Referred to as: ADV BALOY SC · Adv Baloy SC
No picture yet. Upload one or paste an image URL.
The matter involving theft of funds in the docket is a grievance about someone losing out on an appointment, rather than a criminal matter outside the mandate of IDAC.
“This , in fact , further clarifies that this grievance as it relates to this employee in particular, and her ending up being charged , is really a grievance about someone having lost out on an appointment , and it is no more than that .”
There is no substantive factual content in section 27 of the affidavit mentioned, as agreed regarding the need for further clarification.
“Section 27 , which contains no facts whatsoever . We have agreed to that . It contains no actual material .”
If directives were from head office (General Libiya), decisions to remove and restore Warrant Officer Sander would also come from head office; it was not Maj General Senona's own decision.
“If you were acting on the instruction from head office, which is General Libiya, surely the decision to restore or to return Warrant Officer Sander to SOCI ... could also not be your decision ... The return ... also has to be based on an instruction from head office ...”
ADV BALOY SC alleges that Chief Mashaba already knew at 03:41 that assistance from Phokungwana and Magane was needed for an operation, contradicting Chief Mashaba's earlier evidence that he only knew in the morning after meeting Mr Nkuo on the 10th.
“at 03:41 already you had called Phokungwana to say I need assistance...your earlier evidence ...cannot be true”
ADV BALOY SC challenges Chief Mashaba's denial and states there is evidence that Chief Mashaba had called Phokungwana at 03:41 saying he needed assistance, disproving Chief Mashaba's earlier evidence about timing of knowledge.
“It is false... at 03:41 already you had called Phokungwana to say I need assistance...This documents say it is false your evidence”
ADV BALOY SC states that assuming the document is not doctored and true, then the timing of the communication at 03:41 means Chief Mashaba's earlier evidence is false.
“assuming this document is a true reflection... the 03:41 contact from Phokungwana...means your earlier evidence ...is false”
ADV BALOY SC emphasizes if the document is true, Chief Mashaba's evidence about only knowing after meeting Mr Nkuo is false and he mobilised resources earlier based on the information received at 03:41.
“If what is contained in this document is the truth...the timing...shows that your earlier evidence ...is false”
ADV BALOY SC accuses Chief Mashaba of being untruthful and continuing to be untruthful about his engagement with Mr Nkuo on the day he operationalised the information.
“this document proves that you were untruthful and continue to be untruthful about your engagement with Mr Nkuo on the day when you went and operationalised his information”
For the particular drug operation discussed, the DPCI only has an investigation diary and lacks any inspection report or formal record equivalent to that used by ORS.
“In this particular operation, all we have is that investigation diary. We have nothing that is the equivalent of this kind of inspection report.”
Mr Mogashoa has locus standi to depose an affidavit and speak on behalf of the Commission, contra a submission that he lacks locus standi.
“You assert that Mr Mogashoa does have locus standi to depose on behalf of the Commission.”
Information from Mr. Mashaba's informer was first received on 8th July.
“information, according to Mr Mashaba, he got the information on the 8th for the first time from his informer”
Mr. Mashaba went to Yellow Jersey and was told he could not search.
“He went to, I think, Yellow Jersey, and he was told, no, you cannot search.”
ADV BALOY SC accused LT-COL PRINSLOO of failing to raise security concerns about illegally stored high-value drugs despite knowing there was no security, instead complying with orders to keep them stored in an insecure location.
“you are confronted with a situation which clearly breaks every rule that you know about handling exhibits... You are keeping this huge consignment where you do not have security at all... You did not at all... raise concern. And still be told, no, we will keep it here. We hear your concern, but we will keep it here.”
LT-COL PRINSLOO accepted the criticism from ADV BALOY SC regarding security concerns about the stored consignment.
“I accept what you say, Commissioner.”