McBride defends controversial investigation methods in Phahlane case

Former Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) head Robert McBride on Tuesday said the police watchdog body conducted a “white man thing” when they accessed the home of former acting national commissioner Khomotso Phahlane during their investigation.

Testifying before the parliamentary inquiry into allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, McBride confirmed that Phahlane had complained about IPID officials visiting his home with the complainant and forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan, who identified himself as an investigator when investigating fraud, corruption, and money laundering against him.

He told the Ad Hoc Committee that he did not respond to Phahlane and that the business card left by the investigators belonged to one of them.

McBride said the investigators told him that O’Sullivan was pointing a crime scene and that they went there in his car because the IPID bakkie had space for only two people.

“When I asked why Paul O’Sullivan was allowed to take the lead in some instances, the answer was they were doing a white man thing,” he said, adding that the IPID officers stated that, as blacks, they get ignored and don’t get access to places.

“That is how they have had access,” he said, referring to the IPID investigator accessing the home of Phahlane, adding that the estate manager leaked information to O’Sullivan as his informant.

McBride said he did not say what the IPID officers did was wrong, saying they played the way they did to get information.

“I don’t micro-manage and don’t second-guess people. I am not a specialist. I take specialists and pull them together to make a good cause.”

He noted that Phahlane had complained to Parliament, and they had to answer in his presence in the meeting of the Police Portfolio Committee.

“A suspect is a suspect. It is craziness that should not have been done, and we had to do that.”

McBride defended the investigation into Phahlane, saying there were complaints from a whistle-blower, a service provider, and the estate manager, who knew what was happening despite the former police boss denying kickbacks.

O’Sullivan had also lodged a complaint about tender irregularities and irregular appointments.

The former IPID boss said complaints against Phahlane were from the Eastern Cape, Gauteng, and the national office, including Popcru.

“There were not enough resources. We later established a unit called national special investigative task team. After I left, it was disbanded. I did not go and do a media conference,” he said about how the investigators came to be called the Phahlane task team.

Speaking on some of the investigations, McBride told the inquiry that there was a complaint that Phahlane’s house was valued at R8 million and that he could not afford it, and there were reports that he received money from service providers and the vehicles that were not declared in the gift register.

“The key issue is the amount to acquire the cars,” he said, adding that the cars were a gratification.

McBride maintained that the value of the cars Phahlane traded in was more than the market value and was resold at exorbitant amounts.

“That is what we looked at,” he said.

Earlier, McBride told the Ad Hoc Committee that the IPID investigation into SAPS deputy national commissioner Shadrack Sibiya and former DPCI head Anwar Dramat, who were implicated in kidnapping and defeating ends of justice in the illegal rendition of Zimbabweans, was not done independently.

Before his appointment in March 2014 as IDPI head, there was a progress report on the illegal rendition.

He said he had asked to be briefed on all big high-profile cases.

“In the rendition case, it became clear to me that the investigation had not been conducted independently and impartially in line with IPID Act,” he said.

“SAPS Crime Intelligence conducted the investigation and presented their case to IPID. I was not satisfied by this as Crime Intelligence does not have investigating function and it smacked of an attempt to present their work as the work of IPID,” McBride said.

He also said the final report issued on the matter exonerated Sibiya and Dramat following the review of evidence and additional evidence gathered.

McBride also said the first report did not factor in the cellphone record analysis.

“On studying the report, it was clear General Sibiya was not anywhere near the scene of the crime, and it appeared it was a stitch-up,” he added.

mayibongwe.maqhina@inl.co.za