Mapisa-Nqakula trial | Former minister says ‘Impepho’ wasn’t code for cash, denies bribery claims

Disgraced former Defence Minister, Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, has firmly denied that she and defence contractor, Nombasa Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, used coded language to disguise conversations about bribes.

Mapisa-Nqakula took the stand in her corruption trial before the Pretoria High Court on Monday to give her version of events, after her bid to have the corruption and money laundering charges against her dismissed, was rejected.

With that application out of the way, the trial continues, with Mapisa-Nqakula’s legal team now presenting its witnesses and evidence in an effort to challenge the State’s case.

Mapisa-Nqakula faces allegations that she solicited R4.5 million and received R2.1 million in cash bribes from Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu between 2016 and 2019, while serving as Defence Minister.

She says she first met Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu face-to-face at OR Tambo International Airport in January 2017.

According to her testimony, their conversation took an unexpected turn when Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu noticed the white beads around her wrist and asked about her spirituality.

Mapisa-Nqakula told the court that she revealed she was a sangoma.

She says Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu also opened up about her own spiritual beliefs, telling her that she was a traditional healer and that her farming activities were connected to growing plants used in traditional medicine.

“One of the things that Nombasa mentioned is that in this process of farming and planting, it is assisting her in the sense that whatever it is that she will require or need in the work of being a traditional healer, she is able to have it because she plants her own medicine,” Mapisa-Nqakula testified.

The court previously heard that Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s farming activities were based in Delmas, although Mapisa-Nqakula says the contractor told her that she farmed in Midrand.

– But what about the ‘code’? –

The State has placed a spotlight on WhatsApp messages between the two women, arguing that their exchanges contained coded references to money.

Prosecutors allege that references to “impepho”, or snuff, were used to signal requests for cash.

In another message, a request for a final R100,000 payment was allegedly disguised through a reference to Mapisa-Nqakula’s indumba, a sacred ancestral hut, supposedly having “no more medicine”.

However, Mapisa-Nqakula rejects the interpretation that these spiritual references were a secret language for bribes.

She says her relationship with Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu began months before their first face-to-face meeting.

Mapisa-Nqakula told the court that she first became aware of the defence contractor in June 2016, when Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu called her in distress and in tears.

Ntshondwa-Ndlovu allegedly told the then-minister that she had been awarded a Defence Department tender, only for the contract to later be revoked.

According to Mapisa-Nqakula, Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu threatened to take her grievances to the media and expose what she regarded as unfair treatment by the department.

Mapisa-Nqakula says she subsequently raised the contractor’s concerns with South African National Defence Force (SANDF) Chief General, Solly Shoke, and Defence Secretary, Dr Sam Gulube.

She testified that General Shoke promised to investigate the matter and follow up on Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s complaints.

But, according to Mapisa-Nqakula, Gulube took a very different approach.

She says he immediately dismissed the concerns and told her to stay out of the matter, explaining that the department had already been dealing with Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu for some time.

Mapisa-Nqakula says she warned both officials that the dispute could damage the department’s reputation and urged them to find a resolution.

– Judge rejects bid to have case thrown out –

Meanwhile, Judge Mashudu Munzhelele rejected Mapisa-Nqakula’s Section 174 application, which sought a discharge from the case on the basis that the State had failed to establish a case against her.

In delivering the ruling, Munzhelele cautioned against treating contradictions in a witness’s evidence as automatic grounds for rejecting it.

She said inconsistencies could, in some circumstances, simply be the result of an honest mistake.

The judge found that the defence had placed significant emphasis on discrepancies between Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s testimony in court and the contents of her earlier statement.

However, Munzhelele said those discrepancies had to be assessed in their proper context, stressing that an affidavit is not intended to be a verbatim account of everything a witness will eventually testify about in court.

The defence also questioned Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s credibility because she is a Section 204 witness, arguing that her evidence effectively amounts to single-witness testimony and should therefore be approached with caution.

However, Munzhelele said the cautionary rule governing single-witness evidence does not arise for determination in the same manner at the Section 174 stage.

The judge added that the court is not required, at this point, to make a final finding on every aspect of a witness’s credibility.

For now, Mapisa-Nqakula remains in the witness box, where her account of spiritual conversations, tender disputes and alleged coded messages will be tested against the State’s version of events.

Written by: Odirile Rabalao