The women in the blue and yellow SAPS hostess sashes kept a watchful eye as MPs, dignitaries and senior officials of the Hawks, and the police queued at the buffet of scrambled eggs, sausages and yoghurt. Nowhere to be seen was Hawks head Lieutenant-General Mthandazo (Berning) Ntlemeza. Earlier he had said that “some in the media are driving a negative agenda to undermine the Hawks”. Instead of using media platforms, Ntlemeza, referring to the DPCI Judge, said: “(We) urge communities to use this arm of government.”

The elephant in the room, of course, was the Hawks’ quest to have Gordhan respond to 27 questions on the SARS rogue unit on pain of being subpoenaed. A flurry of letters has been exchanged over the past couple of weeks. On Sunday Gordhan’s office issued a statement in which the minister again reiterated that the Hawks should state on what legal authority they are pursuing their investigation and on what charge. It also reiterated that the Hawks’ deadline to answer the questions could not be met: the minister was focused on preparing and delivering the budget, and then on an overseas roadshow to ensure South Africa staved off a downgrade to junk status.

While Ntlemeza did not answer questions at the launch, journalists were told there would be a statement. And when it dropped a few hours later, it was hard-hitting in its dismissal of Gordhan’s “utterances”.

“The minister, for whatever reasons, has failed to meet the second (statement’s emphasis) deadline for answering questions and our legal team are forging a way forward which will see the Hawks exercising our constitutional powers. The investigations will not be stalled by an individual who refuses to comply with the authorities and demand a preferential treatment,” said the Hawks statement, adding there would be no further comment.

Following the launch of the Office of the DPCI Judge, Police Minister Nkosinathi Nhleko was asked about the tensions, but told reporters he did not respond to “non-issues”. At a previous media briefing he’s gone on public record to say: “You can’t have a charge unless you completed an investigation. There are possible violations under the laws which would have been transgressed”.

Tuesday’s event may have wanted to cock a snook amid the heave-to over this particular Hawks probe. It was a show of something; a show of business as usual perhaps amid displays of officialdom power? Guests were instructed to stand just before Nhleko walked into the Old Assembly dining room, a point of protocol most ministers seem to eschew although it is standard practice for the president. The doors were closed when the minister started to speak in an echo of how the president conducts his public speaking engagements. Applause at the right moment was offered at the nudging by the programme director, who likened the relationship between the Hawks and the Office of the DPCI Judge to one of courtship. The judge asked, the Hawks agreed, he said.

But few paid attention to the fact the office for complaints against the Hawks has been in place since 2010, even as what was called a “co-operative framework” was signed underneath the oversized photos of South Africa’s first Parliament, Nelson Mandela arm in arm with apartheid’s last president FW de Klerk and the speaker of the first ever democratic national legislature, Frene Ginwala.

The office was established in terms of Section 17L of the South African Police Service Act. Its mission is to “execute an oversight role in respect of the investigations conducted by the Hawks”, “safeguard and secure members of the Hawks against improper interference, whether political or otherwise” and to “create an environment in which members of the Hawks can conduct their investigations without fear or favour and prejudice”, according to the official info booklet.

The 2014-15 annual report of the Office of the DPCI Judge shows the office, which struggled until 2014 to get off the ground with office space, staff and budgets, had received 21 complaints in total. Fourteen were received in the 2014-15 financial year, one from a Hawks member and the remainder from members of the public. Four complaints were closed and the reports submitted to Nhleko, the annual report said, without outlining what the investigations concluded.

Judge Moosa said it would be up to the police minister to act on these complaints; the powers of his office did not extend to this. However, the office was also submitting trends in complaints to the ministry for further action.

It remains unclear what happened to the judge’s completed files once they reached the ministry. What is known courtesy of the 2014/15 annual report, the latest available, is that the closed cases include one of intimidation and harassment against a senior Hawks member in the Western Cape, abuse of power against a senior member of the Hawks and a politician in the North West and one complaint of intimidation laid by a Hawks member against a senior Buffalo City municipality official.

One complaint of corruption against Hawks members in New Brighton, Nelson Mandela Bay Metro, could not be substantiated by evidence. Another case of “allegations of service delivery” against Hawks members in Nelspruit was finalised, and submitted to prosecutors for a decision, although the final report to the minister was yet to be completed.

Delivering his official speech, Nhleko said the launch was one of several to raise awareness of the Office of the DPCI Judge.

“Democracy, precisely because it is based on the will of the people, has many checks and balances,” he said before going off script to raise questions as to why these days everyone including commentators and others think they could determine what was constitutional.

“In this country there is only one institution designated to make findings on the Constitution, and that’s the Constitutional Court,” said Nhleko. “Since when have people graduated to assume such a role?” DM

Photo: Judge Essa Moosa (Kurdishinfo.com)