The Hawks And The Alleged Zimbabwean Rendition II – The Two Independent Police Investigation Directorate Reports

This brief compares the IPID 1 & IPID 2 reports


Two purported Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) Reports which were released on 22 February 2015 by Times Live in an article entitled “Police watchdog does mystery U-turn on Dramat case”.  There has been some confusion about the relationship between these reports.  This brief sets out a comparison of them.

The first IPID (“IPID 1”) report is dated 22 January 2014 and signed by Mr Innocent Humbulani Khuba, who was the Acting Provincial Head of IPID in Limpopo. The second IPID (“IPID 2”) report is dated 18 March 2014 and was again signed by Mr Khuba. The second report was also countersigned by Mr M Sesoko, Acting Chief Director – Investigations and Information in the IPID National Office and Mr R J McBride, the Executive Director of IPID. 

At the outset it must be pointed out that some of the pages from the IPID 1 report are missing and hence we cannot examine the content stated on these pages.

The Purpose of the Reports

The purpose of the IPID 1 and IPID 2 reports was to investigate the conduct of police officials in the alleged illegal rendition of the Zimbabwean Foreign Nationals from South Africa back to Zimbabwe. In the Brief titled “THE HAWKS AND THE ALLEGED ZIMBABWEAN RENDITION: LET THE COURTS DECIDE”,  the differences between deportation, extradition and rendition are explained. The term rendition means the illegal forced movement of a person from one country to another. 

Much of the material in the two reports is identical or very similar in wording.  However, the IPID 2 report contains more material on telephone records of various individuals alleged to be involved in the illegal renditions.  Its analysis is also fuller. The recommendations of the reports are different regarding the findings, as indicated in the table below.  

General Comments

The HSF does not make any attempt to draw conclusions on the innocence or guilt of the individuals mentioned in these IPID reports. That it is a matter for the courts should anyone be prosecuted.  We have merely examined of the two reports will be conducted and noted their similarities and differences.

The reports mainly contain statements from potential witnesses and not affidavits.

Brig - Brigadier
Col – Colonel
CPA – Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977
Cpt – Captain
Cst - Constable
IPID – Independent Police Investigative Directorate
Lt-Gen – Lieutenant General  
Maj-Gen – Major General
TOMS – Tactical Operations Management System
W/O – Warrant Officer

Comparative Analysis of the Two IPID Reports 

IPID 1 IPID2 Discrepancies
Page 9: statement of Ndanduleni Richard Madilonga – mention is made of Lt-Gen Dramat knowing of the meeting of the Zimbabwean Police and Brig Mashuku and was told by Gen Dramat to let them come. Page 9: statement of Ndanduleni Richard Madilonga – there is a bit more info here after the words “ assist them in tracing suspects ...” there is additional info added stating that only Maluleke knew of this set up for the rendition and No mention is made of General Dramat being called. There is a discrepancy in the alleged  role of Lt-Gen Dramat which affects his knowledge of the Zimbabwean Police being in the country and involved in the rendition.
Page 23: Evidence in terms of section 205 of CPA 51 of 1977 (here are substantial changes) Page 23: Evidence in terms of section 205 of CPA 51 of 1977 (here are substantial changes)  

The changes are as follows:

1.     Evidence of Maj-Gen Sibiya’s cell records show that he communicated with officers involved including Gen Dramat – but Dramat did not respond to these sms’s.

The changes are as follows:

Evidence of Maj-Gen Sibiya’s cell phone records states that he was never at the arrest scenes or planning areas as alleged by members of Crime Intelligence

There is a change of focus from the act of communicating to the place of communication.
2.     Lt-Gen Dramat’s cell phone records are not mentioned in this report. It is stted here that Lt-Gen Dramat’s entire cellphone record does not show any interaction between him and the Zimbabwean police. There are photographs showing that the Zimbabwean entered the country but no evidence that they were with Dramat. The photos only show them with members of TRT, Cpt Maluleke and Members of Crime Intelligence. The second report contains an analysis of Lt-Gen Dramat’s cell phone calls.  The first does not.
3.     Cell phone records of Cpt Maluleke show that he liaised with Gen Dramat in outgoing sms’s to which Gen Dramat never replied.  He further called some Zimbabwean numbers and called Cpt Madilonga when he was near Musina and was corroborated by Cpt Madilonga.   There is no change in these statements.
4.     Cell phone records of Col Neethling – directly reporting to Maj-Gen Sibiya,  Col Neethling stated that he believed that he reported the operation to Maj-Gen Sibiya. No mention is made of this record in this report. The reports differ on whether information was given to Maj-Gen Sibiya.
5.     Cell phone calls by Col Madilonga:  (a) to Cpt Maluleke to cross the border with the suspects (b) to Lt-Gen Dramat. The records confirm Col Madilonga’s version. There is no change in these statements.
6.     No mention of this person here. General Hlatswayo stated that she did not know anything about the deportations and she was never present at the scene of Fourways where the alleged arrest took place. New statements
7.     No mention of this person here. Cell phone records of Gen Lebeya reported.  No allegation that he knew of the operation or arrest of the Zimbabwean Nationals. New statement.
8.     No mention of these people here Cpt Nkosi, W/O Makoe and Cst Radebe: cell phone records confirm that they were at the scene.  The allegation that they stole from the people arrested is not corroborated. New information.
On Page 24: mention is made to statements of Lt-Gen Mkhwanazi and Lt-Gen Lebeya who stated that they had contact with both Cpt Maluleke and Gen Dramat about the rendition.  Lt-Gen Lebeya stated that  a success report on the operation was submitted in accordance with normal practice. On Page 24 – 25 Ms Jennifer Irish-Qhobosheane’s statement is also included.. She states that she is the head of the Civilian Secretariat and the Secretary of Police and that she only became aware of the renditions when she saw the Sunday Times and then received two official responses which were requested by the Minister from the DCPI. Based on such information the Minister felt that there needed to be a further inquiry into the matter. The role of the Minister of Police
On Page 24 – 25 – no mention of  statements by senior members of SAPS

On Page 24 – 25:  Statements :

Gen Dramat: did not authorise the unlawful deprivation of liberty and had never authorised the kidnapping of the Zimbabwean Nationals.

Gen Sibiya: never appointed as head of TOMS, but received reports regarding success as a matter of routine and was never part of the Zimbabwean rendition operation.

Lt Col Mahlangu Maluleke: exercised right to remain silent.

New statements from senior officers
On Page 25- last line on second paragraph is extended in IPID Report 2. On Page 25 – includes the extra line on paragraph 2 at the end to read: “There were also four Detention Warrants, four Deportation Notifications and a copy of Witness Ndeya’s Death Certificate”. Raises issues about deportation or rendition
On Page 26 – dates set out differently on the 4th paragraph last line which states information was received on 28/01/2013 regarding receiving information. On Page 27: Dates set out differently – in the second paragraph the date for receiving information is changed to 7/03/2013  
Pages 28-29 Missing.

Page 28:  information regarding the overtime claims for the periods 1/11/2010-31-01-2011, approved trip itineraries etc and logbooks for Col Maluleke and receiving of success reports included in IPID 2 report only.

Also in last paragraph on page 28 – one of the members Avhashoni Desmond Pages missing from IPID 1. The content could be in the missing pages.




Takalani had pictures of Johnson Nyoni and Zimbabwean Police.

Brigadier Britz – who knew of the charges of Gordon Dube and arrest of Johnson Nyoni were known by him and a statement was requested from him.

Pages missing from IPID 1. The content could be in the missing pages.

Pages 30-35 Deals with analysis of the evidence which is summarized as follows:

Cpt Maluleke was the head of cross border desk at the DCPI to assist in the coordination and apprehending of cross border fugitives. His superior, Ms Leonie Verster stated that Cpt Maluleke carried out his duties without supervision from her and she did not know what was happening. Interpol’s W/O Kgomo stated that the correct procedures were not followed during the rendition as the Zimbabwean Nationals were not on the wanted list and no warrants were issued in their names.

Arrests of the four Zimbabwean Nationals were done by Cpt Maluleke and that the renditions were given in a report by Cpt Maluleke to Gen Dramat when called to account for the rendition.

Arrest of Prichard Chuma –Lt-Gen Sibiya not present as his cell phone records do not place him there. Cpt Maluleke instructed other officers to escort Prichard to the Beit Bridge – as confirmed by cell phone records of Cpt Maluleke.

Arrest of Gordon Dube and Johnson Nyoni – Again Cpt Maluleke arranged for this. He also has evidence on his laptop showing the communication between himself and the Zimbabwean Nationals  suspects in the operation.


Analysis and findings:

- Cpt Maluleke has been established to lead the rendition and used his position to acquire cooperation and did not follow the legal procedure.

- Regarding the theft – no evidence to show that the officers took the money from the Zimbabwean Nationals.

- Contradictions with regard to the assaults by Cpt Maluleke, Cpt Nkosi, W/o Makoe and Cst Radebe.

- Also that senior members of DCPI could not have known of his operations as Cpt Maluleke put his own name on the documents sent to Home Affairs.

- The meeting between Lt-Gen Dramat and the Zimbabwean Police based on a success report lacks detail and corroboration.

- No evidence placing Lt-Gen Sibiya on the scene of the renditions as evidenced by cell phone records.

- No evidence that Mzwandile Petros, Lt-Gen Dramat, Gen Toka, Gen Lebeya and Gen Hlatswayo were involved in the rendition.

Evaluations of the findings are substantially different.


That Gen Dramat, General Sibiya, Col Maluleke, Cst Radebe, Cpt Nkosi and W/O Makoe be charged criminally for Kidnapping, defeating the ends of justice and assault and theft in respect of Cpt Maluleke, W/O Makoe, Cst Radebe and Cpt Nkosi.


- No charges to be brought against Gen Dramat and Gen Sibiya- as no prima facie evidence against them.
- Col Maluleke – to sustain charges of kidnapping and defeating the ends of justice as prima facie evidence exists.

Recommendations are substantially different. 

Arvitha Doodnath - Researcher