By Thapelo Molefe
The state has said that former National Assembly speaker and minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula has a case to answer on charges of corruption and money laundering, adding there is enough evidence to secure her conviction.
Senior state advocate Emile van der Merwe made the submission in the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria while opposing Mapisa-Nqakula’s application for a discharge under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
“There is prima facie evidence. There is a proper case. There is enough evidence for a conviction,” Van der Merwe told the court on Monday.
Mapisa-Nqakula is accused of using her position as defence minister to solicit payments from a contractor who did business with the South African National Defence Force, Nombasa Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, in connection with government contracts involving her company.
She faces 12 counts of corruption and one count of money laundering arising from allegations that she solicited R4.5 million in bribes while serving as defence minister between 2016 and 2019.
The state alleges that R2.1 million was received in cash from Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu.
Mapisa-Nqakula has pleaded not guilty to all the charges and has denied wrongdoing.
Her legal team is seeking her discharge under Section 174, which allows a court to acquit an accused at the close of the state’s case if there is insufficient evidence on which a reasonable court could convict.
Her lawyer, Siyabulela Mapoma, argued that the state’s case relied on inferences and the testimony of a single witness.
He also argued that Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu had failed to explain the specific reason for making the alleged payments to Mapisa-Nqakula.
But Van der Merwe said Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s evidence had been corroborated by 15 other witnesses.
He also questioned what Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu would have gained by falsely implicating the former minister.
The state argued that the alleged payments could have been made to maintain Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s business relationship with the department or to secure future favours.
The state’s case included testimony about alleged cash payments and requests for money, as well as WhatsApp conversations between Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu and Mapisa-Nqakula.
The prosecution also previously led evidence about an alleged R200,000 cash payment that was reportedly being transported to Mapisa-Nqakula when the vehicle carrying the money was allegedly attacked by armed robbers.
The defence has challenged aspects of the state’s evidence, including alleged inconsistencies in witness accounts.
It also questioned WhatsApp messages presented as evidence, arguing that references to terms such as “impepho”, “snuff” and “padkos” did not establish a link to illicit payments.
Van der Merwe argued that the messages were authentic and that Mapisa-Nqakula had not testified to explain whether she received physical wigs, snuff or other items referred to in the messages.
The prosecution also relied on financial records relating to Mapisa-Nqakula’s family bank accounts and renovations to the family’s Johannesburg home.
Van der Merwe argued that legitimate cash withdrawals from the accounts were insufficient to cover the extensive renovations, while evidence showed that builders were paid in cash.
He argued that the evidence pointed to the alleged payments from Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu being used to finance the renovations.
Van der Merwe described the Section 174 application as inappropriate and suggested it amounted to a “fishing expedition” aimed at testing the court’s view of the evidence.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the Gauteng High Court postponed the matter to 7 September for judgment on Mapisa-Nqakula’s discharge application.
INSIDE POLITICS
