Masemola off the Hook as NPA Withdraws Charges Over R360m Police Contract

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has ordered the withdrawal of four PFMA charges against National Police Commissioner General Fannie Masemola, ruling that the evidence does not offer reasonable prospects of a successful prosecution.

National Director of Public Prosecutions Advocate Andy Mothibi issued the instruction after reviewing the case brought by the Independent Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC), which resulted in Masemola being arrested and charged over the alleged irregular awarding of a major police health-services contract.

The case centred on a contract valued between R228 million and R360 million that was allegedly awarded to Medicare24, a company owned by businessman Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala.Masemola was charged with four counts of contravening Section 38 of the Public Finance Management Act.

The allegations against him related to his responsibilities as an accounting officer and did not accuse him of personally committing fraud or corruption.The NPA’s review has now brought the prosecution to a halt.Mothibi invoked Section 179(5)(c) of the Constitution, read with Section 22(2)(b) of the NPA Act, in directing that the charges be withdrawn.

The provisions empower the NDPP to intervene when prosecution processes fail to comply with NPA policy directives.

Those directives require, among other things, that prosecutors establish reasonable prospects of success before enrolling a criminal case for trial.In reaching his decision, Mothibi considered evidence gathered by IDAC, a report from the Case Assessment Panel and a report prepared by an independent Senior Counsel who participated in the assessment process.

The review concluded that the prosecution could not meet the required threshold.“The NDPP is satisfied that there are no reasonable prospects of a successful prosecution against the National Commissioner on the PFMA charges,” the NPA said.

Mothibi said prosecuting a case without sufficient evidence would not serve the public interest.“Enrolling a case for prosecution where evidence is not sufficient to sustain a successful prosecution is not in the public interest,” he said.

He further said a prosecution that continues despite insufficient evidence, while failing to consider material exculpatory information, would not be consistent with the NPA’s mandate.The decision does not end scrutiny of how the case was handled.