Commissioner Baloyi exposed how corrupt police use IPID to fight their battles, Madlanga is angry

Added: 2026-06-09

[00:00:00]Then you give a brief descript description of what you call the merits of the complaint.

[00:00:06]Um would that be based on the statements or based on the initial um interview or it's a consideration of both having met with them and having received their statements. When you make uh when you at least compile this memorandum >> it's after we received their statement.

[00:00:27]Remember we only register this after they've already registered the case.

[00:00:35]So with the statement of the complainant that's when we can generate this uh document for approval.

[00:00:44]>> All right. Can you then for for the record uh and because this narrative goes through even find its way to your final report um can you read through for the record um the description you you have there in in bold.

[00:01:00]Okay. It is alleged that on Thursday 8th July 2021 Chief Mashaba received an information about the suspected drugs that were to be transported from Devon to Albertton.

[00:01:13]The following day on the 9th the on the 9th the information was followed and indeed the truck was followed to the depot where it was parked. Chief Mashaba asked for assistant and he was assisted by warrant officer Mukana and warrant officer Pakula. The truck was then escorted to his destination at Aratin where it was opened by the owner. The police searched the container and drugs were found in the container. The driver of the truck and the person who had to receive the whole cargo were placed under arrest. However, the hoax members arrived at the scene and the member who recovered the drugs were later arrested.

[00:01:53]The driver and the owner of the cargo were then released.

[00:01:59]All right. Um I will I will raise my concern with you with this description and then you can comment if you want.

[00:02:07]>> Okay. And my my concern really is that it does not seem to capture the the heart of the case. I know it's a it's a it's a a brief summary, but it seems to be omitting at least very crucial information. For example, I'll mention to you that it doesn't it says nothing about the informer, Mr. It says nothing about Guan Officer Mahan's designation. It says nothing about people from Pritoria attending to an incident in Soeteru. It says nothing about the drugs allegedly being solicited to be moved to gemston.

[00:02:46]And it certainly says nothing about the loading of the drugs by the certain by the very same complainants into the into the what they call Mr. Mahan's baggy. So it gives a very I would say a sanitized um accounts of events based on their version only.

[00:03:08]Um I'm just concerned that it doesn't give the full picture of what and and this information obviously it's used to inform you as the iPad whether to proceed with the matter or not. and having seen and having consulted with other witnesses and having been aware of the fuller picture. Is there any comment you need to make you want to make on on on that observation? Okay. Uh this document is prepared on the very early stage before even the investigation was conducted.

[00:03:40]At this particular time, we will only have maybe the statement of the complainant uh coupled with what uh we come out from the um interviews that we had with the complainants. It's not the fuller version of what transpired during the investigation because at this particular time we haven't even started with the investigation.

[00:04:05]Now that that's correct and that's my very concern that you you didn't have a proper or at least you were not provided with a full version by the complainant.

[00:04:14]Yes.

[00:04:14]>> Um but let's move to page two. Um just out of interest it says there in the middle of the of the page when you deal with the prospect of successful investigation.

[00:04:26]Um what does that mean and how do you arrive to that at that scoring of of 50%?

[00:04:36]because we haven't even started with the investigation and we because we haven't we don't have the vision of the other um members the suspects. So for us it's 50/50 chances whether they're telling the truth or not. So we cannot say it's above 50 or before below 50 because we don't have the vision of the other uh members who are involved.

[00:05:03]Okay.

[00:05:05]But I I would assume because there is a below and above, there are circumstances where you might score below and and above.

[00:05:13]>> I haven't even found something like that. For me, it's always 50/50.

[00:05:18]>> Just say on the document, it it does give an option of >> in the document. Yes.

[00:05:22]>> Yes. All right. Thank you. Uh director, can we then proceed on page five?

[00:05:30]Um you deal with a so we're going back to the the statement chair >> statement >> uh we deal with a summary of um allegations.

[00:05:41]Uh can you pick it up at paragraph 18 where you deal with it's an A1 of Mr. Samuel Zani Mashaba.

[00:05:50]>> Okay.

[00:05:52]Um the complainant alleged that on Thursday 2021 0709 they were following up on an information about trucks from Brazil that they were in a container and were going to be delivered at Scanya.

[00:06:08]He was assisted by war officer Mukana from Ziso APS um who was referred to him by war officer.

[00:06:19]These an extra three and four is the statement of mashaba and the statement of warrant officer.

[00:06:30]>> Yeah, you can proceed.

[00:06:32]>> Okay. They arrived at Aratin at about 8:00. The information was positive and the drugs were found inside the container. The driver of the truck, the lady was about to receive the goods and the manager was present were placed under arrest by warrant officer Pakula.

[00:06:48]Um I've attached warant officer Pabula statement as an ana as well. While the police officer were busy at the crime scene opening the case and waiting for relevant role prayers to come, two police officers from boys arrived and inquired about what was happening and they explained to them about the drug bust.

[00:07:11]The police officer from boys in SAPS satisfied were satisfied and were willing to assist them. They even gave feedback to radio control 101 indicating that all was in order and then I've attached the report from 101 STK6.

[00:07:31]A police officer who was later known to them as Warren Officer Rotto arrived and had an argument with Warrant Officer Pakula. Warrant Officer Roo did not want them to open a case but to open an inquiry file. Warrant Officer Pakula refused and he was then told that General Khan was on his way.

[00:07:52]Members of the provincial uh dog unit, Captain Mudupi, Leenant Canel, Malule tech from technical operation management section. Tom's hawks also arrived at the crime scene.

[00:08:07]Lieutenant Canel Mal wanted to take over the crime scene as the drug was part of his mandate.

[00:08:14]Sergeant Papula and Sergeant and Warrant Officer Sab from dog unit arrived followed by General Khan. General Khan then said he was taking over the crime scene. Without getting the information from the officers who recovered the drugs, he then instructed Warrant Officer Makano to sit in his bike. He instructed Chief Mashaba to go to his car and took his firearm and cell phone.

[00:08:44]At about 13:30, the members of DPCI amongst others, General Kra, Birlla, Ken Stain, Captain Soula arrived at the crime scene and they arrested the police officer who made the drug bust that is warrant officer Manu, Warrant officer Pagula, Chief Mashaba and the and Duo.

[00:09:10]They were charged with dealing in drugs and possession of drugs. Uh stroke use of drugs. The truck driver, the person who was receiving the goods and the manager were released.

[00:09:22]Um additional statement of Samuel Tani Mashava was attached as well indicating that on the day of incident he contacted General Muela informing him that General Khan was busy harassing them at crime scene.

[00:09:39]A statement of General Mella was obtained. I've attached it as TK8 and he indicated that he cannot confirm nor deny receiving a call from Mashaba.

[00:09:53]A statement of General Meni attaches TK9. He also state that he remembers he alleges that he remembers speaking to an official attached to how traffic police who introduce themselves as Mashaba who indicated that they were following uh the information on drugs and he was complaining that the police were about to arrest them. He referred the complaint to Brigadier Shiri.

[00:10:24]The statement of General Shiviri, he was a brigade by then uh was also attached as TK10.

[00:10:35]He said that he had a conversation with Mashava relating to the following up on information about drug trafficking at Aratin and they were accosted by a member of SAP's crime intelligence hogs and want to arrest them. He referred him to General Carda of DPCI.

[00:10:56]They opened a case as per Bo 98 of 7 2021 and it was investigated by DPCI a member Captain Sua I believe now is a laten canel.

[00:11:09]>> Yes.

[00:11:10]>> The arrested member were taken to Bo's police station and detained at about 1930.

[00:11:17]>> Sorry. Sorry. Did you ever look at and compare the statements that were taken uh in respect of the drug charges or drug related charges?

[00:11:36]There is a statements taken by those investigating those charges. Did you ever do a comparison? we were >> I'm asking I'm asking for example because on this aspect the aspect we've just dealt with um there is a statement that says um Brigadier Shibiri who later became a general called at the scene and said isn't there a way in which all of this can be resolved amicably and uh I I don't know whether he was referred to someone else and then he said I basically left it at that and didn't follow up on this amicable resolution. That's why I'm asking whether you ever did any comparison with what was happening on the other side.

[00:12:35]Did you just run with what you established with regard to the complaint that had been laid by these three people, two of whom were SUPS members and uh one of whom was a provincial traffic officer >> commissioners? Um we were never given a chance to check uh the other case because the DPCI refused with the docket.

[00:13:00]>> Oh yeah. Oh, I remember that detail. All right. Thank you. Thank you.

[00:13:05]Yes. Um, director, just to go back on, um, page five, um, a paragraph 18.1, maybe we need to correct that.

[00:13:18]Um, the incident occurred on it was on Friday, not Thursday.

[00:13:26]>> 18.1.

[00:13:27]>> Yes. Uh but the substance of my question really is that >> you you were told at least from a statement by Mashaba that they were following up an information and he doesn't mention Mr. >> H but you had testified earlier on that you guys um had an interview with Mr. Um can you assist us from from your rec recollection? Um what did you at least assertain from that interview?

[00:14:00]Perhaps before you do that, can we accept at least for now that there's no statement that you took from Mr. >> Yeah. Commissioner, there's no statement that we took from Mr. >> Yes. Can we then maybe as far as we can you can recall from that interview, what what can you relay?

[00:14:16]Yeah, as as a team we are concerned about how did they know about the drugs because they were just telling us that they were following up on information about the drugs from Brazil to Scania.

[00:14:29]So the question uh with us was how did you know about the drugs? That's when they told us about Dumelo and when they came to IP it was only three of them. Dumelo was not part of them.

[00:14:47]Uh so we asked for the contact details of tumelo so that we can interview tumelo. Hence we interviewed tumelo at a later stage >> and and if I understand well there was no reason stopping him from being part of the complainant is there?

[00:15:06]>> No there was no >> there was nothing.

[00:15:10]And how far did you get in terms of where he received uh >> the information? the information >> commissioner. Um he was not making uh too much of a sense because he was talking about um issue of um what do you call this hacking and something like that that is a cyber crime hacking something like that >> and he kept on telling us that he is an informer of that the late general that he was giving the information to the lead general >> in in your conversation.

[00:15:55]>> So was was the point that he had hacked onto a system that revealed that there was such a consignment or or what exactly was this hacking about?

[00:16:09]>> He he was talking about so many things.

[00:16:11]He was not talking about only >> let's just focus on the hacking phone for a minute please. He was talking about hing in order for him to get this kind of information about the illegal transportation of things.

[00:16:25]It can be drugs, it can be any other thing. It can be any other trafficking.

[00:16:31]>> So he was talking about so many things but he he was not giving us anything to work on. Did you did you ask for anything concrete because surely there would have been records of uh the hacking?

[00:16:48]>> No, I didn't have anything. It was just what you were saying.

[00:16:51]>> Did you ask for the for the records?

[00:16:54]>> Commissioner, >> did you ask for the records?

[00:16:57]>> Yeah, we asked for the record, but he didn't have anything. It was only what he was saying >> and of which we didn't have anyone to confirm what he was saying.

[00:17:10]Okay. Thank you.

[00:17:11]>> Um, in that conversation, did he did he at least disclose to you that a previous day he was in Debon and that he followed the truck all the way to Howen?

[00:17:26]>> Yeah. Commissioner, he did mention that that he followed the truck from Devon to Yellow Jay.

[00:17:33]>> Yes.

[00:17:33]>> Yes.

[00:17:35]Did did he mention to you what his interest would have been in in doing all of that?

[00:17:42]>> We were interested in Li as to why uh the interest but he kept on saying he's been giving out information to these uh police officers and he doesn't know whether the information was positive or not. So this time he was trying to make sure that yes the whatever information he got when they open the truck the drugs will be there that was his response >> and was your sense that he is an informer/informant >> registered with subs or uh was an ad hoc if I may use that term an ad hoc informer. former. What What was your sense? What was your sense?

[00:18:30]>> Uh my sense was that he was not a registered informer because if he was a registered informer, um he was going to tell us about the handler, the the the general who passed away, but the general was working with other people. So from my understanding like he was not a registered informer.

[00:18:52]>> Okay. Yes. Director, one thing that immediately stands out when you look at the statements of uh director Mashaba and uh Joseph Makana is in the case of director Mashaba it says he's based in Sidang in Fer.

[00:19:14]That's the first thing that stands out.

[00:19:16]In the case of uh Mahana, it says he's in the SIMAK uh crime information analysis center in Ziza.

[00:19:28]>> Does that not immediately raise a question? What are you doing in Iroen?

[00:19:34]If you are a traffic director in Fer or you are a crime analyst in Zong, >> what are you doing in a drug bust?

[00:19:47]Because those two jobs have nothing to do at all >> with being involved in a drug bust before you even get to what happened.

[00:19:59]>> Just their positions. A traffic officer in Ferinang should have nothing to do with a drug bust in Johannesburg.

[00:20:08]A Simck officer we've heard that they are desk bound because they analyze stats crime stats to assist those who are operational to to do their job. When they say to you, we conducted a drug bust, isn't the first inquiry, what were you doing there? Because that's not your job.

[00:20:29]>> Yeah. Commissioner, it was our concern that um why especially with Mashaba as a traffic official um but he told us that you normally get this kind of information. I don't know his uh job description where he's working but he indicated that he he do get this kind of information and then he normally assist with um this kind of operation. He was saying he used to work with General Ma.

[00:21:07]So I I don't know his job description.

[00:21:10]>> I'm looking at the affidavit that he gave you paragraph one. It gives his name, ID, number and he says I am employed as chief at Ken traffic police city in Fer on H6.

[00:21:26]It's your ana TK2 which you refer to in your statement.

[00:21:31]>> Okay.

[00:21:34]>> So City Bang is a district. It's it's in the Val.

[00:21:39]>> Yes. and he says, "I'm following a truck in Ecuani and I'm following it to Johannesburg and I'm conducting a drug bust." So, where he works, that's problem number one. Problem number two is he's a traffic officer.

[00:21:59]What is a traffic officer doing conducting a drug bust?

[00:22:07]Commissioner, we we tried to find out from him. That is why maybe he also gave uh his um supplementary statement to indicate that he used to work with General Ma. That is why on that particular day he also phoned General Ma. I don't know how they work at the traffic side. I don't know whether if you are working in CDBang you can also attend to the issue of Tuani for example. H I don't know >> but >> I think why I'm raising this iPad has testified before us.

[00:22:44]>> Okay. And one of the issues they took with uh EMPD officers conducting a bust in Rosebank or Kilani is that a that's not the job description of traffic officers and secondly they are outside of their jurisdiction >> and for those two reasons >> their conduct was unlawful >> and we heard that from IPIT when it was testifying. So me the first thing that stands out looking at paragraph one is here is a traffic officer in Fer who is leading because he's the leader.

[00:23:23]He says I called other people leading the chase of a truck because that's what they were doing and conducting a drug bust. They chasing it in Egueni outside of City Bank. They're chasing it all the way to Johannesburg outside of City Bank. But he's a truck officer. He has no business opening containers and finding out that there are drugs in those containers and arresting uh owners of those containers or the recipients of the goods that are in the container.

[00:23:57]>> Uh that's true, commissioners. Um like I'm saying, we don't investigate the the traffic officers. I don't even know their jurisdiction whether a a person from traffic in citybang can also come and work in or in Johannesburg I don't know but don't as an investigator don't you follow up check those kind of things I mean I'm not I'm not sure that it's open to you to say I don't know what he does, what his job is, and his job description. Because if it turns out, at least in my mind, if it turns out that his job has nothing to do with what he did on the day, then you as the investigator, you probe further into why was he there in the first place.

[00:24:52]So, so to say you just took because that's effectively what you're saying.

[00:24:56]you took his word at face value uh and made no interrogation of it. He said I was following up on an invest on on a on a tip off and then we conducted this operation when in fact perhaps had you asked what is your what do you do where you work? Let's speak to his superior and find out whether what he got involved with is part of his job.

[00:25:22]And if his superior had said no, it's not part of his job. he had no business to be there. It may have le led you down a different line of inquiry.

[00:25:32]>> Uh I understand commissioner but um those were our complainants and as IP we don't investigate our complainants. That was the role of um SAPS there. SAPS I believe SAPS investigated uh whether they were supposed to be at that crime scene or not. However, we did manage to obtain the statement of their supervisors to try to find out whether uh on that day they knew about the operations or not.

[00:26:07]>> But you test what the complainant says.

[00:26:10]That's why in that form you say 50%.

[00:26:13]It's because you eventually must test what they say. Yeah, we man we we did test that because with Mashaba um the supervisor indicated that he didn't know about the operation.

[00:26:27]>> Yeah. But isn't that that kind of answer to you? Isn't that what should peak your suspicion that he's in an operation that his superior says I didn't know anything about it. It's not his job. would should that that would have picked your suspicion about him to inquire further about what in fact was he doing there because the complaint as we understand it is their complaint is that they were arrested when they were conducting a lawful operation >> operation. Yes.

[00:26:56]>> Yes. So so if if they were if they were interrupted conducting an unlawful operation, you wouldn't have found the police officers guilty of you wouldn't have made a negative recommendation. if it turned out this was an unlawful operation. So that you don't investigate, you don't test that even after his employee, his superior said, I have no idea what he was doing on the day is is disconcerting.

[00:27:27]>> I understand commissioner >> I find it quite disturbing that you say you don't probe your complainants.

[00:27:34]That's quite disturbing. I I I think that's a wrong approach to to investigation. What's your comment >> uh commissioners? Um at IP most of our complainants are are suspects on the SAPS cases. I'll give you an example.

[00:27:53]Um you'll find maybe um the suspects were robbing a bank and there was a shootout between the police and the suspect and the police shot and killed maybe one or two of the suspect. I investigate that case because we are checking the conduct of the police. We are not checking what the criminal were doing in robbing the bank, but we are checking whether the the conduct of the police they acted within the scope of their mandate or not.

[00:28:33]Whether they kill somebody, maybe they killed two and then the third suspect ran away and then he surrendered somewhere but the police shot and killed that particular person. Those are the conduct that as IP we're checking.

[00:28:52]So we don't investigate the the initial cause of the bank robbery but the police that the one who must investigate the bank robbery then I when we investigate this murder we obtain the copies of that um robbery.

[00:29:10]>> Would this be murder committed during the robbery?

[00:29:13]>> Yes.

[00:29:15]I'm not sure that I follow this the distinction J. I'm not sure that I follow the distinction. Then you you you do I'm I'm trying to give a a scenario that uh we don't check the conduct of our complainant or our victims as to what happened prior to this incident.

[00:29:42]But the police they investigate the robbery case then IP will get the copies of the robbery.

[00:29:48]>> Maybe let's just forget about that example because it may just confound uh the issues. Let's look at what was at issue here. You have these uh people who are complainants and uh what we are saying is it is just odd for you to say that uh you basically do not interrogate what's been brought to you in so far as it relates to or concerns your complaintants. That is what I find uh difficulty with. It's I think it's a different rather I think it's a wrong footing to to proceed from because ultimately when you decide that there is a case to be answered which you should then refer both to the employer and to the NPA it can only be because you are satisfied that there is indeed a case and if there are issues that are questionable in so far as your complaintants are concerned And it may well be that those issues will point in the opposite direction which is that there um how should I put it?

[00:31:01]Ah you you follow me. You follow me?

[00:31:04]>> I do. I do commissioner. Um in this case um the commanders of Pakula uh said he had a knowledge of what Pakula was going to be doing on that on the day of incident and also um the commander of Moanu gave a statement saying Moanu called him and inform him about the operation.

[00:31:34]So for me it was something that their commanders because we investigate the police not the traffic officers the police uh commanders knew where they were their members were uh doing operation on that particular day.

[00:31:52]>> Let me take you informed.

[00:31:54]>> Okay let me yeah you do you do investigate traffic officers.

[00:32:00]>> Yeah.

[00:32:00]>> No not the routing traffic officers. the metrop police.

[00:32:03]>> It's metro. Oh, it's metro and subs only. Yes.

[00:32:05]>> Okay. Anyway, let me go back to um the question uh that triggered the debate that we are we are having now.

[00:32:18]Uh that question was about you following up on the issue that Commissioner Kumalo raised and you said you did follow up on that but uh later you then said that you know nothing about the jurisdiction of someone like Chief Mashaba and so on. Then I started wondering what exactly would you then have inquired about? If you basically know nothing about these issues around the jurisdiction and so on, what then would you have inquired about?

[00:33:01]>> That goes even to that goes even to um warrant officer Muano being deathbound.

[00:33:08]So what would you have inquired about?

[00:33:10]Because you said you did inquire. Do you remember saying so?

[00:33:13]>> Yes. Now if later in the debate you say h you knew nothing about those issues >> that in my mind raises the question what then did you inquire about in this regard >> commissioners I inquired about whether they were on duty on that particular day >> that's not the same thing that's not the same thing that's not the issue that was being raised around whether they ought to have been there in the first place that's a that's totally that's a totally different question to where they were and were they authorized in terms of maybe their bosses saying no you can't go to Eratin and so on this is a totally different question is this something that fell within their mandate is this something they could in law have done >> okay the only person that we did not inquire much it was chief mashava >> you know the question is what did you what what what did you inquire about >> we inquire whether they were on duty and whether the their commanders knew about the operation.

[00:34:18]>> I I will I will leave it. That's not the question I'm asking but I will leave it there.

[00:34:24]>> Thank you chair. Um director my my concern is this. Um remember you guys are policing the police. you supposed to be the watchdog and ensuring that the police are kept in in order and in doing so it can never be in my understanding that it's just a matter of who of the naughty kids came to report first to the principal. you need to check the facts that are brought to you to verify those allegations uh because I think you'll accept that there is a potential or possibility of the police using or weaponizing iPad against each other.

[00:35:10]You'll accept that?

[00:35:13]>> I do, Commissioner. Um but the the cases differ.

[00:35:20]Um it's just that this one there are police officers involved as well. But on a normal course of event where it's just a normal um member of public we don't uh check as to whether this person what happened prior to whatever that is happening the case that the person is reporting happened prior to that with this one is I understand it was the police officers uh who reported this matter. However, we had we have two cases. We've got the case uh the 98 case and the 252 case. So, we couldn't do what the case 252 was I mean the case 98 the the investigating officer of case 98 was doing because um it will seems as if now we are interfering with their cases.

[00:36:23]So hence we only dealt with case 252.

[00:36:29]>> Let me ask a qu question that's related to one of the very questions I I I put to you. Had you been aware that there were text exchanges between uh Mr. and someone that he referred to as boss and uh who was saved on his device as alpha. Is it saved as alpha?

[00:37:01]The content of which that is the content of uh the text.

[00:37:06]The content of which was or appears to have been the ultimate link is still going to be made hopefully and we were promised by the evidence leaders that that link will be made but uh for for for argument's sake let us assume that that link uh will be made. So, had you been aware that there were exchanges of texts that appeared to follow up on this consignment of suspected drugs constantly.

[00:37:46]The texts even expressing concern in case that consignment were to be intercepted or however else not to be received by apparently them.

[00:38:05]Um and also if you had been aware that Mr. drove to Durban a day before the truck that carried this container drove up to Howen, which was the 7th of July, 2021.

[00:38:31]and that on the 8th of July he drove up and that was the same day that the truck also drove up to Howen and then on the 9th that's the that's the day on which he together with these two the the traffic officer and war officer Muana then followed the truck to Eritton from yellow jerseys.

[00:39:05]Had you been aware of all those facts, would you still have made the recommendation that you made? In particular, the very first ones that appear with involved with someone he calls boss texts that are concerned about are we going to get delivery of this? It may be a mission impossible if if this gets Was that about another one? The main the main delivery. Was it about it about No, no, no. I I'll leave out I'll leave out the concerns and mission impossible and so on, but I will retain everything else that I've suggested to you.

[00:39:58]Had you been aware of all of those things, would you still have uh taken this to be a mere the mere actions of of an informer?

[00:40:10]>> Uh or would you would you not have suspected that this is actually someone who is complicit in the delivery of this uh consignment delivery and receipt of this consignment?

[00:40:25]Yeah, commissioner with regard to yes. Um, if we had that kind of information, we were going to look it uh look at these things they differently.

[00:40:39]>> That's why I'm saying had you heard?

[00:40:41]>> Yes.

[00:40:42]>> Okay. All right.

[00:40:44]>> We're going even maybe the the kind of investigation was not going to be the way the investigation was if we had that kind of information. Unfortunately, we didn't have >> Okay. Just advise me. Yes, I know you you you tried to get hold of the the poison docket.

[00:41:04]>> Yes.

[00:41:05]>> You did not succeed. Just remind me again how high did that request or inquiry about the docket, how high did it go on uh the IP side?

[00:41:18]Uh >> who who was the most senior on your side who tried to get hold of the docket after the meeting that you referred to had had failed?

[00:41:28]>> It was the NHI, the National Head of Investigation.

[00:41:33]>> Okay. All right. All right. Is that the highest you could have gone? Couldn't you have gone to Was it already General Leia then? Yeah, it was generally but the NHL was supposed to have escalated the matter to the executive director of which I don't think the matter was escalated.

[00:41:52]>> So it was beyond beyond you at that stage.

[00:41:55]>> Yes.

[00:41:55]>> Couldn't you have made the request to to the head your head to to escalate it to General Leia?

[00:42:05]Uh uh the matter was escalated to General Levia but >> it was >> it was escalated to General Levia >> within the halls. Yeah.

[00:42:14]>> Yes.

[00:42:15]>> But uh we did not get any positive feedback.

[00:42:20]>> Okay. Did you did you get to what did General Libya do? Do you know?

[00:42:25]>> General I think he spoke to my um my supervisor the one who drafted the letter to him. No, I mean with subs on the sub side. Do you what did >> on the subsides it was generally?

[00:42:39]>> Okay.

[00:42:42]Oh, I see this is >> statement.

[00:42:45]>> Okay. At paragraph 24 of your statement, you say General Liia did not assist IP with the request. Instead, he indicated that IP must investigate without the copies of that docket. So he didn't uh >> yes >> engage subs on the matter.

[00:43:02]>> Yeah.

[00:43:03]>> All right. Thank you.

[00:43:05]>> Can I just ask on the back of the discussion that you've just had with the chair you about had you known certain things that have now come to light about Mr. how you whether you would have still proceeded the same way. Now when Mr. U says to you that is an informer and and the other police officers tell you that this is Mashaba. Chief Mashaba tells you that that's his his inform.

[00:43:38]You you don't you don't verify that.

[00:43:44]You you you've said that he told you that his handler is someone that has passed, but you do know subsystems uh that they do have registered informs.

[00:43:54]I'm sure you have an idea that they don't necessarily work alone. So even if a general has passed on a handler, they may well be somebody you you didn't and you don't check that to verify who this supposed source uh is.

[00:44:12]>> No. Well, we did not verify.

[00:44:14]>> You did not do that.

[00:44:15]>> No.

[00:44:16]>> Is it because that's not what you do?

[00:44:18]You just you take things on face value?

[00:44:20]I I think I'm trying to like the chair I'm trying to understand how you you conduct your investigations and whether as I must say it seems to me to have been the case with this uh that you don't get the IP doesn't get used to to to to to as in this case I suspect that that's what happened with the complaint that came to you uh to pursue do meritless cases because there are agendas. Uh people want to to get to some point. You don't you don't verify that kind of basic information. Isu indeed an informer. We have a way of checking with the subs. You you don't do those kind of checks.

[00:45:11]commissioners with because he mentioned somebody who already passed and he was not telling us uh that he was a a registered informer.

[00:45:26]We did not uh h verify that kind of information but on the day of this he was saying now he's giving information to Chief Mashaba.

[00:45:36]So he was now the handler of Chief Mashaba.

[00:45:41]>> Chief Mashaba was his handler now.

[00:45:43]>> Yeah. He said now because of he used to give information to that the late general.

[00:45:49]Uh now he's giving information to Mashara.

[00:45:53]So so the reference then to that late general for purpose of of your investigation should be relevant if if it meant nothing. If it's someone that you used to share information with but it has no bearing on this then it's irrelevant. You proceeded solely on the basis that he is an informer of Mashaba who of Chief Mashaba who is his handler.

[00:46:17]That that must be the basis on which you proceeded.

[00:46:20]>> That's correct commissioner.

[00:46:22]>> Thank you.

[00:46:24]It this this this again raises the point on which commissioner Kumaro was wasn't engag was engaging you. Um he's an informer informing about drugs and what's he got to what's what's what's Mashaba got to do with drugs that he even has this informer who's assisting him about drugs. It just does not make sense.

[00:46:52]Do you want to comment >> commissioner? Um I don't know the job description of Chief Mashava but from the I can confirm uh commissioners that we also have cases where um people from the traffic police uh working with the SAPS SAPS members especially the hogs do some operation I don't know their memorandum of understanding I I I don't