1. The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) did not fail to prosecute cases emanating from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). In fact, a total of nine Priority Crimes Litigation Unit (PCLU) prosecutions were noted between 2003 and 2017. An additional six seminal TRC cases were subsequently enrolled by the NPA.
2. The decision to appoint Adv Ntsebeza, Senior Counsel was taken by the NPA leadership in line with the Roderigues judgment. His mandate was to review the measures that the NPA had adopted to deal with the TRC matters, and assess whether they were adequate, if they were found not to be, to make recommendations to strengthen them. However, in the process of review, said Senior Counsel had reason to believe that there was information that would amount to a violation of Section 41(1) of the NPA Act, 32 of 1998.
Adv Ntsebeza, SC, was however unable, due to “lack of an investigative arm”, to make a recommendation in respect of an investigation in terms of section 41(1) of the NPA Act, 32 of 1998. Instead, he recommended a commission of inquiry to allow implicated individuals to be given a platform to respond to the grave allegations against them.
3. A determination on whether there was a violation of section 32(1)(b) read with section 41(1) of the NPA Act has not been made as of yet. Such can only be made once the allegations have been properly canvassed by either a Commission of Enquiry, or a criminal investigation conducted by the SAPS or the DPCI.
4. The Minister is still considering all the options with regards to the recommendations for Commission of Inquiry.