Former National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) head Shamila Batohi has opted not to return and complete evidence in the inquiry into Gauteng South director of public prosecutions Andrew Chauke’s fitness to hold office.
In a letter to the inquiry, chaired by retired justice Bess Nkabinde, Batohi said she decided not to return to the witness box and continue being cross-examined.
“I have carefully reflected on my position in these proceedings and, with full appreciation of the seriousness, have decided not to continue giving evidence before the inquiry,” Batohi said in the letter to Nkabinde, who is chairing proceedings.
“I wish to emphasise that I have taken this step on my own accord. It is a considered and informed decision, reached after significant thought and reflection, and it is not taken lightly.”
Batohi was scheduled to advise the inquiry on Thursday whether she would return and complete her testimony.
In December, Batohi abruptly halted her testimony during cross-examination, saying that she had elected not to continue without legal representation.
While the main scope of the inquiry is focused on Chauke’s fitness to hold office, Batohi at the time faced questions on her legal powers to review her predecessor’s decisions.
Chauke, who was appointed director of public prosecutions in 2011, is accused of supporting racketeering charges without evidence against former KwaZulu-Natal Hawks head Maj-Gen Johan Booysen in 2012.
The authorisation of the charges by Nomgcobo Jiba, then acting national director of public prosecutions at the NPA, was later dismissed due to the state having insufficient evidence to prosecute.
When Batohi took over at the NPA in 2019, she reviewed and withdrew charges against Booysen authorised by her predecessors, Jiba and advocate Shaun Abrahams.
She faced questions on what information she relied on before deciding to withdraw and faced scrutiny.
In her letter filed on Thursday, Batohi details why she paused evidence and asked for legal representation. Earlier this month the inquiry declined her request for legal representation because she was under cross-examination.
“It should be noted that during the course of my testimony, serious allegations were put to me, including that I had suppressed evidence, misled and lied to the panel, defeated the ends of justice, acted in breach of my oath of office and contravened the NPA Act,” Batohi states in the letter.
“These are matters of considerable gravity. No objection was raised by the evidence leaders, nor did the panel intervene, as has occurred in respect of other witnesses.
“I have, throughout, been subjected to robust and, at times, hostile cross-examination and have been labelled an “accuser” or the “complainant”, which I respectfully consider to be both incorrect and inappropriate.
“I was, in truth, discharging my duties as the then NDPP in making a referral to the president in accordance with the NPA Act.
“It remains my respectful view that complex legal issues have arisen in the course of my testimony and that it would, in those circumstances, have been appropriate to permit me to consult with my legal representatives in order to obtain legal advice.
“This is not simply a matter of procedural fairness. The right to obtain legal advice has been recognised by our courts in a wide variety of circumstances. The absence of such an opportunity, in my view, materially impacted the fairness of the process, notwithstanding the understandable imperative of maintaining its efficiency.”
Batohi’s request for the letter to be read was refused. Nkabinde said it would also not be accepted as part of the record.
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.