Police Minister Nathi Nhleko.
- There were suspicions that IPID was involved in a cover-up in relation to the now infamous Zimbabwe rendition, the state capture commission of inquiry has heard.
- IPID produced two reports, each containing different conclusions, and former police minister Nathi Nhleko said there was clear evidence of deletions in the second report.
- IPID said the first report was a preliminary report and that there was outstanding evidence, which led to the changes in the second report.
Former police minister Nathi Nhleko has told the state capture commission of inquiry about suspicions that the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) was involved in a cover-up to protect Hawks bosses for their alleged roles in the infamous Zimbabwe rendition.
Nhleko’s second day of testimony at the commission on Tuesday mainly focused on IPID’s reports into the so-called illegal rendition of five Zimbabweans between November 2010 and January 2011.
It produced two reports. The first, by directorate investigator Innocent Khuba was dated 22 January 2014 and contained a finding that former Gauteng Hawks boss Shadrack Sibiya and former Hawks boss Anwa Dramat were involved in the renditions and should be criminally charged.
READ | Zondo commission: Nhleko did not seek clarification from IPID on two rendition reports
The second report, dated 18 March 2014, contained a finding that there was no evidence incriminating Sibiya and Dramat in the rendition matter.
Khuba previously told the commission that the first report was a preliminary report and that further evidence cleared the Hawks bosses of involvement in the renditions.
On Tuesday, Nhleko took the commission through several instances where there were either complete deletions or alterations in the second report.
He said the alterations or deletions could be seen as tampering with evidence and that they were done to influence the material recommendations that the second report contained.
He said he saw the deletions as serious acts of misconduct.
READ | State capture: McBride, former police minister butted heads over contradictory Zimbabwe rendition reports
“You are bound to conclude that it’s possible that there was a cover-up of sorts,” Nhleko said.
He added that there were suspicions in that regard, which was why there had to be another process to investigate that possibility.
Nhleko, who earlier testified that he believed the first report was a final report, then commissioned private law firm Werksmans to investigate the reports.
Commission chairperson, Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, put it to Nhleko that Khuba’s evidence was that the first report was preliminary. He asked how could it be regarded as a final report if there were outstanding investigations.
Nhleko responded that it was clear that there was no additional information in the second report. Instead, alterations and deletions could be noted.
He added that previous IPID boss, Koekie Mbeki, could speak on the finality of the first report, but questioned why it was handed to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) if it was not final.
Nhleko is expected to continue his testimony on Wednesday.
