Former defence minister Mapisa-Nqakula to apply for discharge

Section 174 move follows testimony from 16 witnesses, including key contractor

Former defence and military veterans minister and National Assembly speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula. File photo.
Former defence and military veterans minister and National Assembly speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula. Picture: (ESA ALEXANDER/SUNDAY TIMES)

Story audio is generated using AI

The Gauteng High Court in Pretoria has postponed the corruption and money-laundering trial of former defence and military veterans minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula to August 20 after her legal team announced plans to apply for a discharge.

This is under section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The act allows a presiding judge or magistrate to acquit an accused person at the close of the prosecution’s case if there is no compelling evidence that they committed the alleged offence. If granted, Mapisa-Nqakula would be automatically found not guilty without needing to present a defence.

Mapisa-Nqakula faces 12 counts of corruption and one count of money-laundering stemming from her tenure as defence minister between 2016 and 2019. She allegedly solicited R4.5m in bribes, R2.1m of which was allegedly paid in cash from South African National Defence Force (SANDF) logistics contractor Nombasa Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu to secure and maintain tenders.

The state concluded its case on Thursday after calling 16 witnesses, including Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, deputy minister of defence Bantu Holomisa, members of Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s family and an interior decorator who testified regarding home renovations carried out at Mapisa-Nqakula’s Bruma residence during the period in question.

Speaking to TimesLIVE on the sidelines of the proceedings, defence attorney Makhi Nogaga said the prosecution failed to prove its case. He noted that only one of the 16 witnesses, Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, directly accused Mapisa-Nqakula of receiving money.

Nogaga stated that Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s uncorroborated and contradictory testimony was insufficient to warrant a formal defence, adding that subsequent witness testimonies chipped away at the credibility of the primary allegations.

However, prosecutor Emile van der Merwe expressed surprise at the defence’s plan, maintaining that the state has built a strong case that demands an answer from the accused.

The postponement to August 20 is to allow the defence team time to secure court transcripts and finalise their section 174 application.

TimesLIVE



Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Comment icon