The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has remained mum over the EFF’s call to have the recent appointments of former state capture commission evidence leaders, advocates Paul Pretorius and Matthew Chaskalson, reversed.
On Tuesday, the EFF said due to a conflict of interest, it will continue to demand the immediate reversal of the appointments of Pretorius and Chaskalson as consultants within the NPA.
Over a week ago the NPA unveiled the pair as consultants in prosecuting cases related to the state capture commission, which they consulted for as evidence leaders between 2019 and 2022.
Reacting to the recent developments surrounding this matter, party spokesperson Sinawo Thambo indicated on the party’s publication, the Radical Voice, that this was nothing short of a conflict of interest.
He said: “Those who are sports-inclined have referred to Pretorius and Chaskalson’s appointment by the NPA to prosecute the evidence they led and developed at the Zondo Commission as them playing the role of a player and a referee at the same time.
“Perhaps this sports analogy is more convincing to those who have a distaste for unfairness and cheating, I don’t know, but it serves its desired effect.”
Last week, IOL reported that the NPA’s Investigating Directorate (ID) had appointed the two without a vetting process having been undertaken.
Following their appointment, the EFF slammed the move, describing it as “gross collusion, opportunism, and undermining of the wheels of natural justice”.
“Chaskalson and Pretorius are now set to advise the NPA on prosecuting cases based on evidence they developed and led during the commission.
“Pretorius, former head of the legal team, led evidence on the State Security Agency and Bosasa, including President Cyril Ramaphosa’s testimony. His appointment raises concerns about conflicts of interest,“ the EFF said.
Last week, The Star reported that ID spokesperson Henry Mamothame defended their appointment, saying this was done in terms of Section 38 of the NPA Act “in line with the NPA’s objective to enhance its ability to prosecute state capture corruption matters effectively”.
However, the publication reported that there had not been any response to the pair’s security clearance issue.
“The advocates in question are both leading experts in their fields who have extensive experience working on state capture corruption matters, including for the Zondo Commission,” the NPA said last week.
Further attempts to get the NPA to comment on whether they were considering calls for the two appointments to be reversed following EFF’s calls were unsuccessful at the time of going to print.