Twenty-one years after her signature on a cheque led to a theft conviction and a prison sentence, Alina Mhlekwa has achieved her dream of becoming an attorney.
The 49-year-old was admitted to the legal profession after Free State High Court judge Joseph Mhlambi said he was satisfied she was not inherently dishonest.
The decision means Mhlekwa, who has bachelor and master’s law degrees, has reached the end of a journey that began in 2001 when her boss stopped at her desk and asked her to countersign a cheque.
The young woman was an assistant to Andries Masoanganye, master of the high court in Mahikeng, who used the cheque to steal R182,000 from the Guardian Fund he administered.
It was the first of five thefts in the following year which netted Masoanganye more than R1.2m and earned him a 10-year prison sentence in 2010.
Mhlekwa did not receive a cent of the loot, but she was prosecuted as his accomplice in the first offence and given an eight-year prison sentence, half of which was suspended.
Her legal fight went as far as an unsuccessful application for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court, but in December 2013, still protesting her innocence but with no further legal options, she was imprisoned and spent 11 months behind bars.
After being paroled she found a job as a consultant at a legal firm in Bloemfontein, and in 2018 she applied for admission as an attorney, conveyancer and notary of the high court, starting a new four-year battle.
In her application, Mhlekwa said she was bitter and resentful when she went to prison, but anger management courses helped.
“The entire ordeal enabled her to learn several invaluable life lessons, one of the most important of which was to be more cautious in accepting the say-so of others without first taking time to consider and evaluate a situation herself,” said Mhlambi.
“She also developed a new appreciation of procedure and accountability and understood more than ever that the consequences of her conduct could be far-reaching and very serious.
“She fully understood that being an attorney involved a high degree of honesty, reliability, and integrity and that clients as well as the public in general should be able to entrust her with their affairs and money without concern.”
The Law Society of the Free State supported Mhlekwa’s application, and correctional services said she had acknowledged where she went wrong and committed herself to making a success of her life.
But Mpina Mathebula, the first judge to consider her application, wasn’t satisfied and asked the Law Society about Mhlekwa’s insistence that she was innocent. She supplied an affidavit saying she could not admit something she had not done.
“When I was being considered for parole, the parole board suggested that my application might be considered more favourably if I were to admit my involvement in the scheme, but I simply could not,” she said.
“I informed the board that if they were not prepared to approve my application unless I made the admission, I should rather remain incarcerated. The application for parole was, however, granted.”
The entire ordeal enabled her to learn several invaluable life lessons, one of the most important of which was to be more cautious in accepting the say-so of others without first taking time to consider and evaluate a situation herself.
— Free State High Court judge Joseph Mhlambi
Mhlekwa said this did not mean she did not acknowledge her shortcomings. “The dismissal of the application for leave to appeal to the ConCourt marked a distinct turning point in my life,” she said. “[I realised] that my attitude, and especially my unwillingness to take responsibility for my prior conduct, was wrong.
“I gave my full co-operation to the correctional officials and benefited from intensive rehabilitation and reformation courses. I have to especially emphasise the positive effects that the ordeal has had on my personal and professional life.”
Mhlekwa even obtained an affidavit from Masoanganye in which he admitted taking advantage of his assistant’s inexperience when he asked her to countersign the cheque, and confirmed she had no knowledge of his scam.
Nevertheless, the Legal Practice Council — which by now had replaced the Law Society — objected to her application for admission as an attorney, saying she had shown no remorse. Reform could only begin when a person acknowledged she had committed a wrongful act, it said.
Mhlekwa argued that admitting something she had not done did not amount to reform. Instead, she had accepted the responsibility to be better equipped to avoid contributing to illegal activities.
Mhlambi said: “She fell from grace in consequence of an isolated act while she was in her twenties. Hers was not deliberate and persistent dishonesty for personal financial gain over a protracted period.”
The judge said he had read affidavits in support of Mhlekwa’s application from attorneys, senior staff at the master’s office, a traditional healer and a pastor.
“All speak highly of her and more especially her diligence, knowledge, honesty, trustworthiness, reliability, willingness to help and passion for her work,” he said.
“I agree with [Mhlekwa’s] counsel that her choice to follow her conscience, notwithstanding the possible repercussions, is an appreciation that dishonesty, simply to facilitate her application for admission, is not something that a fit and proper person would do.”
Mhlekwa, who still works at the firm that employed her when she was freed, declined to comment on her ordeal or her plans.
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.