Chief Perumal had discussions with Major General Khan and obtained an unsigned provisional statement from Khan aimed at clarifying queries regarding the Lushaba incident, which was sent in an email to other investigators including prosecutors.
“Chief Perumal indicated in an email that he has had a discussion with Major General Khan … and obtained a provisional statement aimed at clarifying some of the queries I was raising regarding the Lushaba incident. The unsigned statement of Major General Khan was attached to Chief Perumal's email.”
Mr Raphesu stated that on the previous 27 project, they had problems with Chief Perumal who sometimes tried to come with tricks, so they had to unite to deal with his dodgy ways.
“we had problems with Chief Perumal. So he sometimes wanted to come with tricks and other things. So we had to unite so that we can be able to deal with his dodgy ways”
Chief Perumal briefed Mr Brian Padayachee before the meeting, surprising Mr Raphesu who expected to receive the briefing as well.
“Chief Perumal indicates that he had already briefed Mr Brian Padayachee. So I was then surprised to say, if we have now been briefed about this now, and he is saying that he has already briefed Mr Padayachee”
Chief Perumal instructed or tasked Mr Raphesu to locate dockets that bear a case number of Villieria and also indicated the dockets might be locked in a safe in the Station Commander, Commissioner's office at Villieria.
“Chief Perumal was explaining ... He mentioned that he is basically tasking me or giving me instructions to locate the dockets ... The dockets ... bear a case number of Villieria ... dockets might be locked in a safe in the Station Commander, Commissioner's office at Villieria”
Mr Suneel Bellochun was heard fighting/exchanging words with Chief Perumal about being promised the lead role on a matter.
“Mr Suneel Bellochun, it looked like he was promised that he was going to be a lead on thismatterso he was asking Chief Perumal, why am I not a lead in thismatter”
Mr. Raphesu was instructed by Chief Perumal to collect dockets urgently because Chief Perumal needed to take them to East London before he moved to Villieria.
“I w a s i n s t r u c t e d a f t e r b r i e f e d b y C h i e f P e r u m a l t o c o l l e c t t h e d o c k e t s , h e s p e c i f i c a l l y t o l d m e t h a t I m u s t g e t t h e s e d o c k e t s b e c a u s e h e w a n t s t o l e a v e w i t h t h e m t o E a s t L o n d o n . H e w a s f l y i n g b a c k t o E a s t L o n d o n o n t h a t F r i d a y .”
Colonel Phillips informed Mr. Raphesu that the dockets were not in Villieria but had been collected by the Hawks and locked up in his General's office, and that dockets could only be released possibly on the Monday morning.
“Already, I have informed Chief Perumal that the dockets were collected, they are not in Villieria, by some Colonel Phillips from the Hawks. ... You cannot get the dockets today. You can only get the dockets possibly on Monday because the dockets were locked up in his General's office.”
Mr. Raphesu witnessed an interaction and arrangements between Colonel Phillips and Chief Perumal for collection and letter exchange regarding the dockets.
“They are now making arrangements for the collection of the dockets on Monday. Soon the arrangements, they are talking how they are going to move about, how the letters will be exchanged between the two of them and how the letters should be directed.”
Mr. Raphesu stated that information about the 'BMW lady' discussed in the meeting came from Chief Perumal, but the name was not mentioned during the meeting and it was just captured that way.
“the issue about the BMW lady, it was coming from Chief Perumal ... the name was not mentioned . It was just the way I captured it”
During a meeting, Chief Perumal asked about a circulating clip, and Mr. Raphesu was tasked to find out from Mr. O'Sullivan if he had opened a case regarding the BMW lady issue or done any work on it.
“during the engagement in the meeting, Chief Perumal asked about a clip that was circulating... they tasked me to go to Mr O’Sullivan to find out if he had opened a case against ... around this issue about the BMW lady ... also to find out if he has conducted or done anything on that matter”
Mr. Raphesu testified that when Advocate Ramsamy asked Mr. Fadiel about documents, he was told Fadiel had already given the documents to Chief Perumal just before the interviews started.
“when Advocate Ramsamy asked him about the documents, Mr Fadiel already told us that he gave the documents to Chief Perumal just before the interviews started”
Mr. Raphesu acknowledged that the documents shared by Chief Perumal at the meeting on 9 December were likely the same ones referred to by Mr. Fadiel, implying no new documents were disclosed beyond those already seen.
“those would have been the documents that Mr Perumal then shared with you in the meeting of the 9th of December ... there would not have been other documents to disclose ... apart from those that you had already then seen”
MR RAPHESU stated that Chief Perumal did the typing of the affidavits and that MR RAPHESU, as lead investigator, commissioned the affidavits without formal discussion or objection from others.
“Chief Perumal was doing the typing , Commissioner . There was no discussion about that , but as a lead investigator on the matter , I just assume that it is me who was supposed to have commissioned the affidavits . There was no objection .”
MR RAPHESU explained Chief Perumal does not want to be named or sign any affidavit but operationally leads everything, so MR RAPHESU assumed commissioning the affidavits was their role as lead.
“Mr Perumal is not a person that will want to put this signature or name in any document . From what I know is , even if you write in your affidavit and you mention him , he is going to fight with you . He does not want to be put on any affidavit . He does not want to be named at anything . But operationally , he leads everything . So I just assume that because I am the lead on this , I have to commission .”
MR RAPHESU and Advocate flew back to Johannesburg together, while Chief Perumal flew back to East London separately after their interviews in Cape Town.
“No , I think the two of us , I Advocate and myself , we flew back and then he flew back to East London .”
There was no occasion when Chief Perumal was alone with Mr Adams, without MR RAPHESU or Advocate present.
“Was there an occasion or a moment when the two of you were somewhere else , and Mr Perumal was alone with Mr Adams ? No , that never occurred , Chair .”
Mr Perumal reportedly does not want to put his signature or name in any document or affidavit, and fights if mentioned, although operationally he leads everything.
“Mr Perumal is not a person that will want to put this signature or name in any document . From what I know is , even if you write in your affidavit and you mention him , he is going to fight with you . He does not want to be put on any affidavit . He does not want to be named at anything . But operationally , he leads everything .”
Mr Raphesu confirms that affidavits commissioned by Chief Perumal to Cape Town/Pretoria should have been named supplementary affidavits if intended as such, but one affidavit was not preceded by 'supplementary'.
“Just to complete your point about the Cape Town/Pretoria affidavits commissioned by Chief Perumal, you said they too should have been named supplementary affidavits. May I take you to page 3483? That is one of Chief Perumal's affidavits or rather affidavits commissioned by him. You see there between the tram lines at the top of 3483, there it says ‘affidavit’. An affidavit is not preceded by supplementary. That is correct, Chair, I confirm.”
Chief Perumal provided telephone numbers including Feroz Khan who would shed more light on the Lushaba matter related to lost items reported to Khan.
“The numbers were provided by Chief Perumal. And Mr Feroz Khan was one of the people that was identified that he would shed more light about the topic that we were talking about ... it has something to do with the lost items that were reported to Khan.”
Mr. Raphesu made a report on the Lushaba matter and submitted it to Chief Perumal.
“I continued with the investigation on the Lushaba matter. I subsequently produced a report on the findings of the investigation. Then I submitted the report to Chief Perumal.”
Chief Perumal is guiding the investigation and is both referee and player in the process; he orchestrated the call to Mr Nkabinde and is now the Investigation Officer in the same matter.
“Chief Perumal will be guiding the investigation ... Mr Perumal will be a referee and a player in this process ... He is also a suspect because he is the one that orchestrated this thing ... he is now the IO again of the same matter”
Mr Mbalowa was originally a TRT member guarding Chief Perumal, later became an investigator and currently works under Chief Perumal.
“Mr Mbalowa was a TRT member. He guarding, he was one of the guards of Chief Perumal. So eventually, he became the investigator. He is now working under Chief Perumal.”
The confidential Crime Intelligence documents show a list of bank details of General Lushaba, suggesting information about the R50 million movement from Crime Intelligence account would have come from someone in Crime Intelligence involving either Advocate Johnson or Chief Perumal who were closely dealing with this.
“...the two of them would have or must have received information ... about the R50 million ... from Crime Intelligence ... funds being moved from a Crime Intelligence account ... That kind of information ... would have had to have come from someone at Crime Intelligence ... Advocate Johnson or Chief Perumal because they are the two people ... intimately dealing with this...”
ADV BALOYIS C implied that Mr Perumal and Colonel Padayachee compiled the list of requirements for the National Commissioner being summoned to interview.
“Chief Perumal and Colonel Padayachee, one of them or both of them would be the people that have compiled this list of what is required from the National Commissioner who has been summoned to an interview.”
Chief Perumal solicited a section 27 affidavit which landed on Advocate Johnson's desk and is the only one he worked with.
“this one that we have been dealing with you say was delivered to, was solicited by Chief Perumal and then eventually landed on your desk and that is the only one you have worked with”
There are no allegations related to the PKTT in the official section 27 affidavits of Investigator Rapetsu, Advocate Ramsamy, and Chief Perumal, suggesting a discrepancy in the allegations against PKTT.
“our section 27 does not have any reference to PKTT at all ... I do not know ... it makes no sense”
Mr Rapetsu and Chief Perumal should have addressed all issues related to the investigation together and produced a single document instead of separate statements taken on the same date.
“And if either Mr Rapetsu or Chief Perumal felt that, wait, there is something else still to be dealt with on an aspect, it should have been dealt with all at the same time. If there was a need to, it should have been captured in one document and then commissioned, and then we move on to the next and soon and soon.”
Chief Perumal wrote his own statement behind the backs of the other investigators and commissioned Mr Adams to depose on it, which may lead to conflicting official records.
“Mr Perumal, Chief Perumal, behind their backs, because there is no better way of saying this, behind their backs he goes and he decides to write his own statement that he commissions without the other two knowing, and he gets Mr Adams to depose.”
If Chief Perumal's statement, not produced with the other investigators, forms the basis for warrants and charges in the Mokwele matter, it would be misleading and undermine the ends of justice.
“If in fact, as we know has happened in the Mokwele matter, if the docket that is before the Court and that is disclosed to the accused and that is the basis for the warrants that were obtained for instituting for the charges, it is in fact Perumal's questionable statements, not the ones that were properly taken. That would amount to, it seems to me, that that would have amounted to defeating the ends of justice, lying to the Court, lying to you, misleading everyone that is involved with this and failure to disclose the true contents of the docket. Am I correct in all of that? I am assuming Perumal's are in fact a manufactured statement that is being used.”
Chief Perumal acted outside prescribed protocols by consulting witnesses and potential complainants before deciding to take on a case, contrary to intended operating procedures.
“you acted outside of a prescribed protocol in that you went and consulted with a complainant, a potential complainant, even before a decision was made to take on this case for investigation”
There must be a formal, recorded process of seeking clarifications with witnesses or referees happening before a case is taken on for investigation, ensuring accountability.
“in that process of seeking clarifications, that is a formal process, it is recorded . It is a formal process . You may not at that point yet have decided to take on the case, but I would expect that there would be a record that Chief Perumal spoke to Mr Adamson this day , and this is what was discussed between them”
Chief Perumal received a list of names from Mr Adamson that were not included in the section 27 referral affidavit but were implicated in the investigation authorization.
“I got the section 27 from the ID on this date, right, and we determined, or I determined, that it requires particulars . I met with Mr Adamson this day, right, and here is what I discussed with him . These are the questions I asked him , and this is where I got these names . I am talking about that kind of process.”
There should be a formal application document supporting authorizations, which must be recorded and retrievable for accountability purposes.
“I would expect that in that process of seeking clarifications, that is a formal process, it is recorded ... there would be a record that Chief Perumal spoke to Mr Adamson this day, and this is what was discussed between them . Otherwise, if you do not have that kind of formal record, then there is no accountability whatsoever .”
The authorization application for investigation implicated more people than were listed in the initial section 27 affidavit, raising questions about the factual basis for including the additional names.
“Now, if all Mr Adams gives Mr Perumal is a list of names and it is now 12 people, what is the factual basis for you coming to a conclusion as you do on 3283 that you have reason to believe that the persons in the annexure have committed the offences you mentioned on page one”
A document seeking clarification on matters raised in the section 27 referral was commissioned by Chief Perumal on 10 January and was not originally with SAPS.
“This document was not at SAPS. It was created. It was commissioned by Chief Perumal on the 10th of January.”
Chief Perumal acted outside of prescribed protocol by consulting complainants or witnesses before a decision was made to take on the case, contrary to operating procedures restricting such premature engagement.
“that you acted outside of a prescribed protocol in that you went and consulted with a complainant, a potential complainant, even before a decision was made to take on this case for investigation”
There must be formal process and recording when seeking clarifications from referees in section 27 inquiries; casual or undocumented engagements create a lack of accountability.
“I would expect that in that process of seeking clarifications, that is a formal process, it is recorded ... otherwise ... there is no accountability whatsoever”
Advocate Baloyi SC states that linking names to specific factual allegations would not be in the submission from the prosecutor, but in whatever submission was made by Chief Perumal, who would have explained why the people were implicated and must be included in the list.
“The linking of these names to any specific factual allegation would not be in the submission from the prosecutor. It would be in whatever submission was made to you by Chief Perumal. So the one that gives, by the time you give the list to the prosecutor, Ms Ramsami... already have been told these people are implicated...”
Advocate Johnson states he had no independent recollection of discussion with Chief Perumal about why the list of people was given and can only speculate about any engagement.
“I had no independent recollection, and so I do not want to venture guess whether or not I even had a conversation... But that is mere speculation and I do take the point that you make.”
Advocate Johnson agrees with the point that there is no independent recollection of any discussion or instruction from Chief Perumal about why the names were included in the list given to the prosecutor, and that absence of proof means he will not speculate.
“As I indicated this morning, Commissioner Baloyi, I had no independent recollection, and so I do not want to venture a guess whether or not I even had a conversation, except that when the list was given to the prosecutor, there was no reason why she may not have, I am not saying she did, why she may not have had an engagement with Mr Perumal as they were part of that team. But that is mere speculation and I do take the point that you make.”
Commissioner Baloyi states that the prosecution submission would not link names to specific factual allegations, but that such linking would occur in submissions made to the advocate by Chief Perumal, and it would justify including names in the list for the application.
“The linking of these names to any specific factual allegation would not be in the submission from the prosecutor to you, it would be in whatever submission was made to you by Chief Perumal... So the one that gives, by the time you give the list to the prosecutor, Ms Ramsami, in this case, you already have been told these people are implicated.”
The witness was told by Ms Ramsami that the list was obtained from Chief Perumal, and the witness confirmed having spoken to Chief Perumal about the list.
“once you were told by Ms Ramsami that you told her that you got it from Chief Perumal”
Advocate Baloyi propositions that the letter from Mr Nkabinde says nothing and it is proposed that Chief Perumal should speak to Mr Adams directly, implying there were allegations of interception of dockets and possibly corruption.
“I want to make a proposition ... that when you look at the letter from Mr Nkabinde, as you agree, it says nothing ... for you to instruct Chief Perumal to speak to Mr Adams ... the emails speak to corruption of sorts ... allegations of interception of dockets.”
Colonel Padayachee testified that a briefing was given to the team by Chief Perumal after the case management committee considered section 27, but Adv Johnson and Adv Sello allege this is incorrect and there is no such committee.
“Colonel Padayachee spoke of a committee, an intake committee... So, to, then, was Colonel Padayachee wrong in testifying that the briefing was given to the team by Chief Perumal after the case management committee had considered the section 27? That is utterly wrong.”
Colonel Padayachee testified that a briefing was given to the team by Chief Perumal after the case management committee had considered Section 27, but this was allegedly incorrect as no such committee exists.
“Colonel Padayachee was wrong in testifying that the briefing was given to the team by Chief Perumal after the case management committee had considered the section 27. That is utterly wrong.”
Chief Perumal did not withhold any document related to Section 27 referrals; the document was held by the prosecutor or project manager, not by Chief Perumal or Colonel Padayachee's team.
“He did say that he did not withhold any document.... He did not withhold the Section 27 because after the deliberations happened, the 27 was kept by the prosecutor or the project manager, but there was a 7 that was in the team.”
The Section 27 referral document was handled by the prosecutor and project manager, and not provided to Colonel Padayachee, who led a separate investigation without access to it.
“He said to me he did not have the Section 7 referral because that is what was testified to, that Chief Perumal had it and it was not given to me.... Chief Perumal says I did not have that document. That document was with the prosecutor.”
Colonel Padayachee was orally briefed about the Section 27 referral by Chief Perumal despite not having seen the source document, which is unusual and problematic given the seriousness of the investigation starting.
“The prosecutor has it. He, that is Mr Perumal, does not have it and has never had it and then he, according to Mr Padayachee, gives an oral briefing to Mr Padayachee.... That is just very, very strange to me. And yet something very serious, which is an investigation, is going to commence and yet the two people involved right at the tail end, before the investigation actually starts, have not seen the source document.”
Chief Perumal did not withhold any document and said he did not have access to section 27 referral documents.
“He did say that he did not withhold any document ... He did not have the section 27 because after the deliberations happened, the 27 was kept by the prosecutor or the project manager”
Colonel Padayachee did not have the section 27 referral document and had never seen it despite giving oral briefings based on it.
“Chief Perumal said I did not have the section 27 referral because that is what was testified to, that Chief Perumal had it and it was not given to me ... he said I've never seen it. It is never provided”
Colonel Padayachee was present and aware during the preparation of subpoena documents signed by Advocate Johnson, but the actual preparation was done by Chief Perumal.
“The section 28, it would have been done by Chief Perumal ... I would have maybe, you know, looked at, whilst he was preparing the document ... but he prepared it.”
Colonel Padayachee, as lead investigator for the relevant docket, is responsible for identifying and requesting specific documents and information such as personnel files for individuals including Mokwele and General Khumalo; some documents related to Khumalo fall under investigations handled by others like Chief Perumal.
“you are the lead investigator ... you are responsible for these requests”
Chief Perumal assembled the investigators, briefed them on allegations relating to Crime Intelligence, and provided guidance which started the whole investigation.
“Chief Perumal assembled us as investigators... that was the briefing from him which started the whole investigation and the guidance from him.”
Mr Adams signed twice on pages 681 and 682 as well as his own statement, but his signature on page 681, where Chief Perumal was supposed to sign, appears to be the same as on other pages, suggesting Mr Adams signed in place of Chief Perumal.
“it would appear at first blush that Mr Adams signed both ... page 1 and page 2 and his own statement ... it looks like the signature at 681, so it is the same signature ... where Chief Perumal was supposed to have signed on 681, Mr Adams signed”
Chief Perumal declined to comment on whether he signed Mr Adams' statement, saying he is not a handwriting expert and it would be unfair for him to comment.
“I cannot comment on that ... I am not a handwriting expert and I cannot comment on that but he himself can comment. Did you sign here or did not? If I am understanding you correctly.”