Latest news with #SenzoMchunu
Eyewitness News
2 days ago
- Politics
- Eyewitness News
Is Parliament likely to get to the bottom of the alleged cops corruption scandal?
The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional development has recommended that the National Assembly set up an ad hoc committee to investigate claims of corruption in the police service. Suspended minister Senzo Mchunu has been accused of interfering with criminal investigations in order to protect his associates and criminal overlords. He has been placed on special leave, but police continue to make arrests - especially of some of the names mentioned by his accuser, KZN Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi. RELATED: Police Minister Mchunu is under criminal investigation for lying to Parliament - Baxolile 'Bax' Nodada, DA South Africans are left wondering whether the commission of inquiry set up by President Ramaphosa will get to the nub of the allegations, and do so timeously? Zikala says the hope is that Members of Parliament put the interests of the country first...
IOL News
2 days ago
- Politics
- IOL News
South Africa Needs Action, Not Another Commission of Inquiry
Opposition parties say President Cyril Ramaphosa could have used the existing crime-fighting state institutions to investigate Senzo Mchunu instead of appointing a commission. Image: IOL Graphics Opposition parties say President Cyril Ramaphosa could have used the existing crime-fighting state institutions to investigate Senzo Mchunu instead of appointing a commission. Image: IOL Graphics South Africa stands at a critical juncture in its democratic journey, yet again faced with the painful realisation that those entrusted with the stewardship of the nation are, in many cases, the very ones who betray it. 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 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. Next Stay Close ✕ The recent decision to establish yet another commission of inquiry into deeply troubling allegations involving senior political figures and criminal syndicates is, frankly, a smokescreen. It is not justice. It is not urgent. It is a distraction. We do not need another commission to tell us what we already know. What we need is political will. What we need is action. Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi's testimony was not vague. It was not speculative. It was not an anonymous whisper or third-hand hearsay. It was prima facie evidence — clear, credible, and damning. In any functioning state where law enforcement operates independently and accountability is more than a buzzword, such testimony would have immediately triggered charges or, at the very least, an expedited investigative process. Instead, what we are seeing unfold is an elaborate performance of 'doing something' – the favourite tactic of those in power when the heat gets too close to the source. The establishment of commissions of inquiry has, over the years, become the ANC's go-to strategy for placating public anger. Recall the Zondo Commission: four years, over a billion rand spent, and while it uncovered monumental corruption and state capture, how many implicated high-level figures are now behind bars? Very few. The culture of impunity persists, emboldened by the fact that inquiries often produce reports, rather than justice. In the current scenario, a parliamentary inquiry could and should have sufficed. Parliament is the appropriate forum for holding the executive to account. It has both the constitutional mandate and the power to summon individuals, demand documents, and refer matters for prosecution. By launching a full-scale commission instead, those in power are effectively kicking the can down the road—again. Let us be blunt: the ANC is at war with itself, and South Africans are the collateral damage. What we are witnessing is not governance; it is a gang war masquerading as a political process. The allegations made by Mkhwanazi point to a deep rot in our law enforcement and political structures, one that implicates senior ANC leaders in direct or complicit involvement with organised crime. If we were a country truly governed by the rule of law, these individuals would be investigated, charged, and, if found guilty, imprisoned. But the ANC does not cleanse itself. It protects its own. Worse still, the deployment of commissions is a strategy to neutralise whistleblowers and reformists within the system. It creates the illusion of accountability while buying time for accused individuals to regroup, destroy evidence, or mobilise counter-narratives. And let us not forget: commissions do not suspend the presumption of innocence, nor do they have the power to prosecute. They merely recommend, suggest, and report. The burden of actual justice remains on institutions that, by all accounts, are either captured or too weak to act independently. We must ask ourselves: Who benefits from this delay? Indeed not the South African public, who continue to endure failing infrastructure, rising crime, and economic stagnation. Indeed, not the honest civil servants who risk their lives and careers speaking truth to power. The only beneficiaries of this delay are the criminal-political elite, those who wear the colours of the liberation movement by day and run extortion rackets by night. It is also important to call this what it is: political cowardice. The president and senior leadership of the ANC have had multiple opportunities to take decisive action, to show that no one is above the law. Each time, they have chosen instead to prioritise party unity over national interest. In doing so, they have betrayed the very ideals they claim to uphold. This is no longer a question of evidence. It is a question of courage. The SAPS and Hawks must act on the information presented. The NPA must follow through without fear or favour. Parliament must assert itself and not defer its responsibilities to time-consuming commissions. Civil society and the media must maintain pressure, refusing to be lulled into passivity by yet another promise of reform. The people of South Africa have been more than patient. We have waited through the arms deal, Marikana, Nkandla, state capture, Phala Phala—and now this. How much longer must we wait while our democracy is undermined by those who treat it as a personal fiefdom? We are not dealing with ideological disagreements or political rivalries. We are dealing with thugs—criminals embedded within the movement once tasked with liberating our people. The longer we deny this reality, the deeper the rot becomes. South Africa does not need another commission. South Africa needs a reckoning. *Mayalo is an independent writer. The views expressed here are not necessarily those of IOL and Independent Media
Free Malaysia Today
4 days ago
- Politics
- Free Malaysia Today
South Africa's Ramaphosa removes police minister over criminal link allegations
South Africa's President Cyril Ramaphosa said he will appoint law professor Firoz Cachalia as acting minister of police. (AP pic) JOHANNESBURG : South African President Cyril Ramaphosa placed police minister Senzo Mchunu on immediate leave of absence on Sunday, following accusations by a top police official that he had colluded with a criminal syndicate and interfered in high-profile investigations. Mchunu denied the allegations by Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, police commissioner of KwaZulu-Natal province, at a media briefing last Sunday. He said the accusations were baseless and in a statement issued by his spokesperson last week said he was committed to upholding the rule of law. Ramaphosa, whose rise to the highest office was built on promises to fight corruption, has been under pressure to act swiftly as political parties and citizens said the allegations called into question the integrity of the criminal justice system. Investors have for years expressed concern over rampant crime that the World Bank estimates costs South Africa an estimated 10% of gross domestic product each year. 'These allegations therefore call for an urgent and comprehensive investigation,' Ramaphosa said in a public address which was carried by the public broadcaster and private TV stations, adding he would establish a judicial commission of inquiry for this purpose. Ramaphosa said he will appoint law professor Firoz Cachalia as acting minister of police. Mchunu is a senior figure in Ramaphosa's African National Congress (ANC) party, and political analysts have said he could run for a leadership position at the ANC's next elective conference in 2027. Citing digital evidence such as WhatsApp messages, Mkhwanazi's allegations included that Mchunu had disbanded a police unit tasked with investigating politically motivated killings to protect politicians, police officers and other people linked to a criminal syndicate. Mkhwanazi said more than 100 case files were taken away from the political killings task team and have not been investigated further since. The Democratic Alliance party, the ANC's main coalition partner, called for a parliamentary inquiry into the allegations against Mchunu. At least one opposition party has called for his suspension.
Daily Maverick
4 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
MK party's ConCourt challenge to Mchunu's removal raises important constitutional law issues
The muted public response to the news that the uMkhonto Wesizwe (MK) party has asked the Constitutional Court to invalidate the decision by President Cyril Ramaphosa to place Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on a leave of absence and to appoint Professor Firoz Cachalia as acting minister of police, as well as the decision to establish a judicial commission of inquiry to investigate the allegations made by Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, is somewhat surprising. Even more surprising is the speed with which the court responded to the application, and the extremely tight deadlines the court set. On Sunday, a mere two days after the application was launched, the Chief Justice issued directions to all parties with an interest in the matter to file affidavits by no later than Monday (for amici) or Tuesday (for respondents), with the applicants having to file replying affidavits by Thursday. I can't recall any other matter in which the court has given respondents or amici two days or less to file their answering or intervening affidavits. This is even more surprising because it is not clear whether the matters raised by the MK party are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the court, or whether the application was not premature because the appointment of Cachalia had not yet happened. A third surprise is that the MK application does raise some genuine and important constitutional law issues, and largely avoids the usual mix of conspiracy theories, ad hominem attacks and complaints about victimhood normally found in the party's legal papers (its arguments in support of its challenge to the appointment of the commission of inquiry do include hints of the usual attempts to discredit the judiciary). Let me explain. Legal nonsense The MK party contends, first, that Ramaphosa's decision to place Mchunu on a leave of absence is irrational because 'it is tainted by bias, blatant inconsistency and other unfairness in the form of favouritism'. This argument is a legal nonsense. As any competent second-year student would know, a rationality review is not concerned with whether the decision was fair, wise or biased, but rather whether the decision was rationally related to the legitimate purpose being pursued. As head of the executive, the President enjoys an extraordinarily wide political discretion on the appointment and firing of ministers, on assigning functions to them, and on managing the Cabinet. As a matter of law, he may (and is expected to) pursue even blatantly self-serving political goals when doing so. It is for the electorate, not the courts, to hold him politically accountable for these decisions. A persuasive argument However, the MK party also contends that the decision was invalid because it was ultra vires. This was so because there is nothing in the Constitution that authorises the President to place a minister on a leave of absence. 'Leave of absence', it contends, is just 'a fancy phrase for suspension with pay.' I find this argument rather persuasive. It is a well-established constitutional principle that the President can only exercise powers entrusted to him by the Constitution and by legislation, although section 84(1) of the Constitution states that these powers include those 'necessary to perform the functions of the national executive'. The President might therefore argue that the power to place a minister on a leave of absence was necessary for him to perform his functions as head of the executive, but I don't find this convincing. It would be politically convenient for the President to have such a power, as it would allow him to signal to the gullible public that he is taking action while not upsetting the members of his party — the audience that matters to him more than any other. But it is not clear why it would be necessary for him to have such a power to do his job. There is, after all, nothing stopping the President from dismissing Mchunu now, and reappointing the minister later if the allegations against him turned out to be incorrect. The appointment of acting ministers MK also contends that the appointment of Cachalia as an acting minister was invalid, although the argument it advances in support of this contention is, at best, difficult to follow. But I would argue that there is a strong argument to be made that the appointment of Cachalia would be unconstitutional and invalid because the Constitution does not authorise the President to appoint acting ministers. (While I believe Cachalia would make an excellent minister of police, he can only serve as minister of police if he is lawfully appointed as such.) Section 91(2) of the Constitution authorises the President to appoint 'the Deputy President and Ministers', while section 91(3)(c) of the Constitution (which the President relied on) allows him to appoint 'no more than two Ministers' who are not members of the National Assembly. It is silent on the appointment of acting ministers, nor does section 91(1) mention acting ministers. It states that the 'Cabinet consists of the President, as head of the Cabinet, a Deputy President and Ministers'. Does this mean Cachalia would be an acting minister and thus not a member of the Cabinet? Moreover, section 98 of the Constitution, which provides for situations where it becomes necessary for someone to 'act' as minister on behalf of a colleague, makes clear that only a 'Cabinet member' can be assigned the power or function of another member 'who is absent from office or is unable to exercise that power or perform that function'. In other words, the President may assign the powers and functions of the minister of police to another 'Cabinet member', thus somebody lawfully appointed as a minister, but may not assign these powers to the non-existent position of 'acting minister', not least because 'acting ministers' are not members of the Cabinet. To ensure the lawful appointment of Cachalia to serve as minister of police, the President would have to appoint him as an ordinary member of the Cabinet who would, like all other ministers, serve as a minister until he is dismissed or he resigns. If Mchunu's 'leave of absence' is found to be valid, the President could then assign the powers of police minister to Cachalia as an existing member of the Cabinet. This means that even if the court invalidates the appointment of Cachalia, it might not have any practical effect as far as the appointment is concerned, as nothing would stop the President from fixing the problem by appointing Cachalia as a permanent Cabinet member. I am not a fan of political parties rushing to court to challenge the validity of decisions by the President or other elected functionaries or institutions that require the exercise of political discretion, especially when this will have little practical effect. However, this might be an exceptional case in which court intervention is not a bad thing. This is so because any invalidation of the appointment down the line would also render all the decisions taken by the 'acting minister' from the time of his appointment invalid, unless the court directs otherwise. Things could get messy if the court does not intervene. 'Judicial capture' The MK party's third contention, namely that the decision by the President to establish the judicial commission of inquiry was irrational because it was headed by a judge who would have to investigate the claims of 'judicial capture', is at best misguided. I assume the applicants are aware that this part of their case is hopeless, and suspect that it was included to provide a platform for MK leaders to continue their campaign to discredit the judiciary and pre-emptively lay the groundwork for discrediting any findings the commission of inquiry might make. The MK party contends that, given Mkhwanazi's vague allegations, we cannot assume that any judge is either guilty or innocent of the charges of judicial capture 'until it has been properly and independently investigated, confirmed or refuted'. This means the President has appointed a judge who could potentially have to investigate himself. It would also amount, according to MK, to the judiciary investigating itself. The party further argues that it would be in breach of the Constitution for the commission to investigate the allegations of judicial capture as the Constitution only empowers the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and/or the Magistrates Commission to investigate judicial conduct. As the leader of the MK party should know from personal experience, the first claim does not hold water. Judges are presumed to be impartial and have a duty to recuse themselves from hearing a matter if they are conflicted. A party which has evidence to the contrary should apply for the recusal of the specific judge. Our courts have long dismissed vague and unsubstantiated claims of this sort, and I have no doubt that Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga would do the same if such an application were made for him to recuse himself. As for the second argument, the JSC (and no other body) is authorised to investigate the conduct of individual judges against whom specific allegations have been made, but there is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits a commission of inquiry from looking into allegations of judicial capture or corruption, provided that any such investigation does not threaten the independence of the judiciary. It is not a foregone conclusion that the Constitutional Court will decide to hear the case, nor is it clear what the President might do if it emerges that valid constitutional concerns will scupper his scheme to smuggle a highly competent person into his otherwise underwhelming Cabinet. I for one, hope the President reverses course and decides to appoint Cachalia as a Cabinet minister in the normal constitutionally compliant way. DM
IOL News
5 days ago
- Politics
- IOL News
Mbalula defends ANC's step-aside rule from criticism amid Mchunu allegations
Minister Senzo Mchunu, was placed on leave of absence by President Cyril Ramaphosa last week. Image: Ayanda Ndamane/Independent Newspapers ANC secretary-general Fikile Mbalula defended the party against criticisms that it has selectively applied its step-aside rule when it comes to the allegations raised against former Minister Senzo Mchunu, who was placed on leave of absence by President Cyril Ramaphosa last week. Mbalula, came out to address the media during a short interval at the Cape Sun Hotel, where the ANC's National Working Committee (NWC) met with the Provincial Executive Committee. This forms part of the ANC's ongoing efforts to strengthen its organisational capacity and engage directly with structures of the movement across regions and districts. Mchunu, who was also present at the ANC's NWC meeting, faces allegations of corruption and malfeasance from KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi. 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 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. Next Stay Close ✕ The ANC has previously said it welcomes Ramaphosa's decision to establish a judicial commission of inquiry to probe the allegations against Mchunu. However, there were some senior members of the party who questioned the step-aside rule and its effectiveness, saying it only applied to some. The rule requires members of the party who are facing serious allegations to step aside from their positions. The rule has seen some ANC officials having to vacate office until they were cleared of any wrongdoing. A senior member said there was commotion among ANC corridors in Luthuli House because some felt Ramaphosa was selective in the application of the step-aside rule. ANC Secretary-General Fikile Mblalula and ANC Western Cape Provincial Chairperson, Cde Vuyiso 'JJ' Tyhalisisu. Image: Ayanda Ndamane/Independent Newspapers Mbalula said there is no such thing as selective application of the step-aside rule. He said once members are arrested or appear in court, then the rule is applied. 'When last did you see people supporting each other going to court with ANC t-shirts? You get arrested, you stand on your own. Step-aside rule applies. Those who vulgarise things shamelessly will say that the rule doesn't apply to Senzo Mchunu, but the president did put him aside, with immediate effect. 'Argue the question of how that has happened, but he is aside. We've got an acting Minister (Gwede Mantashe) who is chairing the meeting today. I've explained, and I'm repeating it again today - Senzo will not step aside in relation to the ANC. He is an elected member. Deputy Secretary-General of the African National Congress Nomvula Mokonyane, Secretary-General Fikile Mbalula, ANC National Chairperson, Gwede Mantashe, ANC President, Cyril Ramaphosa, and Deputy President, Paul Mashatile facing the provincial ANC branches in the Western Cape. Image: Theolin Tembo/Independent Newspapers Deputy Secretary-General of the African National Congress Nomvula Mokonyane seen speaking to ANC National Chairperson, Gwede Mantashe. Seated in front of them are ANC President, Cyril Ramaphosa, and Deputy President, Paul Mashatile. Image: Ayanda Ndamane/Independent Newspapers 'He's got an opportunity now, in terms of the audi (alteram partem) principle, to also state his side of the story. Once we listen to that, it is also evaluated in terms of facts by a competent, independent judge, and a judicial commission like the president appointed, then we can pass judgment. 'Let's allow the process to follow; this is what all South Africans look forward to. Even we're looking forward to that. 'The principle of our jurisprudence allows that somebody's story must also be listened to, and that is there is any wrongdoing by him, and all of that, the ANC, in terms of its renewal process, this kicks in,' Mbalula said.'There are many ANC members who are step-aside, who have appeared in court, who have been arrested. 'We are the only party in South Africa that practices things even beyond the jurisprudence. Even Magashule failed to challenge the step-aside rule.' ANC National Chairperson, Gwede Mantashe sitting alongside ANC President, Cyril Ramaphosa, and Deputy President, Paul Mashatile. Image: Theolin Tembo/Independent Newspapers ANC President, Cyril Ramaphosa, during an interval at Sunday's report back. Image: Ayanda Ndamane/Independent Newspapers Magashule referred to former ANC secretary-general Ace Magashule, who went to court to overturn his suspension for failing to step aside after being criminally charged. 'It was affirmed by the Constitutional Court that there was nothing unconstitutional about the step-aside rule because it is entrenched in the ANC constitution itself. 'There is nothing like selective justice, and selective application of the step-aside rule. If you are arrested, you appear before the courts, even before you appear. Once you are arrested, you step aside.' Mbalula also touched on how the NWC's visit to the Western Cape structure is their fifth in a series of visits to provinces, as they seek to strengthen their organisational branches in the region. He said that they have been receiving reports from their visits. President Ramaphosa was in the Boland Region on Saturday as part of their efforts. 'All of us were in different regions (of the province). We interacted with branches that gave us reports, and we are currently processing those reports. Tomorrow (on Monday), the working committee will meet to reflect on the reports and chat on the way forward to strengthen our organisation here in the province.'
