Thabo Mbeki Denies Claims Of Political Interference In Apartheid-Era Prosecutions

Former president Thabo Mbeki has denied allegations that he and former president FW de Klerk held secret meetings with apartheid-era security force leaders to prevent prosecutions for crimes committed under apartheid.

Mbeki made the denial on Monday while testifying before the Khampepe Commission of Inquiry, which is examining whether political interference obstructed the prosecution of cases arising from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

The allegations include claims that Mbeki’s administration failed to ensure that TRC findings were acted upon and interfered with the National Prosecuting Authority’s (NPA) handling of cases involving apartheid-era human rights violations.

The Calata Group, which represents families of victims of apartheid-era crimes, has accused successive ANC-led administrations of failing to ensure that cases identified by the TRC were properly investigated and prosecuted.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Sibiya’s Lawyer Denies Attempt To Help Him Evade Arrest

Mbeki also faced questions about an alleged intervention in 2006 to suspend planned arrests in the case involving Reverend Frank Chikane, who was poisoned in 1989 by apartheid security branch operatives.

Former law and order minister Adriaan Vlok and several former senior security officials pleaded guilty to attempted murder in connection with the poisoning in 2007. They received suspended prison sentences.

Mbeki Calls Alleged Secret Meetings A Fabrication

Mbeki rejected claims that meetings with former apartheid security officials were intended to secure amnesty or prevent prosecutions.

“It’s a complete fabrication. There’s no such thing. There are no such meetings that took place in order to secure amnesty for them,” he told the commission.

He acknowledged that a meeting had taken place with senior officers from the former South African Defence Force (SADF) and South African Police (SAP), but said the discussion concerned how political leaders should account for decisions that had led to human rights violations.

According to Mbeki, the generals argued that former National Party leaders, including De Klerk and members of his Cabinet, should first appear before the TRC’s amnesty committee to explain the orders they had given.

The security officials would then provide evidence about how they had implemented those decisions.

Mbeki said this approach was intended to establish the broader context of apartheid-era crimes rather than leave individual foot soldiers to account for their actions without examining the role of senior political leaders.

He maintained that the meeting was not an attempt to arrange immunity from prosecution.

ANC Leaders Were To Lead By Example

Mbeki told the commission that the ANC leadership agreed to approach the amnesty committee first, demonstrating that political leaders should take responsibility for decisions made during the apartheid conflict.

He said the ANC would then encourage National Party leaders to follow the same process.

“The ANC would then go to the leadership of the National Party to say, ‘Please do as we have done’. So we acted on that,” Mbeki testified.

He said the purpose of the meeting with former security officials was to respond to their concerns about how the amnesty process was being conducted.

Mbeki maintained that the discussions were focused on accountability and establishing the truth about decisions made by political leaders and carried out by security personnel.

Mbeki Rejects Claims Of NPA Interference

Mbeki also denied that his administration intervened to stop the prosecution of cases referred to the NPA by the TRC.

He referred to a 2003 statement to Parliament in which the government addressed cases involving people who had not applied for amnesty through the TRC but were suspected of committing politically motivated offences.

Mbeki said the government had proposed that the NPA investigate outstanding matters and seek information that could help establish the truth about unresolved human rights violations.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Frank Chikane Says ‘Organised Campaign’ Is Trying To Discredit Him Ahead Of Elections

These included undisclosed weapons caches, disappearances and killings in which the whereabouts of victims’ remains were unknown.

He also cited intelligence reports about weapons caches and concerns that the Boeremag, a far-right organisation, intended to use force to destabilise the democratic state.

Mbeki said these security concerns were the focus of the government’s parliamentary statement, rather than discussions about protecting former apartheid generals.

“It’s no instance at all, Chairperson, no instance at all, that the national executive intervened to stop the prosecution of cases referred to the NPA by the TRC,” he told the commission.

“Any statement made that that happened is a lie. None of that ever happened.”

His testimony directly disputed allegations that the executive had obstructed the prosecution of TRC cases. The commission is examining the evidence surrounding those claims.

Apartheid-Era Pardons Also Under Scrutiny

Mbeki also addressed his decision to grant pardons in 2002 to some people convicted of politically motivated offences who had not appeared before the TRC.

He said his office had received numerous applications from people who claimed their offences had been politically motivated and argued that some cases were relevant to national reconciliation.

Mbeki acknowledged that the pardons attracted criticism from civil society organisations, including the Helen Suzman Foundation, and from the late Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, who chaired the TRC.

“After the TRC completed its work, my office received numerous requests for pardons from persons who claimed to have committed offences and human rights violations for political reasons and who were convicted for those offences,” he testified.

He said the criticism prompted the government to consider a more structured and transparent process for handling future pardon applications.

The Khampepe Commission is examining allegations of political interference in the handling of apartheid-era crimes, including whether decisions by successive administrations impeded efforts to hold those responsible for human rights violations accountable.