Taxi boss Joe “Ferrari” Sibanyoni told the Madlanga Commission under oath on Tuesday that he has never taken part in any unlawful activity.
Minutes later, he asked the commission to stop questioning him about the criminal case he faces in the Delmas court.
Sibanyoni is the associate of Mpumalanga taxi boss Oupa “Bafana” Sindane. On Monday the commission heard evidence from WhatsApp chats taken from Sindane’s phone.
Before questioning began, Sibanyoni’s counsel, Adv Gqomfa, told the commission her client had not given up his rights.
“At no point has Mr Sibanyoni waived his right, first, to innocence and, secondly, to remain silent. And as a matter of fact, to be tried by a competent court where he has not purposefully or intentionally implicated himself or the co-accused with whom he is charged,” she said.
She said Sibanyoni is also a witness in a case involving Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala. She said he was the victim of a targeted attack on his life.
“I think in truth, for Mr Sibanyoni, it’s just the decision to say: I am here to testify in that criminal case, and I do not intend to air whatever testimony I aim to air before that court,” she said.
Commission chairperson Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga asked what legal principle she was relying on.
“Chair, no, I am not talking about a legal principle at all,” Gqomfa replied.
Madlanga told her: “That’s exactly what counsel should never do. You don’t make a proposition just because your client wants you to.”
Gqomfa said the defence had raised the issue at the start “for the decency that the commission deserves”.
“We have highlighted those areas that Mr Sibanyoni has decided he will not address,” she said.
Evidence leader Adv Matthew Chaskalson said Sibanyoni has a privilege against self-incrimination. But he said Sibanyoni must claim it for each question, and in good faith.
Madlanga agreed. He said the commission had dealt with Matlala’s evidence the same way, one question at a time.
He said it was not proper to argue “in a broad, generalised manner” that no questions at all could be asked about the case.
Chaskalson read from Sibanyoni’s first statement to the commission.
In it, Sibanyoni says: “I have never directed, financed, commissioned or participated in any unlawful activity.”
The statement adds: “The Delmas charges are charges which I deny and I intend to contest fully.”
Chaskalson asked whether he was happy to say this under oath.
“Yes,” Sibanyoni said. Chaskalson then turned to a statement by businessman Dr Ntuli. Ntuli is from Middelburg and ran a quarry in the Kwaggafontein area.
Sibanyoni said Ntuli needed him as a local partner.
“If you were to operate in my area, it is clear that there is a certain percentage that you give to the locals, which is allocated as 30%. So if you are not from that surrounding, for sure you don’t qualify for that. It’s a written rule,” he said.
“Mr Ntuli never qualifies for that for the mere fact that he’s from Middelburg,” he said.
Asked where the rule was written, he pointed to community liaison officers. He could not name a source.
“I can’t take you to a specific rule, in terms of: this is the rule on page 30, page 45. But the common understanding that is there is that one needs to give 30% as local content,” he said.
Madlanga said the commission would insist on seeing it.
“We will insist that we should be shown or given that rule, where exactly that rule comes from,” he said.
Gqomfa referred the commission to a statement by Ntuli in the bundle.
“It’s not Mr Sibanyoni’s answer. It is the context that is placed on record by Mr Ntuli himself,” she said.
Chaskalson read the page. He said it referred to no rule and no 30% requirement. Gqomfa then apologised and gave a different page.
Asked how he qualified as local when he lives in Pretoria, Sibanyoni said he moves between Pretoria and Kwaggafontein.
“Ever since the age of five, I’ve been a Kwaggafontein person,” he said.
Sibanyoni said there was no written agreement with Ntuli.
“When we’re talking to each other, it’s not a matter of us bluffing or fooling each other. It’s a matter of adults talking, adults agreeing on the matter,” he said.
He said Ntuli proposed a 50-50 profit split. Sibanyoni said he offered 60-40 in Ntuli’s favour.
“You are the one on the ground. I will rely on you. Nothing to write about,” Sibanyoni said. He said that he put money into the venture about three months after quarrying began.
“I gave Mr Ntuli R900,000 in three pieces. I don’t have specific dates. Remember, this thing is almost five years ago now,” he explained.
Chaskalson said he imagined Sibanyoni had researched the matter closely, as he faces criminal charges over it.
Sibanyoni said the first two payments were cash and the last was a bank transfer from his personal Absa account. He could not say how much the transfer was.
Gqomfa said the defence had a record of the last payment. Madlanga warned her to be careful not to testify from the bar.
Sibanyoni then asked the commission to leave the matter to the Delmas court.
“The Delmas court is listening to this commission. Mr Ntuli is listening to this commission. So I find it very strange that we get deep into this matter.
“If the matter is sub judice, can we just park this matter outside, because there is a court that is going to deal with it. So if Mr Chaskalson is pushing this matter that it must be heard here, it prejudices my rights,” he said.
“I’m under oath here as well. Under oath, once you’ve said between R10 and R15, tomorrow it’s R16, but you are under oath. Then I don’t have a leg to stand on. If I were to be found guilty, I’ll blame Mr Chaskalson. I’m incriminated. I’m getting sentenced for things that Mr Chaskalson was not allowed to do,” he said.
Chaskalson replied that Sibanyoni could decline to answer any question that might incriminate him. But he said Sibanyoni would have to explain how he could claim that privilege “when his basic statement is that he denies categorically that he’s done anything unlawful”.
The hearing continues.
