L T - C O L S E B O L A

The correct procedure for communication in investigations involving the office of the Provisional Commander should be through formal channels such as the office of the Provisional Commander or the Unit Commander, not direct contact to the investigating officer.

“...they communicate with the office, the officer referring the, the office of the Provisional Commander, which is, in this case, Brigadier Sekgobela. Or they should have communicated with the Unit Commander, which in that case was Colonel Zondi who will then call me to the office...”

There should be a formal, preferably written, communication trail in investigations; communication should not be solely telephonic.

“There should be a paper trail to say there was this communication.”

The investigating office typically receives strange and unsolicited calls from officers seeking information on docket details.

“Because we sometimes as investigating officers we get strange calls that seek information in our dockets.”

Lieutenant Colonel Sebola has no knowledge of reasons why DPCI leadership refused IPID's requests.

“I cannot respond to General Kadwa for not adhering to the request and also for General Lebeya, for not, but I think the direction to General Lebeya was for IPID to investigate... So I cannot comment on …”

Lieutenant Colonel Sebola only received one call from General Lebeya related to signing a letter of misconduct; no other communication about IPID was received from these generals.

“The only time I got a call from General Lebeya was when I was in Limpopo to sign the letter for misconduct, nothing else.”

Major General Kadwa found no evidence warranting findings of misconduct against any DPCI members implicated in the IPID report, and that the implicated members acted bona fide within their mandate, though fundamental administrative errors were made by investigators.

“According to his findings, he was unable to identify any evidence that would warrant the findings of misconduct against any DPCI members implicated in the IPID report... The findings indicate after the consideration of the evidence available, there was no evidentiary basis to support allegations of misconduct against implicated members... They acted bona fide within the scope and mandate of the DPCI... There were fundamental administrative errors made by the investigators assigned to the team...”

Major General Gerber's report found no evidence indicating wrongdoing by DPCI members including Lieutenant Colonel Sebola, who acted bona fide within the scope and mandate of the DPCI.

“General Gerber found...no evidence indicating wrongdoing on the part of the DPCI members, including yourself... On the contrary, they acted bona fide within the scope and mandate of the DPCI.”

Lieutenant Colonel Sebola was unaware of fundamental administrative errors identified by the investigators such as errors in serial numbers on evidence bags until these were read during the hearing.

“Were you told of any of this, the administrative errors? No. ... I was never informed of any other error. This is the only one that I know.”

There was an administrative error in the statements by Captain Nortje and Warrant Officer Morris about the seizure which was later rectified and communicated to Lieutenant Colonel Sebola.

“Statement of Captain Nortje and Warrant Officer Morris, who performed these seizure together, differs but was rectified and found to be an administrative error... It was sent to me.”

Lieutenant Colonel Sebola was aware of errors related to evidence packaging and number discrepancies between scene officers and SAP13 registers.

“I am aware of that error... there was a difference between what the officers on the scene recorded as well as in the SAP13 register... the numbers got up to 700, but it was at the lab where they said 715.”

Lt-Col Sebola was questioned whether he had undergone any drug course and if he could handle the scene, he responded that was why he called in officers to assist and that as long as he had information, he had to do the arrest.

“I asked him , you are not a police officer . You do not even – do you know what drugs - have you undergone any drug course or anything that can suggest to say you can handle this scene ? He said , that is why I am calling these officers to come and assist . Then that also pushed me to say , then , ok , you are calling this one to me , seated here I am seeing them as your friends . Then here , the marked police vehicles , they are coming here to assist upon getting that information or complaint . Why cannot you accept them to the scene ? Acquaint them with the scene because that is their area of operation , not yours .”

Lt-Col Sebola stated that informers are no longer just given information but actively work together with police, and unless they are undercover agents, informers do not have to inform and follow the police.

“Unless only if may be he is an undercover agent that is part of this operation . But you do not have to inform me and follow me . Then it is as good as saying , let us go and work . We are working together . We are no longer giving information . We are working together .”

Lt-Col Sebola explained that police drug enforcement does not investigate criminal matters based on their knowledge but relies on information from other state agencies, and that such operations become police operations once information is received.

“Normally , Commissioners , it comes from other state agencies . It goes to the police . Then it become a police operation . It is as good as , like , you get it from anonymous callers and all those things . Then you , whoever , if the calls get to say it enters into this agency , like , let us say it goes to my head office , my own head of office . I am based in Gauteng . Theirs is to say who is based on that area . Then they dispatch the information to whoever should be in that area . Then once I have done everything , I have to submit an information note to the people that gave me that information . If I open enquiry , I will quickly open up enquiry because every action must be based on documents to say I got this information from head office . They said they got it from so and so . Is it not that they still need to respond ? Then I write my own information note about operation that this is what happened , this is what we found , this was the end product of RUA informations so that they can communicate with whoever submitted the information .”

Lt-Col Sebola stated that criminal matters are investigated by police and not the traffic police, who have their own responsibilities and no criminal cases are referred to them for investigation.

“Criminal matters are investigated by the police . ... Unless , not the traffic officer , unless other investigative agencies have been mandated to do so , but not the traffic police , they have got their own responsibilities . No case will ever be referred to them , a criminal matter , for investigation . That is a big no .”