NELSPRUIT – A case of fraud and perjury has been opened in Randburg against the Mpumalanga Land Claims commissioner.
Representatives of the Enqunqini community set off for the court, located next to the Land Claims Commission’s headquarters in Ferndale last Thursday. Led by Mr Isaac Mokoena, they managed to have a police docket opened to investigate the provincial commissioner, Mr Lebjane Maphutha.
Lowvelder reported earlier that the members of the Enqunqini community had been waiting 18 years for their land claim to be finalised. They first made the application for land restitution of about 4 153 hectares in 1996 represented by the late Mr Pau Moses Mokoena, Isaac’s father.
The claim was gazetted, but later a portion of this land was transferred to the people of Engcungcwini. Isaac maintains that nobody know who they are. As a result, the Enqunqini community has made criminal complaints against the commission before, and is currently embroiled in a civil claim against it.
The claim relates to the commission’s failure to produce the settlement agreements and money to the value of R994 million for loss of income due to the years the claim has been stalled.
Last week in his statement to the police to verify their criminal claims, Isaac alleged that Maphutha lied in his answering affidavit to their civil suit, by stating that a break-in at the offices of the commission was the cause of the delay in awarding the gazetted claim to the Enqunqini Community Business Trust.
However, Maphutha argued in his statement that Isaac did not have locus standi to act on behalf of the community and that the claim was lodged on behalf of the Engcungcwini Communal Property Association. He also stated that the current owners of the land in question should be part of the proceedings and that the allegations of fraud were bound to lead to disputing of facts.
While the criminal complaints were being investigated, the Enqunqini Ka-Majumba Business Trust was also awaiting a court date for the civil matter to be finalised.
Previously, agriculture, rural development and land adminstration said it could not comment on the matter since it was sub judice.
