Idac must not falter in high-stakes corruption case

The arrest of 12 high-ranking police officers and their appearance in court over their alleged criminal conduct in the awarding of the now infamous R360 million health services tender to businessman Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala was met with a lot of genuine applause from South Africans who are tired of the blatant and unashamed looting of public funds.

What makes this case worse is that those who enabled the looting are the very people that citizens expect to uphold the law and ensure that anyone who does wrong is jailed.

Since they are cops, they are automatically held to a higher standard or should be.

The only risk to this exceptional work is the very real possibility the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), through the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (Idac), could bungle the case in court.

The scariest part of that possibility becoming a reality is that the bungling could even appear deliberate.

This is not an accusation that the NPA bungles cases on purpose, but a realistic view based on what the prosecuting entity has done in the past in very high-profile corruption cases.

Following the arrest and appearance of the high-ranking cops in court, a rather suspicious message was put out that national police commissioner General Fannie Masemola has been “summoned to appear in court”.

Initially, it was not made clear whether he is being added to the 12 or whether he is appearing in court for having colluded with the 12.

It was clarified later that his charge will be with regards to having not performed his duties as an accounting officer the way the Public Finance Management Act says he should.

The timing of the release of the details about the national police commissioner makes it impossible for the public not to lump him with the cops charged for aiding Matlala.

ALSO READ: ‘No, I didn’t do anything wrong,’ Masemola clarifies summons

This is by no means an appeal that the country’s top cop should not have been charged.

As the phrase of the week was “everyone must be treated equally before the law”, it still begs the question: is Idac not aware of the possibility that the public will perceive his summons to appear in court simply as a means to get him to step aside?

South Africans are aware that in the battle against criminals, there are cops who have chosen to aid criminals and the country has seen them at the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry into police corruption.

There are also police officers who have chosen to stick to the good that they joined the police force to do.

It has not been established yet if there are prosecutors and judges who have also taken the side of the criminals, but any right-thinking citizen will ask themselves if the continued bungling of cases against high-profile corruption accused is by design.

Voters have the right to ask these questions.

It has been seen in the past that one way to get the good guys out of the way is by charging them, getting them to relinquish their positions, which Masemola must now do because “everyone is equal before the law”.

Logic dictates the charges against Masemola will only carry weight if a court finds those that awarded the tender and those that administered payments guilty of corruption.

Would it have been to the disadvantage of the country if the national police commissioner was to be charged at the conclusion of the case against the 12 police officers?

The battle against good and bad in the police service requires a lot of stability in its leadership and actions that unnecessarily add to instability work in favour of the bad guys looting public funds.

NOW READ: Arrests ‘show police rotten from the top down’