Former defence and military veterans minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula’s legal team has presented its arguments before the Gauteng high court in Pretoria, explaining why the corruption and money laundering case against her should be dismissed.
On Monday, the defence applied for a discharge under section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act, arguing that the state failed to build a solid case against Mapisa-Nqakula and presented no evidence proving she committed the alleged offences. Judgment on the application has been reserved for September 7.
Mapisa-Nqakula faces 12 counts of corruption and one count of money laundering stemming from her tenure as defence minister between 2016 and 2019.
The state alleges that she solicited R4.5m in bribes, R2.1m of which was allegedly paid in cash, from South African National Defence Force (SANDF) logistics contractor Nombasa Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu to secure and maintain tenders.
The state alleges the funds were used for renovations at Mapisa-Nqakula’s Bruma home between 2018 and 2020.
The state concluded its case on August 13 after calling 16 witnesses. These included Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, deputy minister of defence Bantu Holomisa, members of Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s family and an interior decorator who testified regarding the renovations at the Bruma residence.
Defence advocate Siyabulela Mapoma argued there is no evidence the accused committed any of the charged offences. He noted that no evidence of theft, fraud or extortion was presented, and urged the court to grant the discharge application.
Key arguments presented by the defence:
No evidence of payments made
Mapoma argued that Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu provided no evidence demonstrating that money was paid to the accused to induce her to act or refrain from acting in a way that benefited Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu or anyone else. He emphasised that the testimony lacked any explanation of why the alleged payments were made.
Single-witness reliance and lack of eyewitnesses
The defence highlighted that Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu is the sole witness testifying directly to the alleged physical handover of money. While her daughter, sister, brother and husband testified that they accompanied her when she withdrew cash or travelled to meet Mapisa-Nqakula, none of them actually witnessed the money changing hands.
Disputed ‘coded’ WhatsApp messages
Mapoma challenged the prosecution’s claim that terms like impepho, indumba, snuff and padkos in WhatsApp exchanges were codes for bribe payments, calling the assertion a fabrication by Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu.
He pointed out that while Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu used these terms casually, the state selectively interpreted them as illicit codes only when used by the accused in the same thread.
Furthermore, he argued the messages were compromised because Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu had deleted portions of the chat logs, and noted that no such terms appeared in relation to the first five alleged payments.
Lacuna in evidence and unverified claims
The defence pointed to a significant gap in the evidence, noting the absence of call records or verification to confirm that phone or WhatsApp calls took place between Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu and Mapisa-Nqakula.
Mapoma argued that the deletion of messages combined with the absence of call logs undermines the credibility of the state’s case. He added that the state failed to link the alleged bribe money to the home renovations, despite financial records showing that legitimate cash withdrawals from the Mapisa-Nqakula family bank accounts were insufficient to cover the work.
Contradictions among state witnesses
Mapoma argued that the testimony of other state witnesses directly contradicted Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s account, pointing to significant discrepancies across the prosecution’s evidence.
State’s response:
The state maintains that Mapisa-Nqakula has a case to answer. State prosecutor Adv Emile van der Merwe told the court that sufficient evidence exists and argued that the section 174 application should be dismissed. He suggested the application was premature and brought merely to gauge the court’s view of the evidence.
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.