* Michelle Mateza, Desmond Tutu, DL Tutu Legacy Foundation, Romaney Pinnock, IJR, Brian McConnell, Dept of Justice TRC Unit, Mochubela Seekoe
* 05 Jun: LJ Re CCMA: 1063-20: LJ v TRC: 05 June Tel Call
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub: LJ v TRC, EoP v Nobel, LJ v MoJ / EoP NWO SCO: EoP NTE GM: EoP NTE GMA: EoP NTE GMRU: EoP NTE GMZA| EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP Academia, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity, EoP v WiP Peacenik / EoP v WiP Neg.
From: Lara Johnson <email@example.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2020 15:22:31 +0200
Subject: CCMA: 1063-20: LJ v TRC: 04 June Tel Call
To: “GRG-Senior Case Management Officer: Michelle Mateza” <MichelleM@CCMA.org.za>
Cc: “Desmond Tutu via DL Tutu Legacy Foundation: Romaney Pinnock” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “IJR: Brian McConnell” <email@example.com>, “Dept of Justice TRC Unit: Mochubela Seekoe: Lufuno Mmbadi” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Thapelo Mokushane <email@example.com>
TO: CCMA Karyn Lee Small
CC: CCMA: Michelle Mateza, Zamangwevu Moshani:
CC: TRC Respondents: Desmond Tutu, Inst Justice & Reconciliation, DoJ TRC Unit:
Karyn Lee Small via Michelle Mateza:
Re: CCMA: 1063-20: LJ v TRC: 04 June Tel Call.
Telephone call from 044-805 7700
A woman from CCMA calling herself Mr. Phillips.
Paraphrased transcript of discussion:
She requested information about the respondents. I requested her to put her request for information in writing. She declined saying it was two very simple questions, which the CCMA required before placing the matter down on setdown. Who did I work for, who were the respondents? I said the matter had been setdown, but was postponed due to lockdown not having provided for CCMA as essential services. I said did she read the complaint?. She said she did. I said well then what does it say on the complaint. She said: Tutu Foundation, Inst for Justice and Reconciliation and Dept of Justice TRC Unit. I asked if she was legally representing the respondents. If the respondents dispute any issues of the complaint, they can do so in writing in their notice to oppose. I said as of date the respondents had not yet filed a notice to oppose. She said her supervisor had asked her to telephone. I asked what her supervisors name is: She said: Karyn Lee Small. I said why didn’t you ask your gutless supervisor to put her questions in writing? I asked her what her supervisors email was, and I would contact her supervisor to request the supervisor put her questions in writing. She refused to give me her or her supervisors email address. She again asked about the respondents. I said the respondents have not filed a notice to oppose. If they choose to do so once the matter is setdown they can do so, and I will respond to the respondents notice to oppose statements.
She said this was a private off the record confidential telephone call. I told her I never provided her with permission to make a private off the record telephone call. If she had asked I would have told her to take her backstabbing secret society and shove it where it fits best. Call back when you want an honest transparent on the case court record conversation. I put down the phone.
EoP/OKC TRC Negotiations correspondence is published at EoP Leg Sub [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za]
EoP MILED Clerk [EoP Oath PDF]
16 Taaibos Ave, Heatherpark, George, 6529