A tense exchange erupted at the inquiry into South Gauteng director of public prosecutions Andrew Chauke’s fitness for office as National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) head Shamila Batohi and panel members clashed over her belief she had been assured she would not face cross-examination.
Batohi, who is the inquiry’s first witness, remarked during proceedings on Thursday that she “felt like [she was] being cross-examined”.
The comment prompted panel member Matshego Ramagaga to clarify that though questioning might feel pointed, the panel’s role was inquisitorial, not adversarial.
“This inquiry is an inquiry of lawyers about lawyers,” Ramagaga said. “We must ensure we get all the information needed for the report. You are a key witness because this inquiry stems from your opinion. We are not confused about the difference between cross-examination and questioning for clarity.”
In reply, Batohi said: “The chairperson did indicate to me in chambers that there was not going to be cross-examination.”
However, inquiry chairperson Justice Bess Nkabinde directly challenged Batohi’s assertion that she had been told in chambers that no cross-examination would take place.
Nkabinde insisted that such an assurance had never been given and moved swiftly to place her version of events on the record.
She recounted previous meetings in which the panel had warned the NPA against delays in preparing for the inquiry.
Nkabinde said during a telephone conversation she had with Batohi asking her to attend a meeting the next day, Batohi had expressed the view that she would not want to be cross-examined by advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi SC, who represents Chauke.
“I cautioned that we should not discuss this matter on the phone and that we should have a meeting the next day.
“At that meeting, where we wished to discuss the starting date of the inquiry, we told you that you would be the first witness because you are the complainant who should set the tone of the inquiry. At what stage did you express the view that you would not be cross-examined?” Nkabinde asked.
Batohi said during that meeting, her recollection was that she raised the issue of cross-examination, and Nkabinde had indicated there would be questioning, but not cross-examination.
“It is important not to misrepresent facts to anyone, especially when you impute anything to a presiding officer. It would be unacceptable to impute that any presiding officer misled you. Advocate Chauke is represented, and there is no doubt you will be cross-examined.”
Batohi apologised, saying she had not intended to suggest impropriety on the part of the chairperson or panel.
“It was my understanding,” she said, adding that any misinterpretation “may have been a mistaken one”.
Panel member advocate Elizabeth Baloyi-Mere SC reminded Batohi of an earlier discussion during the same meeting referred to by Nkabinde in which she had stated she was “not scared to be cross-examined” because she frequently faced rigorous questioning from parliament’s justice portfolio committee. Baloyi-Mere asked Batohi to confirm she had never been promised immunity from cross-examination.
In closing the issue, Nkabinde stressed the importance of accuracy and professional integrity during the proceedings.
“We are here searching for the truth. It would be improper for anyone’s name to be dragged into the record in any way suggesting misconduct. If you put a statement implying that I told you something incorrect, you put me in a bad light.”
The inquiry is probing allegations that Chauke supported prosecuting former Hawks head Gen Johan Booysen and members of the Cato Manor unit on racketeering charges despite there being no evidence to justify it.
The panel will also probe allegations that Chauke caused the murder charge relating to the killing of Tefo Abel Ramogibe, along with related charges, to be withdrawn despite strong evidence, resulting in significant delays in the prosecution of Lt-Gen Richard Mdluli.
The inquiry continues.
TimesLIVE
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.