THE APPOINTMENT OF ZONDO COMMISSION EVIDENCE LEADERS MATTHEW CHASKALSON AND PAUL PRETORIUS AS CONSULTANTS IN THE NATIONAL PROSECUTING AUTHORITY

APPOINTMENT OF ZONDO COMMISSION EVIDENCE LEADERS MATTHEW CHASKALSON AND PAUL PRETORIUS AS CONSULTANTS IN THE NPA 

The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) condemns the appointment of Advocate Matthew Chaskalson and Advocate Paul Pretorius as consultants in the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) in the strongest terms. These appointments can only be characterised as gross collusion, opportunism, and undermining of the wheels of natural justice.

In a move by the NPA to fast-track its prosecution of those who were implicated in allegations of corruption during the Commission of Inquiry into State Capture, the NPA   has resorted to recruiting Chaskalson and Pretorius who were evidence leaders in the very same Commission, to now advise the NPA on how to proceed with prosecution on the evidence that they led and developed.

Paul Pretorius served as the head of the legal team of the State Capture Commission, and specifically led evidence as it related to the operations of the State Security Agency (SSA) and BOSASA. Pretorius further led the testimony of President Cyril Ramaphosa, the same Ramaphosa who appointed Shamila Batohi as head of the NPA, and the same Batohi who has now hired Paul Pretorius to form part of a prosecutorial process.

Matthew Chaskalson also formed part of the legal team of the State Capture Commission   of Inquiry, and dealt primarily with the illicit flows of money, in particular, as it related to Transnet. Chaskalson will now be tasked with advising prosecution on the same evidence  he led on a different forum.

The appointments of these two individuals under a cloud of secrecy, wherein there is also    a refusal to disclose their remuneration for their consulting services, would be amusing if it did not undermine the integrity and legitimacy of the NPA. In a quest to rescue her dwindling reputation and salvage a sense of achievement in a term defined by failure, Shamila Batohi has abandoned sense, and lost an appreciation of the law as a neutral instrument to administer justice in South Africa.

Her actions paint a picture of an unhinged and desperate individual, as she is also pursuing  a non-specific and invasive raid on the records and evidence of the State Capture Commission of Inquiry, because she needs anything to effect a prosecution by any means necessary. The EFF affirms that the Department of justice is correct that the evidence of   the Commission cannot be accessed without specific reference to what is required, in relation to which matter, and the relevance of such required evidence to that matter.

The NPA ought to engage in targeted, scientific and specific prosecutions that substantiate the need to access evidence, and not embark on an attempt to obtain possibly irrelevant information by seeking unfettered access, as this poses a risk of the NPA engaging in political witch-hunts, blackmail, and extortive use of sensitive nformation.

Furthermore, there should be transparency in the recruitment and amount of benefits budgeted, including accommodation, offices, and personal remuneration. This is to ensure what happened at Zondo Commission where an unlimited budget of over R1billion had      to be made available.This special prosecution unit should not be a moneymaking scheme for white lawyers as it was the case in Zondo Commision.

The EFF states categorically that our objection to the appointment of Pretorius and Chaskalson, as well as our objection to the blind-raid by Shamila Batohi on the evidence held by the Justice Department, does not constitute any belief that those implicated in the State Capture Commission Report are innocent or guilty.

Those who are implicated in the degeneration of our state-owned entities, law enforcement agencies, state-security agency and various levers of our government must be investigated and if found guilty must face the full might of the law. Our interest is in protecting the sanctity and fairness of the process, because it is clumsiness and collusion of this nature  that allows the corrupt to escape justice and raise questions on the credibility and neutrality of our justice system.

At all times justice must be seen to be fair, and antics such as appointing evidence leaders  as de facto prosecutors of the same evidence they developed and led in a Commission, do not help foster a positive image of the integrity of our investigating institutions.