Madlanga Commission: Johnson admits IDAC had no basis to probe Khumalo, concedes complaints should not have been solicited
Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC) head Advocate Andrea Johnson has admitted that her unit did not have grounds to investigate Lieutenant General Dumisani Khumalo over alleged irregularities linked to police recruitment processes.
She also acknowledged that the anti-corruption unit was “not supposed to solicit” complaints from members of the public—an admission that intensified scrutiny over the investigation’s origins.
She made the remarks during her testimony at the Madlanga Commission.
The admission placed a sharp focus on how a controversial Section 27 affidavit from National Coloured Congress (NCC) leader and MP Fadiel Adams became the foundation of IDAC’s investigation into Khumalo and others.
Chair Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga and evidence leader Advocate Mahlape Sello repeatedly returned to one central question: How did IDAC get the complaint that opened the door to the investigation?
Johnson told the commission the matter began with correspondence from the office of Police Minister Senzo Mchunu, who is currently on special leave.
But there was an immediate problem, the letter arrived without supporting documents or attachments.
Johnson admitted that, without those documents, the correspondence could not trigger a formal investigation.
When Sello asked what Johnson did after discovering the missing attachments, the IDAC head struggled to provide a clear answer.
She said she believed she had acknowledged receipt of the letter but could not produce the response, despite searches by her office.
She suggested technical teams might still recover the missing email.
The commission then turned its attention to Adams’ Section 27 affidavit, which became the statutory referral used by IDAC to launch its investigation.
Johnson suggested that IDAC chief investigator Dylan Perumal may have contacted Adams after receiving instructions, although she could not say this with certainty.
That response drew a pointed challenge from Sello.
“Effectively, IDAC solicited a Section 27 affidavit from Mr Adams,” Sello said, which Johnson denied.
Instead, she replied “I don’t agree with ‘solicited’… I am going through a detail that’s not mine and not in my head”.
But Madlanga was not satisfied with the explanation.
“It’s yours. It’s yours. It’s yours, Advocate Johnson,” he said, reminding her that she was the person who instructed Perumal to contact Adams.
“Perumal would then have been the actor on your instruction. That’s where the question is. So, please do not deflect the question,” Madlanga said.
After resisting the wording, Johnson eventually conceded, after pushing back against the notion.
The questioning continued as Sello asked whether IDAC was permitted to approach members of the public to obtain complaints.
“No. We are not supposed to solicit,” Johnson admitted.
The commission also challenged Johnson’s suggestion that Adams may already have had the affidavit prepared before he was contacted.
Madlanga pointed to the timeline, noting that Adams’ affidavit was only stamped on November 21, 2024.
This was 10 days after Mchunu’s office sent its correspondence on November 11.
Madlanga put it to Johnson to accept that there was no prepared affidavit.
The hearing was later interrupted after Johnson became unwell following medication.
She is expected to return before the commission on Thursday, where further questions about the investigation’s origins are likely to continue.
IOL Politics
