Staff Reporter.
Former Social Development Minister Bathabile Dlamini appeared at the Johannesburg Magistrate’s Court. Photo Credit:Veli Nhlapo.
The perjury case against former social development minister and ANC Women’s League president Bathabile Dlamini has been set down to proceed for plea and trial in November.
The Johannesburg Magistrate’s Court dismissed objections raised by counsel on behalf of Dlamini on Friday.
“It is my view that the objections levelled by the defence have no merits at this point,” Magistrate Betty Khumalo said in her ruling.
Dlamini appeared in the court on a case of perjury.
During proceedings, advocate Tshepiso Mphahlane addressed the court on several objections in the matter.
Mphahlane argued that perjury was not a priority offence and fell outside the mandate of the Hawks.
Mphahlane said:”Without doubt perjury is not a national priority offence – so why are the Hawks involved in this matter? Is it because Ms Dlamini is a former minister, or because she is a politician?”
Dlamini’s counsel further argued that the former minister was an ordinary citizen and was entitled to be treated objectively.
“Should this persist, we will consider options available to Dlamini, including approaching the High Court for appropriate relief,” he said.
Mphahlane further raised an objection to the matter being heard in the regional court, as “perjury matters are not ordinarily dealt with in the regional court”.
The State’s advocate, Jacob Serepo, in reply, submitted that the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) does not determine who investigates a case.
He said: The State further submitted that the said offence fell under the category that says any other offence.
“As to whether the accused was a former minister, that is not a criteria that was used. There [are] no ulterior motives,” it added.
The case relates to her testimony during an inquiry the Constitutional Court had instituted into her role in the 2017 social grants crisis.
The matter returns to court from 24 to 26 November.
The National Prosecuting Authority’s spokesperson Phindi Mjonondwana welcomed the court’s decision.
“We welcome the decision by the court that found that the defence’s objections had no merit. We had argued as the state that as the NPA, we reserve the right to choose where the matter should be enrolled,” she said.
Mjonondwana defended the “unlawful” involvement of the Hawks, saying the state could not dictate who should be appointed to investigate criminal matters, adding that the mandate of the Hawks went beyond serious crimes.