Court Rejects Mapisa-Nqakula Bid To Have Corruption Case Thrown Out

Former National Assembly Speaker and defence minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula will have to answer corruption and money laundering charges after the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria dismissed her application to have the case discharged before presenting her defence.

Delivering judgment on Monday, Judge Mashudu Munzhelele found that the State had presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against Mapisa-Nqakula.

The judge said the evidence, considered cumulatively, supported an inference that Mapisa-Nqakula knew the alleged payments constituted gratification and were connected to her official position, influence and ability to act.

“In my view, the evidence, considered cumulatively, constitutes a prima facie case… The requisite intention is properly inferred from the surrounding circumstances and the accused’s conduct,” Munzhelele said.

She found that the State had therefore presented sufficient evidence for Mapisa-Nqakula to be called upon to answer the charges.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Jub Jub Firearm Case Postponed To 17 September

“The State has, therefore, established a prima facie case on the element of intention, sufficient to require the accused to answer,” she said.

“It would, consequently, be inappropriate to discharge the applicant in terms of section 174 on the basis that the State did not produce direct evidence of subjective intention.”

Defence Challenges Strength Of State’s Case

Mapisa-Nqakula brought the application after the State closed its case, arguing that the prosecution had failed to present evidence on which a reasonable court could convict her.

Her lawyer, Siyabulela Mapoma SC, placed particular emphasis on what the defence described as weaknesses and contradictions in the State’s evidence, especially that of its key witness, defence contractor Nombasa Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu.

“All the other witnesses who testified about the giving of the money heard that from Nombasa. The source of the hearsay evidence was Nombasa,” Mapoma argued.

The defence maintained that there was insufficient independent evidence directly confirming Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s allegations that payments had been made to Mapisa-Nqakula.

Mapoma argued that section 174 did not require the defence to establish that there was no evidence at all, but whether the evidence before the court was sufficient for a reasonable court to convict.

“It is submitted that the evidence presently before court is not enough to sustain a prima facie case,” he said.

“No reasonable court, acting carefully, might convict on it.”

The defence also challenged inconsistencies in testimony from State witnesses and questioned the interpretation of WhatsApp messages relied upon by the prosecution.

Court Considers Alleged Code Words

Part of the State’s case involves alleged code words used in communications between Mapisa-Nqakula and Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu.

The words highlighted during the proceedings included “wig”, “impepho”, “snuff”, “medicine”, “padkos” and “indumba”.

The defence argued that the words were ordinary expressions and that there was no adequate basis for treating them as coded references to money.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Zuma Foundation To Open Criminal Case Against Retired Justice Sisi Khampepe

The State argued that their meaning had to be considered within the broader context of the relationship between the two women and the circumstances surrounding the alleged payments.

Munzhelele said the court was not required at the section 174 stage to determine beyond reasonable doubt whether every word was a reference to money.

The issue was whether the evidence, taken as a whole, established a case requiring Mapisa-Nqakula to answer.

The alleged coded communications formed part of a wider body of evidence presented by the State, including evidence concerning cash payments, financial transactions and interactions between Mapisa-Nqakula and Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu.

Alleged R4.55 Million Payments At Centre Of Case

Mapisa-Nqakula faces 12 counts of corruption and one count of money laundering over allegations that she solicited and received about R4.55 million from Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu between 2016 and 2019.

The State alleges that the payments were linked to Mapisa-Nqakula’s position and influence.

At the centre of the case is the relationship between Mapisa-Nqakula and Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, whose company, Umkhombe Marine, secured a R104 million South African National Defence Force logistics contract in 2016.

The prosecution presented evidence relating to alleged cash payments, financial transactions, renovations to Mapisa-Nqakula’s Johannesburg home and communications between the two women.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Vusimuzi ‘Cat’ Matlala And Four Co-Accused To Return To High Court For Trial-Within-A-Trial

The defence repeatedly highlighted the fact that most State witnesses did not personally see Mapisa-Nqakula receiving the alleged bribes.

It argued that while the State had presented evidence indicating that money had changed hands, it had not established the crucial link between those payments and the former minister.

The State rejected that argument, with prosecutor Emile van der Merwe maintaining that the evidence should be assessed cumulatively.

“The State takes cognisance of certain inconsistencies between the evidence of witnesses,” Van der Merwe said.

The prosecution argued that the inconsistencies should not be considered in isolation and that Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s evidence was supported by other testimony and documentary material.

Munzhelele ultimately agreed that the evidence, taken as a whole, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case.

The State also argued that Mapisa-Nqakula’s alleged influence was reflected in the handling of Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s cancelled R104 million logistics tender.

With the section 174 application dismissed, Mapisa-Nqakula must now present her defence to the charges.

She has pleaded not guilty and denied the allegations against her.