Pretoria - The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) says it will not appeal the outcome of the trail, where the seven police officers accused of the death of Andries Tatane, were acquitted.
The NPA believes that even if the case was presented to a different court, the verdict would likely be the same.
“Judgement in this case was based on facts, and not on a question of law.
“On the basis of the many challenges we have outlined, the NPA is of the view that with the same set of facts that were presented in court, it is highly unlikely that another court would find differently,” Acting Head of the NPA, Thoko Majokweni, told a media briefing in Pretoria on Wednesday.
Instead, the NPA will open a docket for investigation of perjury against the witness who recanted on their statements during the testimony given under oath.
Majokweni said that after the investigation, the Director of Public Prosecutions will take a decision whether or not to prosecute the witnesses with perjury.
“The NPA has to find out if witnesses deliberately changed their initial statements, leading to witnesses being evasive, unreliable,” said Majokweni.
Although no time frames have been put, the NPA says it will ask the SA Police Service to investigate the perjury case, which is normally investigated by the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID).
Last week, the Ficksburg Regional Court acquitted the seven policemen who used rubber bullets and batons to subdue Tatane during a service delivery protest in 2011.
Regional magistrate Hein van Niekerk found that the state could not prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Among some of his remarks, Van Niekerk said Tatane was not an innocent protester and that he was violent on the day and obstructed police in their duties.
The ruling was received by outrange, with some raising questions about how the NPA handled the case.
But Majokweni, who believes the NPA had done its job, said the outcome is not what they have hoped for themselves.
“The NPA would have hoped for an outcome that would not leave such deep disappointment and pain not only to the family, but the entire nation,” she said.
She reiterated that the NPA discharged its duties in this matter. “We can only prosecute on what we receive as evidence … witnesses were only good on paper.”
Explaining the process, Director of Public Prosecutions in South Gauteng, Xolisile Khanyile, said there were a number of people who came forward to say what they had seen but they changed their stories during consultations.
“We had prior consultations with witnesses and we did not anticipate recanting,” she said.
According to the NPA, a total of 35 witness statements were obtained and filed in the police docket.
These witnesses are made out of nine members of the community whose statements relate to the protest march; 19 members of the South African Police Service, the majority of whom are colleagues of the accused; four members of the investigating team from IPID and the rest are related to chain evidence.
From reading the witness statements, of the 19 police officials who made statements, only six positively identified the accused upon viewing footage from the two videos that were admitted as evidence.
During the trial, two of the three remaining witnesses denied the content of their original statements, especially in so far as it related to the identity of the accused.
The third witness had difficulties in explaining the contradictions between his evidence in chief and the evidence he had given during the disciplinary hearing against the police officers.
The three police witnesses could not withstand cross examination and were found by the court to be evasive, not credible and unreliable.
Another witness mixed up the identities of the accused during his testimony, to the extent that the defence found it unnecessary to cross-examine him.
Majokweni explained that the prospects of convincing the court of the identities of the accused would not meet the evidential weight that the court required.
“Unfortunately it was not possible to present ballistic evidence regarding the bullets fired at the deceased, as he was struck with rubber bullets. It is impossible for ballistics to link rubber bullets to a specific firearm, unlike in a case where live rounds are used.”
Reacting to reports that the NPA has failed Tatane, Majokweni said the role of prosecutors in a court system was to present evidence to the court and not to investigate.
“For that we needed reliable and credible evidence that will stand the stringent test of proving a case beyond a reasonable doubt.” - SAnews.gov.za
