Did Mahlobo have ‘tsotsi’ judges on the payroll?

Unidentified witness ‘Steven’ appeared before the Zondo Commission of inquiry into allegations of state capture on May 20 to continue with State Security Agency (SSA) related evidence. Steven has had a long history of intelligence-related services with the intelligence arm of the ANC, uMkhonto we Sizwe. In 1995 he was absorbed into the new intelligence structure of South Africa.

Steven alleged that former state security minister David Mahlobo was responsible for the jamming of cellphone signals in parliament during the February 2015 State of the Nation Address (Sona), had tsotsi judges on his payroll to influence the judiciary, meddled in operational issues, ran his own projects, and made the SSA pay his “assets”.

Steven said he had a cordial relationship with Mahlobo, who called him Bhuti. Meetings were informal, and would take place in a lounge at Mahlobo’s residence in Tshwane, near Waterkloof. He would be met by security at the gate, and would be ushered into the house by Mahlobo’s “protector”. Further protection was provided to Mahlobo by police, visible in the yard. He had also been to Mahlobo’s residence in Cape Town.

The ‘jamming of parliament’

Steven said that the SSA received intelligence that one political party intended to disrupt parliament during the 2015 Sona.

Steven explained that the “Natjoint” – the National Joint Operational and Intelligence Structure (Natjoints) – a joint committee representing various entities including the SSA, is responsible for the protection of parliament, and that the president would be able to address parliament without interruption. There were also concerns about the president’s security.

The South African Police Service (Saps) and the Department of Defence are co-chairs of Natjoint. Parliament is a no-fly zone, and the SSA employed a jammer to prevent a drone being flown.

The jamming device was to be placed outside the chamber, where the president takes a formal salute before entering the chamber.

However, Thulani Dhlomo, the former head of special operations, and deputy director of counter-intelligence in the domestic branch of the SSA, made the decision to employ the jammer in the gallery where the journalists and visitors were seated. This would render all signals void.

He made this decision without the knowledge of the joint chiefs.

Background to Sona

The 2015 Sona was a very heated affair. But when matters became really exciting, there were problems with the sound and visuals. Cell phones were inoperative. Journalists were not able to project what was going on inside the house to viewers watching on television.

While members of the Economic Freedom Fighters were beaten up, picked up, and bodily thrown out the house, with the Democratic Alliance walking out in protest, viewers faced a frozen picture on their TV screens.

At the time there were allegations of the involvement of state security and that a signal jamming device was employed.

Primedia Broadcasting, the South African National Editors’ Forum (Sanef), the Right2Know Campaign, and the Open Democracy Advice Centre initiated court action against the speaker of the National Assembly, the chair of the National Council of Provinces, the secretary of parliament, and the minister of state security.

Mahlobo’s pliant ‘tsotsi’ judges (allegation)

Steven alleged that Mahlobo knew that Sanef was gearing up to take the jamming matter to court, and called a meeting at his home. And that Mahlobo had told Steven that he planned to influence the judiciary.

Mahlobo told Steven that he was going to introduce him to his ‘tsotsi’ judges, and two men entered the lounge.

In IsiZulu, Mahlobo said: “Ngizokuhlanganisa nezigebengu zami.”

Nezigebengu means criminal or tsotsi.

Commission chair, Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, initiated a discussion of the deeper township usage of ‘nezigebengu’; that in the township people would use that term for someone they have respect for, even though they are criminals.

Steven added that it can also mean “we do things together”.

Zondo agreed, and said it can also be used as “my dog”.

Steven agreed, and said this term would only be used with someone you are comfortable with, who wouldn’t take offence.

Steven described the judges, one was very dark, and about 1.65 metres tall. The other one was white, late 50s, and very nervous and jittery.

Steven said Mahlobo was addressing them in a very collegiate way, rather than insulting them.

They had a meeting about the court action regarding the parliament jamming incident. The judges said they could ensure a favourable outcome in Cape Town, even though they were based in Gauteng.

Judicial outcome of the Sona matter

Western Cape High Court (WCHC):

The matter was heard in the Western Cape High Court on May 28, 2015 (you can read the judgment here).

There were three judges, Dlodlo, Henney, and Savage.

Dlodlo and Henney dismissed the application finding that parliament “is constitutionally entitled to ensure its functioning and to protect its own dignity” and that the measures taken were “reasonable, justifiable and proportionate”.

This raises the obvious question. Did Mahlobo influence the outcome?

Savage respectively disagreed with the majority judgment, posting a 7 189 word dissenting judgment.

Savage found parliament’s interference with the telecommunication signal at parliament unconstitutional and unlawful.

He also found that parliament’s policy on filming and broadcasting, and parliament’s rules of coverage on ‘treatment of disorder’ unconstitutional, unlawful and invalid. Savage also found that the manner in which the audio and visual feeds were produced and broadcast, and the use of the jammer to interfere with signals, was unconstitutional and unlawful.

Supreme Court of Appeal:

The Supreme Court of Appeal overturned the WCHC judgment in a judgment handed down on November 23, 2016. Costs were awarded against the minister of state security and the speaker and secretary of parliament. The court found their actions to have been unconstitutional and unlawful, and that the rules regarding ‘disorder on the floor of the house’ “violate the right to an open parliament”.

Mahlobo the operator

Steven gave several examples of Mahlobo’s own projects:

• Eersterust took place just before the local government elections in 2016. The community had various grievances, such as drug dealing and lack of RDP houses. Steven accompanied Mahlobo to Eersterust, where Mahlobo told him that he had to run his own operations, because: “Bhuti, I can see that you guys have tried but you’re not giving me what I want.”

• When Steven tried to advise Mahlobo that his role as a minister was that of oversight, and that he shouldn’t get involved in operational matters, Mahlobo replied that he is well versed in intelligence activities having undergone a three-week training programme.

• Mahlobo wanted R400 000 to pay “an asset”. Steven asked for information so he could put in a claim. Mahlobo said the matter would be dealt with by “Holmes”, head of administrative services.

• Mahlobo gave him a false alert about an act of sabotage that was going to occur at Pelindaba in 2017. Steven deployed forces in the area for two weeks and nothing happened, there was no attempted sabotage. Nonetheless, Mahlobo wanted Steven to pay the asset R3 million. Frank, another unidentified witness, had shown Steven a photograph of the asset, an old man surrounded by children.

• Mahlobo authorised a surveillance operation, Project Greenleaf, in 2017, to spy on SSA officials and senior operations. “We never got to know why we were investigated”.