EXPLAINER | Why Mapisa-Nqakula wants R4.5m corruption case thrown out
Former National Assembly speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula wants the Pretoria high court to throw out the corruption and money-laundering case against her before she is required to present a defence.
The former defence minister is facing 12 counts of corruption and one count of money laundering linked to allegations that she solicited about R4.5m in bribes and benefits from South African National Defence Force contractor Nombasa Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu between 2016 and 2019.
The state alleges Mapisa-Nqakula received about R2.1m in cash, some of which it says was used to fund renovations at her Bruma home. She has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
According to Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (Idac) spokesperson Henry Mamothame, after the state closed its case, Mapisa-Nqakula’s legal team stated it intends to bring a section 174 discharge application.
“The accused placed it on record in court that she will be filing for a discharge in the matter. The state has closed its case and it will await the heads of arguments from the accused in order to draft a reply,” he said.
A section 174 application allows an accused person to ask the court for a discharge at the end of the state’s case.
However, the state says it does not yet know exactly why she believes the case should be discharged.
Mamothame said, “We don’t know yet — we have to wait for her to provide us with her heads of arguments for us to reply. At this point we do not know the basis for bringing this application.”
He said the state had set out its case and would wait for the defence to explain why it believes Mapisa-Nqakula should be discharged before preparing its response.
A major part of the state’s case is the testimony of Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, who alleges she paid money to Mapisa-Nqakula.
The prosecution has sought to corroborate her evidence through bank records, WhatsApp conversations and evidence relating to the former minister’s home renovations.
In Sowetan’s August 7 report, chief financial investigator Wynand Wessels told the court that large cash withdrawals from Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s accounts corresponded with WhatsApp conversations allegedly linked to payments to Mapisa-Nqakula.
The messages allegedly contained coded words used when discussing money. The state says words including “impepho”, “indumba” and “wig” referred to cash payments.
The investigator examined financial records belonging to Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, Mapisa-Nqakula, her husband Charles Nqakula and their two sons.
Sowetan reported that Wessels could not directly link every cash withdrawal to a specific payment allegedly handed to Mapisa-Nqakula. The defence has also questioned whether the WhatsApp messages themselves prove that the amounts withdrawn were bribes.
Another important part of the state’s case concerns renovations at Mapisa-Nqakula’s Bruma home.
Interior decorator Nomsa Shabangu told the court that renovations, furniture and curtains at the property amounted to about R1.7m.
She described Mapisa-Nqakula as being “like a sister” to her and said she was instructed to oversee the renovations, buy building materials and pay contractors.
The state alleges that the cash used for the renovations came from money Mapisa-Nqakula received from Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu.
Architectural draftsman Azwinndini Mulaudzi also testified that he received cash payments for work on the house. He said he initially received R20,000 through Shabangu and later R50,000 directly from the Nqakulas.
The state is using this evidence to build a picture of how the alleged bribe money was received and spent.
The defence can point to questions raised during cross-examination about the coded WhatsApp messages, the inability to connect every cash withdrawal to an alleged payment, and the absence of a direct paper trail showing the alleged bribe money moving into Mapisa-Nqakula’s accounts.
Sowetan also reported that a Reserve Bank investigator made “no adverse findings” regarding Mapisa-Nqakula’s accounts. This could be part of the defence’s argument about the strength of the state’s financial evidence.
Mamothame says the state must wait for Mapisa-Nqakula’s heads of argument to know the exact motivations that will be put forward for a discharge.
The case has been postponed to August 20, when Mapisa-Nqakula’s lawyers are expected to advance the section 174 application.