Why South Africans are losing trust in their security forces
One that isn't expressed in protest or petitions, but in silence. People no longer expect the system to protect them — not from criminals, not from corrupt politicians, and indeed not if they decide to speak out. Confidence in the country's security cluster is in freefall, and the state's latest handling of Minister Senzo Mchunu's scandal has only deepened the sense that truth and accountability have no place in today's political landscape.
On July 13, President Cyril Ramaphosa placed Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on special leave, following explosive allegations by KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi. The commissioner accused Mchunu of colluding with criminal syndicates, interfering in politically sensitive murder investigations, and using his authority to disband a task team probing over a hundred unsolved political killings. The accusations, if true, represent one of the most brazen breaches of public trust by a sitting minister in recent memory.
Yet despite the severity of the claims, Mchunu has not been fired. He hasn't even been suspended without pay. Instead, he's been quietly placed on paid leave while a commission of inquiry is established. And just like that, a man accused of undermining the very foundations of justice is allowed to retreat — salary and benefits intact — while the public waits, once again, for answers that may never come. The optics of this decision are catastrophic. At a time when public trust in the police has dropped to an all-time low — a recent HSRC survey found only 22% of South Africans have confidence in SAPS — the president's response appears more like damage control than leadership. And for whistleblowers, it sends a devastating message: the system doesn't just fail to protect you; it may actively reward those who put you in danger.
This isn't a theoretical issue. Whistleblowers in South Africa operate in one of the most hostile environments in the democratic world. Those who expose corruption or criminal wrongdoing often face threats, intimidation, legal harassment, or even death. Babita Deokaran's assassination in 2021 was not just a tragedy — it was a signal that speaking out in this country can be a death sentence. Since then, government promises to strengthen whistleblower protection laws have amounted to little more than lip service.
Draft proposals to reform the Protected Disclosures Act have yet to materialise into action. Civil society groups have repeatedly called for a comprehensive system that includes safe housing, financial support, legal assistance, and psychological care for whistleblowers. But those calls continue to go unanswered. Now, in the wake of the Mchunu scandal, the stakes have never been clearer. If a police minister can be accused of sabotaging investigations and remain in office, even temporarily, what hope is there for those who come forward with information that implicates people in power? A judicial commission, led by acting deputy-chief Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, has been tasked with investigating the allegations. Its scope includes not just Mchunu's conduct, but broader issues of interference in the justice system by political actors. It is a necessary process, and if handled with urgency and transparency, it could restore some faith in the rule of law. But South Africans have seen this play before. Commissions that take months, sometimes years, to deliver findings. Recommendations that gather dust. Promises that fade into the next news cycle.
The danger isn't just that whistleblowers will stop coming forward. It's that the public will stop caring. When accountability becomes a performance, people turn away. When justice is delayed indefinitely, it begins to resemble impunity. Ramaphosa came into office promising to clean up the state, rebuild trust, and restore integrity to public office. However, his leadership has often favoured caution over conviction. Political stability has come at the expense of moral clarity. At this moment, South Africans don't need another commission. They need a firm, unambiguous stand — a declaration that those who compromise justice will not be protected by proximity to power.
It's not too late. The president can still act decisively. He can remove Mchunu from his position, demand expedited action from the inquiry, and push forward urgent reforms to protect whistleblowers. These are not radical demands — they are the minimum standard in any functioning democracy. The next whistleblower is out there. They might be a municipal clerk, a junior accountant, a medical officer, or a police officer with a conscience. They're watching the Mchunu case unfold. They're reading the silence. And they're asking themselves one very human question: is it worth it? Right now, the answer is uncertain. But if the president and his Cabinet fail to act swiftly and honestly, the silence that follows won't be peaceful — it will be the silence of a society giving up.
*Mayalo is an independent writer and analyst. The views expressed are not necessarily those of IOL and Independent Media
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
7 minutes ago
- The Citizen
Pandor calls on leaders to be good 'troublemakers' like Madiba
Pandor reflected on Mandela's life, his values, and the kind of world he envisioned. Former International Relations Minister Naledi Pandor delivering the keynote address at the official UN commemoration of Nelson Mandela International Day in New York on Friday. Picture: Nelson Mandela Foundation. As South Africans marked Nelson Mandela Day on Friday, former International Relations Minister Naledi Pandor called on world leaders to follow in the steps of Madiba by being 'good troublemakers.' Pandor delivered the keynote address at the official UN commemoration of Nelson Mandela International Day in New York on Mandela Day. 'Mandela a troublemaker' Speaking in her role as the chairperson of the Nelson Mandela Foundation, Pandor reflected on Mandela's life, his values, and the kind of world he envisioned. 'While we all, with great affection, refer to President Mandela's first name as 'Nelson', the name that he was actually given at birth was 'Rolihlahla'. In isiXhosa, which was Mandela's mother tongue, the colloquial meaning of Rolihlahla is 'troublemaker''. She explained that while 'Rolihlahla' directly meant 'shake the tree', the isiXhosa name given to Madiba was 'troublemaker.' 'Mandela was a troublemaker. The kind of good troublemaker that we need more of in the world today, and the kind that we will continue to need well into the future. The kind of troublemaker that some people did not always love because he pushed for an equality that we should all enjoy and for the overcoming of a system of oppression which was called convenient and profitable to some,' said Pandor. As South Africans marked Nelson Mandela Day on Friday, former International Relations Minister Naledi Pandor called on world leaders to follow in the steps of Madiba by being 'good troublemakers.' #MandelaDay @TheCitizen_News — 𝙵𝚊𝚒𝚣𝚎𝚕 𝙿𝚊𝚝𝚎𝚕 ⚡️ (@FaizelPatel143) July 20, 2025 ALSO READ: 'They never stopped' – Naledi Pandor continues to receive threats 'Fierce man' Pandor said Mandela was a fierce man on matters of justice. 'He pushed for a kind of equality and the overcoming of a system of oppression that was convenient and profitable to some, a system that was defeated in South Africa, but which has yet to be eradicated globally.' SA's freedom Pandor told guests, including United Nations (UN) Secretary General António Guterres, about the role the UN played in South Africa's struggle for freedom. 'The United Nations steered us to freedom, stood against apartheid domination not through arms, but through bringing its undeniable moral weight into combat against injustice. That boldness, that courage is needed more and more today, and we hope as we remember and honour President Mandela, we recall his words, 'It is in your hands.' What would Madiba say? Pandor said the Nelson Mandela Foundation, which she now chairs, often gets asked what Mandela would say or do on certain issues if he were alive today. 'We, too, ask this question of ourselves. In the context of my call here today, the question arises – What kind of world would he be prepared to make good trouble for? Drawing on his life and work, and personal reflections, we believe that it would be a just world. 'A world where justice does not kneel to the rich and powerful; where our collective upliftment takes precedence over individual privilege; where the benefits and burdens of our society are equally shared; where our privilege and personal biases do not sway us from being just; and where our like or dislike of someone does not hinder us from doing what is right in relation to them. This is the kind of world that we need to make good trouble for,' Pandor said. ALSO READ: WATCH: 'SA showing world we have embraced constitutional democracy' − Pandor
The Citizen
an hour ago
- The Citizen
Disbanded police task team ‘tried to arrest Mchunu and Sibiya'
A month before Mchunu instructed the unit should be closed, it had reportedly begun working on arresting Sibiya. The task team at the centre of a fight between 'on leave' Senzo Mchunu and KZN police commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi had reportedly tried to arrest the police minister and deputy police commissioner Shadrack Sibiya. Mchunu instructed national police commissioner Fannie Masemola to disband the political killing task team in December 2024, suggesting that it did not add value to policing. However, a month before the closure instructions were given, it had reportedly begun working on arresting Sibiya. City Press sources within the security cluster said task team members had approached prosecutors in Gauteng and later Mpumalanga to secure a warrant of arrest. 'Last month, the police members who were travelling in a Mercedes-Benz V-class Kombi tried to obtain an arrest warrant from the director of public prosecutions for both Sibiya and Mchunu but were turned away. They were told that there was insufficient evidence that warranted arrest,' a source told the paper. Masemola confirmed earlier this month that he had not acted on the order to disband the unit, while it is unclear if his deputy, Sibiya, had done so on his behalf. In explosive allegations two weeks ago, Mkhwanazi claimed the task team had been shut down due to political interference and alleged that top police officials, including Mchunu, were linked to dodgy businessmen and alleged criminal syndicates. Mchunu denied these allegations and a judicial commission of inquiry has been established to investigate the claims. The minister and Sibiya have been placed on special leave amid the allegations. Mchunu was defiant on Friday, telling ANC supporters that black generals in the police had been placed there by the ANC, and suggesting they should be grateful to the party for their positions. 'The ANC appointed black generals so that we also have generals in the army and in the police. They should not trample on this opportunity they were given by the ANC,' Mchunu said. 'They got this opportunity through blood and sweat. There are those who deserved to wear those mantles and camouflage uniforms, but they are dead and they never got that opportunity. They died in the struggle. ALSO READ: MK party takes Ramaphosa to ConCourt over Mchunu special leave decision 'That will be the end of all of us' Speaking to broadcaster Newzroom Afrika, Mchunu also warned against a person acting as both accuser and judge. 'The day South Africa allows one person, whoever it is, to suspect someone and then investigate them, and then become a prosecutor, and then a judge, and issue a verdict all in one place. That would be the direct reversal of what the struggle for justice is about. 'That will be the end of all of us in the country,' he said. Mchunu said the justice system allowed allegations to be made, but had a system in place to test the claims and for the accused to defend themselves. 'It is fair to wait for the commission to deliberate. I support what the president decided. It is fair and square.' Mchunu 'not immune' from prosecution Ramaphosa's decision to place Mchunu on special leave has sparked fierce debate, with the MK party taking the matter to court and calling for the minister to be fired. ALSO READ: MK party takes Ramaphosa to ConCourt over Mchunu special leave decision There are also concerns that while he is on leave, Mchunu's influence in the police may impede the investigation. Parliament's legal advisor, advocate Andile Tetyana, said on Wednesday that Mchunu's leave did not grant him immunity. 'Minister Mchunu is not clothed with legal immunity by virtue of him being on special leave. We know for a fact now that he will be a material witness in the work of the commission and should criminal misconduct be found on his part, he will be charged and prosecuted,' he told parliament on Wednesday. Ramaphosa has defended his decision, saying punitive action against Mchunu would set a dangerous precedent. 'These allegations are serious. They are also untested. 'It is therefore necessary that we establish the facts through an independent, credible and thorough process so that we can ensure accountability and safeguard public confidence in the police service,' he said in Parliament this week. NOW READ: 'Get your popcorn factory ready' — McKenzie willing to testify at the commission into Mkhwanazi allegations
IOL News
3 hours ago
- IOL News
Trust in the judiciary: South Africa's crisis of confidence
President Cyril Ramaphosa appointed Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga to chair the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into allegations of corruption in the criminal justice system. Ramaphosa and the ANC have demonstrated that an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution is politically meaningless, says the writer. Image: Independent Media Archives Prof. Sipho Seepe South Africans live in hope. For seven nerve-wracking days, they waited patiently for President Cyril Ramaphosa to address them on one of the most pressing crises the country has faced since 1994. A week earlier, Lt. Gen. Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi had placed the entire criminal justice system on trial. Mkhwanazi implicated the Minister of Police, Senzo Mchunu, top brass, correctional services, senior politicians, and members of the judiciary in an intricate web of crime syndicates and drug cartels. The allegations put the country on the knife-edge. This is the stuff that collapses governments. When Ramaphosa finally faced the nation, the address was characteristically and predictably underwhelming. All opposition parties took potshots at Ramaphosa. Those who were disappointed in Ramaphosa's utterances have themselves to blame. First, Ramaphosa is not a man of courage. He has no backbone. Placed in a prickly situation, his instinct is to choose ANC's interests over those of the country. Second, Ramaphosa and the ANC have demonstrated that an oath to uphold and protect the constitution is politically meaningless. Third, Ramaphosa does not come with clean hands. The Phala Phala farmgate scandal must have weighed heavily on his mind. The independent parliamentary panel, comprising luminaries in law, found Ramaphosa to be possibly guilty of serious misconduct of violating section 96(2)(b) by acting in a way that is inconsistent with his office. Ramaphosa was also found to have violated section 96(2)(b) by exposing himself to a situation involving a conflict between his official responsibilities and his private business. The panel concluded that. 'Viewed as a whole, the information presented to the Panel, prima facie, establishes that (1) There was a deliberate intention not to investigate the commission of the crimes committed at Phala Phala openly.' The damning findings by the former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo-led panel have not triggered the usual knee-jerk reaction that we have come to expect from the self-appointed custodians of constitutionalism. If anything, they have been conspicuously silent and absent. Confronted by the ever-lingering prospect of possible impeachment of Ramaphosa over the farmgate scandal, the ANC did what it does best. It closed ranks and squashed parliament's attempt to establish a Multi-Party Committee to investigate its leader. An annoyed Thabo Mbeki wrote. 'Are we [the ANC] saying that we suspect or know that he (Ramaphosa) has done something impeachable and therefore decided that we must protect our president at all costs by ensuring that no Multi-Party Committee is formed?...... We acted as we did [as if] there was something to hide'. There is no way that Ramaphosa was going to throw Mchunu, one of his supporters, under the bus without facing serious political repercussions. The establishment of a judicial commission of inquiry was the only safe route open to Ramaphosa. It enables Ramaphosa to postpone addressing a tricky political question of dispensing with Mchunu's services. Be that as it may, the inquiry should not prevent the police from conducting criminal investigations against those implicated in the alleged commission of crimes. Neither does the commission absolve parliament of its oversight responsibility. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ With a president burdened by allegations of possible criminality, it would be foolhardy to expect that the recommendations of the Madlanga Judicial Commission of Inquiry will be taken seriously. That the country can be held in suspense by a President who has proved to be a constitutional delinquent reflects the pervasive sense of lack of accountability, paralysis, and resignation that grips the nation. South Africans deserve Ramaphosa. No self-respecting country would allow this. South Africans have expressed a sense of inquiry-fatigue. They have witnessed far too many commissions without any of them leading to discernible positive effects. Some commissions were demonstrably weaponised to target certain individuals disliked by the establishment. Ordinarily, had it not been for the fact that Mkhwanazi implicated judges in the commission of corrupt activities, the establishment of a judicial commission would be unquestionable. Matters become complex if one considers the fact that the very judiciary had decided that South Africans cannot be entrusted with information relating to who funded President Ramaphosa's 2017 ANC presidential candidacy. Mkhwanazi's allegations lend credence to the speculations that the reason the CR17 files are sealed is that they may implicate some members of the judiciary or their family members. Ramaphosa is lucky. Each time he asks the courts to seal matters that relate to him, the courts oblige. This raises several questions. What happened to transparency being the lifeblood of democracy? If Ramaphosa is innocent as he pretends, why rush to the courts for cover? Who are the funders and beneficiaries of the CR17 funds? The tendency to obfuscate issues whenever Ramaphosa is involved played itself out at the Constitutional Court. Instead of zeroing in on the bigger picture, the country's esteemed jurists inordinately debated whether the parliamentary panel had established a prima facie or sufficient evidence. Their colleague, Justice Owen Rogers, would have none of it. He contended. 'A person loses 8.7 million Rand, they would want to know who the investigating officer is, and has it been reported to the police. Is there a case pending? It is a common cause that there wasn't… There was a deliberate decision because the president wanted to keep secret the source of the money; that's the background to where the panel was coming from.' This invariably raises the perennial question: Who judges the judges? The former Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng answered that question when he contended that 'one of the things we needed to do as judges is to give reasons for our decisions that an ordinary man can understand. You must be worried when you read a judgment, and you are struggling to make sense of it.... We ought to know that partly, we account to the public through our judgments. Now, if you write in such a way that the public can't even understand what you are doing, what kind of accountability is that? We don't write for lawyers. We don't account to lawyers only; we account to every South African citizen.' The question becomes pertinent given society's growing mistrust of the judiciary. According to the 2018 Afrobarometer survey, 32% of South Africans suspect that judges are involved in corruption. In 2002, the level of mistrust was 15%. Responding to the 2021 Afrobarometer report on the society's loss of confidence in the judiciary, Chief Justice Mandisa Maya argued that 'the judiciary itself needs to do an introspection and check if we are to blame for this change of attitude towards the institution.' The chair of a commission of inquiry must be beyond reproach for the commission to enjoy legitimacy and credibility. For now, we can only speculate. And the picture is not rosy. * Professor Sipho P. Seepe is an Higher Education & Strategy Consultant. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
