Addressing Chauke through his lawyer Eric Mabuza, Fraser charged in a letter dated May 27: “Following the submission of the police investigation docket into our client’s complaint into your office for decision more than a year ago, our client has not been advised of the progress of the investigation nor of the decision in this matter.
“We are subsequently instructed to request you to communicate your decision within seven days on whether Dr Sydney Mufamadi, Mr Loyiso Jafta, Mr Y and Ms K will be prosecuted on charges of perjury and whether Paul Pretorius SC and advocate Veruschka September will be prosecuted on charges of subornation of perjury.”
Should Chauke’s decision by next Tuesday not satisfy Fraser, he cautioned he would be left with no choice but to activate sections 7(1)(a), 7(2)(a) and 7(2)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act. These sections provide for private prosecution in the case of “any private person who proves some substantial and peculiar interest in the issue of the trial arising out of some injury which he individually suffered in consequence of the commission of the said offence”, according to section 7(1)(a).
Section 7(2)(a) states “no private prosecutor under this section shall obtain the process of any court for summoning any person to answer any charge unless such private prosecutor produces to the officer authorised by law to issue such process a certificate signed by the [director of public prosecutions] that he has seen the statements or affidavits on which the charge is based and that he declines to prosecute at the instance of the state”.
Chauke, according to sections 7(2)(b) — if he declines to prosecute, as requested by Fraser — shall “grant the certificate [for private prosecution]”.
TimesLIVE
Support independent journalism by subscribing to the Sunday Times. Just R20 for the first month.
Former spy boss threatens private prosecution if NPA does not act
Arthur Fraser insists state capture inquiry evidence implicating him was false
Former State Security Agency (SSA) boss Arthur Fraser has issued a warning to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) to move on a case he opened last year against four individuals who implicated him at the state capture inquiry.
Should the NPA not act, as he had received no update on the case, Fraser said he would be left with no option but to pursue private prosecutions against the four individuals he has fingered, who include President Cyril Ramaphosa’s security adviser Sydney Mufamadi.
Fraser has given the director of public prosecutions in Gauteng, advocate Masenyani Chauke, until next Tuesday to make a move.
The four Fraser is aggrieved about include his successor as spy boss, Loyiso Jafta, as well as two spooks who testified at the state capture inquiry under the pseudonyms Mr Y and Ms K. During their testimony they alleged Fraser had signed off on wasteful operations at the SSA during the state capture years amounting to millions of rand.
Fraser argued at the time that the allegations against him were false and opened a case of perjury against the four, dragging into the case state capture commission legal head advocate Paul Pretorius SC who led their evidence, accusing him of aiding untruths.
Addressing Chauke through his lawyer Eric Mabuza, Fraser charged in a letter dated May 27: “Following the submission of the police investigation docket into our client’s complaint into your office for decision more than a year ago, our client has not been advised of the progress of the investigation nor of the decision in this matter.
“We are subsequently instructed to request you to communicate your decision within seven days on whether Dr Sydney Mufamadi, Mr Loyiso Jafta, Mr Y and Ms K will be prosecuted on charges of perjury and whether Paul Pretorius SC and advocate Veruschka September will be prosecuted on charges of subornation of perjury.”
Should Chauke’s decision by next Tuesday not satisfy Fraser, he cautioned he would be left with no choice but to activate sections 7(1)(a), 7(2)(a) and 7(2)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act. These sections provide for private prosecution in the case of “any private person who proves some substantial and peculiar interest in the issue of the trial arising out of some injury which he individually suffered in consequence of the commission of the said offence”, according to section 7(1)(a).
Section 7(2)(a) states “no private prosecutor under this section shall obtain the process of any court for summoning any person to answer any charge unless such private prosecutor produces to the officer authorised by law to issue such process a certificate signed by the [director of public prosecutions] that he has seen the statements or affidavits on which the charge is based and that he declines to prosecute at the instance of the state”.
Chauke, according to sections 7(2)(b) — if he declines to prosecute, as requested by Fraser — shall “grant the certificate [for private prosecution]”.
TimesLIVE
Support independent journalism by subscribing to the Sunday Times. Just R20 for the first month.
READ MORE: