Hofmeyr affidavit may rescue Zuma
But critics say it actually strengthens DA case
WILLIE Hofmeyr, the deputy director of public prosecutions, has — at least in the eyes of some — become President Jacob Zuma’s unlikely saviour.
In an affidavit filed in court this week in defence of the National Prosecuting Authority’s 2009 decision to discontinue its corruption and racketeering case against Zuma, Hofmeyr is devastating in his criticism of former president Thabo Mbeki and his inner circle.
He accused the former president, his close ally and ex-NPA boss Bulelani Ngcuka, and former intelligence minister Ronnie Kasrils of having been part of a political network that used the head of the now defunct Scorpions — Leonard McCarthy — to manipulate the decision as to when to charge Zuma.
In his affidavit, Hofmeyr states: “It was Ngcuka, with others, and not McCarthy, who ultimately decided when Zuma should be charged.”
They did so presumably to help improve Mbeki’s chances of retaining his position as ANC president.
Mbeki’s office once again dismissed allegations that he interfered with the work of the NPA in order to manipulate the outcome of the 2007 ANC national conference at which he and Zuma fought it out for the ANC presidency.
It said Mbeki would consider taking legal steps once he had read Hofmeyr’s affidavit in full.
Hofmeyr filed his affidavit in defence of the NPA’s decision not to charge Zuma, which the DA wants to be reviewed and set aside by the courts.
“My investigations,” says Hofmeyr in the affidavit, “revealed that McCarthy met regularly with Kasrils . . . at critical points before and after the Polokwane conference. They were careful not to reveal too much information over the telephone. It appears further that Kasrils acted as a conduit for McCarthy to communicate with Mbeki without arousing suspicion”.
But his critics say his affidavit strengthens the DA’s argument that the charges should not have been withdrawn, as the only evidence of political interference relates to the timing of the prosecutions, rather than whether to charge or not.
“There is no new evidence to suggest that Ngcuka unduly influenced McCarthy’s decision-making or that Mbeki exerted any undue pressure on Ngcuka. The prosecuting authority has, therefore, made these claims based on speculation and conjecture and has failed to provide any cold, hard evidence to support these allegations.
“In any event, it is not for the NPA to decide not to prosecute based on its own conclusion that this matter or any matter is fraught with undue political influence. The decision to prosecute was based on the facts, not the timing of the service of the indictment,” argued the DA’s James Selfe in a statement.
Hofmeyr would not comment this week beyond what he said in the affidavit. But an NPA official close to the case said the agency believed that it would succeed in court as “timing is not insignificant” in proving political interference.
How does Hofmeyr, who was viewed until recently as one of the “outsiders” in the state — one of those targeted for a purge by the post-Polokwane administration — end up being viewed as one of Zuma’s defenders in a case that may land the president in jail?
Hofmeyr has been at the receiving end of the Zuma camp’s wrath. The president removed him as the head of the Special Investigations Unit and overlooked him for appointment when NPA head Menzi Simelane was forced to step down by the Constitutional Court.
His associates at the NPA say he has taken up the matter “not to save Zuma” but “because the political interference that happened in this case threatened the future of the NPA and should not happen in future”.
“The big issue for him is what do you do when individuals use your organisation to help one grouping against the other. This issue is even more important now given what is currently happening at the NPA,” the insider said, referring to the battle between NPA boss Mxolisi Nxesana and his deputy Nomgcobo Jiba.
In his affidavit, Hofmeyr goes to great lengths to show how he and other NPA officials had opposed a decision by McCarthy to have the charging of Zuma postponed until after the ANC conference.
The Mbeki faction apparently believed that charging Zuma before the conference would win him sympathy votes.
Hofmeyr makes references to the “spy tapes” which show that, during this period, McCarthy was in constant communication with Ngcuka, who told him how to proceed.
“It was shortly after his conversation with Ngcuka on November 7 2007 that McCarthy first raised the possibility of delaying the prosecution until after Polokwane,” he says.
Before the conference, Hofmeyr alleges, McCarthy and Ngcuka spoke almost daily, and shared confidential details about the case. msomis@sundaytimes.co.za