikili and Brigadiers Nyuswa and Naicker.

“I was summoned to Major General Senona's office in Durban... I was interviewed about the break-in... Lieutenant General Mosikili conducted that interview... The other officers also asked me questions... I did tell Lieutenant General Mosikili that the alarm was not serviced and was not linked to a security company.”

There were six break-ins at the Port Shepstone premises before June 2021, and the latest before the theft was on 15 January 2021; a security breach report was submitted by Lt Colonel S R Singh to multiple crime intelligence and security heads in KwaZulu-Natal.

“General Mosikili refers to six break-ins at the premises before June 2021, with the most recent before the theft being on 15 January 2021. Most importantly, on 22 January 2020, Lieutenant Colonel S R Singh, Acting Section Commander, Counter Intelligence, Crime Intelligence KZN, submitted a report to the Provincial Head of Crime Intelligence KZN, Provincial Head of the DPCI KZN, Section Head, Operations, Crime Intelligence KZN, Section Commander UGU Cluster, Crime Intelligence KZN, and the National Head, Security Standards, Counter Intelligence to address the security breach at the Port Shepstone premises following the 20 January 2020 break-in.”

General Flynn acknowledged a typographical error in General Mosikili's report regarding references to National Instruction 8 of 2017, specifically paragraph references.

“it is obvious that there was a typo in the report by General Mosikili where it is referred to 12. It is supposed to be paragraph 9(2) and as Advocate Sello indicated , there is no such 12 ( 2 ). So , it is supposed to be in totality referring to paragraph 9 ( 2 ) .”

General Flynn confirmed that National Instruction 8 of 2017, annexed as Annexure HFF2, is the correct instruction referred to by General Mosikili in his report.

“That is the correct instruction , National Instruction Commissioners , that is correct .”

General Flynn confirms that the document referred to by General Mosikili is indeed National Instruction 8 of 2017, with no known amendments made.

“I am not aware of any amendments that were made, so I think the detail reflected here is indeed correct”

An information note was prepared by Deputy National Head of the DPCI, Lieutenant General Mosikili, to the National Head of the DPCI, Lieutenant General Lebeya, appraising the latter on the feedback related to the burglary, housebreaking, and theft of 41 kilograms of cocaine from the Port Shepstone Serious Organized Crime Investigation Unit.

“this document is an information note that was prepared and submitted by the then Deputy National Head of the DPCI, Lieutenant General Mosikili, to the National Head of the DPCI, Lieutenant General Lebeya”

The information note details that General Mosikili travelled to KwaZulu-Natal and met with Provincial Head Major General Senon, who submitted a report regarding the incident summarizing the seizure of the drugs in June 2021.

“General Mosikili refers to, it says that she travelled to KwaZulu-Natal and met with the Provincial Head, Major General Senon. Subsequently, the Provincial Head submitted a report regarding the incident, and it is summarized as follows... starts with the seizure of the drugs in June 2021”

The document discussed does not authorize allocation and deployment of security service providers as done in the case at hand.

“this document does not give you the authority to allocate and, using your words, to deploy these security service providers as you did in this case.”

Deputy Chief Dhlamini admits advancing the interests of Ngaphesheya by assisting with the list of bidders.

“So, for now, we can say at least he is advancing the interest of Ngaphesheya? Yes.”

The notification letters for site allocations were all dated the same day with effective dates being the 5th and 15th of January, indicating an irregular and implausible allocation by one person across multiple Pretoria regions in one day without following proper procedure.

“Especially on page, except for the first two, all of these notices are dated the same day. And with all of them, the effective date being the 5th of – so they are drafted on the 14th and the effective date being the 15th of January... this allocation cuts across almost all the regions in Pretoria on the same day.”

Articles about generals Khumalo, Mkhwanazi, Masemola predominate Lieutenant-General Shibiri's chats with Sergeant Nkosi, with only one article about General Mosikili.

“In your chats with Sergeant Nkosi... they are predominantly about Generals Khumalo, Mkhwanazi and Masemola. There is only one about General Mosikili.”