The Madlanga Commission of Inquiry has formally questioned members of the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC) regarding the legal foundation of its investigation into senior Crime Intelligence (CI) officials. The inquiry, which took place on 14 and 15 July 2026, focused on whether the arrest of high-ranking officers in June 2025 met the necessary statutory thresholds required under the National Prosecuting Authority Act.
The investigation in question involves several senior officials, including Crime Intelligence head Lieutenant General Dumisani Khumalo, Major General Philani Lushaba, and Nosipho Madondo. These arrests were connected to the official appointment of Brigadier Dineo Mokwele, an action the IDAC claims fell under the scope of its corruption mandate.
Procedural Integrity And Legal Thresholds
During the proceedings, Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga questioned lead investigator Brian Padayachee on the process used to initiate the probe. It was revealed that the investigation was triggered following a Section 27 referral affidavit submitted by Member of Parliament Fadiel Adams in November 2024.
“You see the problem with your approach, you seem to believe that once an allegation has been made, then the Section 27 requirements have been met,” Justice Madlanga stated during the inquiry.
Under intense questioning, Padayachee admitted that he had not reviewed the contents of the Section 27 affidavit provided by Adams before commencing the investigation. Justice Madlanga further challenged the internal logic of the probe, noting that equating a lack of specific SAPS experience to criminal wrongdoing represented a significant theoretical gap. Responding to these concerns, Padayachee maintained that the IDAC possesses sufficient evidence to sustain the current criminal charges against the accused officials.
Broader Scope Of The Inquiry
The Madlanga Commission is currently tasked with investigating allegations of criminal infiltration and political interference within various South African law enforcement agencies. This specific line of questioning highlights the commission’s broader focus on whether investigations triggered by political referrals are handled with the requisite legal rigour or are susceptible to external influence.
The panel is expected to continue its assessment of the procedural integrity of IDAC investigations as the hearings progress. Further evidence regarding the decision-making processes within the directorate is scheduled to be reviewed in upcoming sessions.