By Simon Nare
Former acting National Director of Public Prosecutions Advocate Mokotedi Mpshe has acknowledged tensions between the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and directors-general in the justice cluster over the control and handling of Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) cases.
Testifying before the TRC cases inquiry, chaired by retired Constitutional Court Justice Sisi Khampepe, on Thursday, Mpshe said tensions arose between former NDPP Advocate Vusi Pikoli and the forum of directors-general, who wanted to be involved in decisions on whether to prosecute apartheid-era cases.
He said this was contrary to the guidelines, which vested the authority to make prosecution decisions in the NDPP.
Mpshe said tensions intensified over the case of apartheid activist Reverend Frank Chikane, with relations between the NPA and the directors-general becoming toxic and acrimonious.
Chikane previously told the inquiry about his frustration with the slow progress in prosecuting apartheid-era operatives who poisoned him during a trip to the United States, leaving him fighting for his life.
Advocate Howard Varney, representing the affected families, asked Mpshe about the NPA’s willingness to prosecute in the matter, noting that “there was a reluctance on the part of some in government to take that route”.
Mpshe confirmed that tensions centred on the NDPP’s authority to decide whether to prosecute.
“Now that body (DGs), they wanted Vusi Pikoli to leave that to them or including them in his taking a decision to prosecute or not. That is where the tension started. There was a stand-off between the NPA and the DGs who were representatives of certain departments,” he testified.
He recalled former safety and security minister Charles Ngqakula referring to the tensions.
During cross-examination, Varney questioned whether Mpshe had succumbed to pressure from the directors-general when he removed Advocate Anton Ackerman as head of the Priority Crimes Litigation Unit, which had been specifically established to deal with TRC cases.
Varney suggested that Mpshe’s decision could have been intended to appease the directors-general, amounting to political pressure.
Mpshe rejected the suggestion, saying the pressure was not the result of direct approaches or instructions from the directors-general but stemmed from their attitude towards Ackerman.
“Let me not agree with you, or let me put it this way, the pressure that you are talking about to interpret it if you do, to interpret meaning that the people in that forum (of DGs) were approaching me or making me or told me to do that.
“It should not be interpreted in that fashion, but you should look at it if you use the word pressure, I would say it was coming from their attitude towards Ackerman. And I was not doing that to remain in good relations with them, not at all, not at all,” he said.
Mpshe maintained that removing Ackerman from his position had no impact on the investigation or prosecution of TRC cases, arguing that other prosecutors in the unit were capable of handling the matters.
However, he acknowledged that no prosecutions took place between 2007 and 2016 and that no new cases were enrolled during that period.
Explaining the disagreement between the directors-general’s forum, also referred to as the task team, and the NPA, Mpshe said the former wanted a greater role in determining how cases were handled.
“According to the directors-general, their opinion was to the effect that they are to assist the NDPP or deal with matter that would be finalised and give him inputs, and in those inputs maybe even direct as to what is to happen to the case.
“In other words, they wanted to take part in the decision-making of the NDPP in as far as prosecuting was concerned. That is what they had in mind,” he said.
