AfriForum is set to pursue legal action against ANC Secretary General Fikile Mbalula for his controversial 2016 family holiday to Dubai.
AfriForum strikes gold in Fikile Mbalula Dubai holiday case
The lobby group’s Private Prosecution Unit recently made a significant breakthrough in the case against Mbalula after obtaining the police docket related to the controversial 2016 Dubai holiday.
This step follows a successful Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) application, which enabled the unit to access critical evidence.
The unit’s spokesperson, Barry Bateman, expressed confidence in the case.
He asserted that the case docket contained glaring inconsistencies and failures in the initial investigation that suggest Mbalula may have received undue protection from prosecution.
“Mbalula’s matter may be the clearest case yet of selective prosecution, where a politically connected person and his well-to-do benefactors is sheltered from prosecution,” Bateman said.
AfriForum’s evidence against Mbalula: What was found?
Upon initial examination of the docket, AfriForum uncovered several pieces of evidence suggesting corruption.
The investigation revealed that Mbalula’s luxurious trip was funded by benefactors who allegedly supported his extravagant lifestyle.
The unit identified significant investigative shortcomings, including collusion between witnesses and the SAPS, the absence of statements from key witnesses, and critical data that was never obtained.
“Notably, a statement from one of Mbalula’s main benefactors was not included in the docket. We are shocked, but not surprised, because we warned the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) of a clear conflict of interest because of the family relations with a senior NPA official,” Bates added.
These lapses raise serious questions about the integrity of the initial investigation and the decision not to prosecute.
Questions raised about NPA and SAPS failure to investigate Mbalula
AfriForum’s findings have cast a spotlight on the NPA and SAPS, accusing them of selectively protecting politically connected individuals like Mbalula.
The unit pointed out that crucial statements, especially from Mbalula’s primary benefactors, were missing from the docket.
Furthermore, the initial investigation seemingly accepted claims at face value without proper scrutiny.
Bateman suggested that family ties within the NPA may have contributed to this leniency, further alleging that the case exemplifies selective prosecution.
Mbalula had not responded to requests for comment when this article was published.