Share

Dear Shaun Abrahams: here's how you probe #Guptaleaks - Glynnis Breytenbach

Dear Shaun 

It is with a degree of concern that I noted the front-page reports of the City Press and Rapport regarding the #Guptaleaks investigation. 

Given that no comprehensive denial or retraction has been communicated, it seems pertinent to bring the following points to your attention. 

It is abundantly clear that “three teams of prosecutors” tasked with providing guidance to the Cybercrime Unit and the Hawks have neither the wherewithal nor the will to do this efficiently or effectively. 

The following suggestions are made in the interests of a just, quick and efficient investigation. 

There are still a finite number of prosecutors at your disposal with the experience and ability to lead this investigation and to prosecute successfully upon completion. You know who they are, but you have failed to appoint them. If you had appointed them, they would by now have made significant progress. They would have advised you that:

- information obtained from the #Guptaleaks can be used as evidence and much of it has already been confirmed by persons implicated;

- the authenticity of the #Guptaleaks has been established to a large degree, but any cyber forensic expert worth their salt could establish authenticity from the source;

- search and seizure warrants should (already) have been authorised and effected, allowing the experts to begin their work;

- s205 subpoenas should (already) have been served, and bank statements and other documentation been obtained and analysed;

- CIPRO searches should (already) have been done and the necessary company and other documents been obtained and analysed;

- this process would have authenticated the vast body of #Guptaleaks and been admissible as evidence against the various perpetrators;

- the Asset Forfeiture Unit should (already) have been in court obtaining freezing orders against the assets of individuals and companies implicated;

- evidence obtained in the fashion of the #Guptaleaks remains admissible in South African law, and that the court has a discretion and will consider the overwhelming public interest in the matter, and also has a discretion regarding the weight to be attached to the evidence at the end of the trial;

- they could be ready for trial, at least with the low-hanging fruit, by year-end if sufficient energy, will and resources were to be made available;

- if the SAPS came to the party and made available the limited number of detectives still available to do this investigation competently, then this is entirely achievable: bearing in mind that this is the single most important investigation in the last 15 years, there can be no doubt that this would be the case;

- there is significant goodwill from international agencies that should (already) have been accessed in this investigation. Again, bearing in mind that some of the offences were clearly committed in international jurisdictions, they would be only too willing to assist, in their own best interests;

- lastly, they would have advised you to read the following judgements (amongst others), which would be of great assistance in this matter: Harvey v Niland and others 2016 (2) SA 436 (ECG); S v Brown 2016 (1) SACR 206 (WCC) and Zurich v State [2010] 1 All SA 352 (SCA).

If you had appointed the few, but sufficient, competent prosecutors at your disposal, this is the advice they would have given. They would have been able to provide regular and real progress reports and the citizens of South Africa, who are desperate for some good news, would have been satisfied that the NPA can do the job it is meant to do.

You still are able to do this. Please, in the interests of the NPA, in the interests of justice and of the citizens of South Africa, appoint those prosecutors. This team that you have assembled is clearly not up to the job.

Glynnis Breytenbach MP
Spokesperson for Justice and Constitutional Development: Democratic Alliance

We live in a world where facts and fiction get blurred
Who we choose to trust can have a profound impact on our lives. Join thousands of devoted South Africans who look to News24 to bring them news they can trust every day. As we celebrate 25 years, become a News24 subscriber as we strive to keep you informed, inspired and empowered.
Join News24 today
heading
description
username
Show Comments ()
Voting Booth
Do you think corruption-accused National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula will survive a motion of no confidence against her?
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Results
No, her days are numbered
41% - 500 votes
Yes, the ANC caucus will protect her
59% - 705 votes
Vote
Rand - Dollar
18.91
+0.1%
Rand - Pound
23.87
+0.1%
Rand - Euro
20.37
+0.3%
Rand - Aus dollar
12.31
+0.2%
Rand - Yen
0.12
+0.2%
Platinum
908.05
0.0%
Palladium
1,014.94
0.0%
Gold
2,232.75
-0.0%
Silver
24.95
-0.1%
Brent-ruolie
87.00
+1.8%
Top 40
68,346
0.0%
All Share
74,536
0.0%
Resource 10
57,251
0.0%
Industrial 25
103,936
0.0%
Financial 15
16,502
0.0%
All JSE data delayed by at least 15 minutes Iress logo
Editorial feedback and complaints

Contact the public editor with feedback for our journalists, complaints, queries or suggestions about articles on News24.

LEARN MORE