The Madlanga Commission has quickly become one of South Africa’s most consequential inquiries. Established by President Cyril Ramaphosa in July 2025, it investigates political interference, organised crime, and corruption within the criminal justice system. Public hearings began on 17 September 2025 at the Brigitte Mabandla Justice College in Pretoria.
In its first days, the commission revealed systemic failures and disturbing links between senior politicians, criminal syndicates, and elements of the police. These revelations have raised the stakes for accountability in South Africa.
We unpack the Madlanga Commission highlights, detailing testimonies, controversies, and the unanswered questions that could shape the country’s fight against corruption.
The Commission’s Mandate and Purpose
The commission’s official title is the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Criminality, Political Interference and Corruption in the Criminal Justice System. It is chaired by retired Constitutional Court Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga (SABC News).
Its mandate is broad. It seeks to uncover how criminal networks penetrate law enforcement, how political actors manipulate investigations, and how institutional weaknesses undermine justice.
Read our detailed coverage here: Madlanga Inquiry Day 4: Masemola Questioned Over Mchunu Order.
Mkhwanazi’s Explosive Testimony Opens Hearings
KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi was the first witness to testify. His opening statement set the tone for the hearings:
“The criminal justice system risks total collapse if nothing is done about the corruption and sabotage in the institutions.”
Over three days, Mkhwanazi expanded on allegations he first made during a July 2025 media briefing. He claimed that politicians and criminal syndicates had infiltrated the South African Police Service (SAPS) and judicial processes.
Allegations Against Police Minister Senzo Mchunu
One of the most striking Madlanga Commission highlights involves Police Minister Senzo Mchunu. Mkhwanazi alleged that Mchunu unlawfully ordered the disbandment of the Political Killings Task Team (PKTT).
The directive, he argued, was outside Mchunu’s jurisdiction. Evidence suggested that businessman Brown Mogotsi, with links to syndicates, knew about the disbandment before SAPS leadership. Mogotsi also had access to police occurrence books and sensitive case dockets—materials no civilian should possess.
Mkhwanazi insisted there was “evidence proving [Mchunu’s] involvement with crime syndicates.”
Former Police Minister Bheki Cele Under Scrutiny
Mkhwanazi also targeted former Police Minister Bheki Cele. He alleged that Cele attempted to interfere with the disciplinary hearing of Major General Feroz Khan, head of Counter-Intelligence and Security Intelligence.
“That got me so upset … He disappointed me as a person who’s a former minister in the police.”
Cele’s intervention raised questions about whether he was protecting allies or obstructing investigations.
Testimony from National Commissioner Fannie Masemola
National Police Commissioner Fannie Masemola testified after Mkhwanazi and backed much of his account. He confirmed that Mchunu’s disbandment order for the PKTT was a clear overreach:
“To go further to say disband, that is total encroachment into the mandate of the national commissioner.”
Masemola also testified that President Ramaphosa appeared surprised when briefed on the disbandment, undermining Mchunu’s claim that the President approved his actions.
Discover the full story in Mkhwanazi Accuses MPs of Interfering in SAPS Affairs.
Evidence of Syndicate Penetration
The commission revealed alarming breaches in SAPS security. Arrested suspect Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala had WhatsApp exchanges with Mogotsi that showed both knew about the movement of 121 PKTT case dockets before police leadership.
This suggested organised crime not only had informants within SAPS but possibly shaped operational decisions.
Politicians and Classified Material
Mkhwanazi accused two MPs—Dianne Kohler-Barnard (DA) and Fadiel Adams (NCC)—of obtaining and exposing classified intelligence documents. This raised concerns about how political actors handle sensitive security information.
Allegations of Presidential Interference
One of the more surprising claims came when Mkhwanazi alleged interference from the Presidency. He testified that after withdrawing a team investigating murders linked to Richards Bay Minerals, he was ordered to redeploy them.
Masemola allegedly told him the directive came following a complaint from the Presidency. This raised new constitutional concerns about executive interference in operational policing.
Whistleblower Babita Deokaran’s Case
During his testimony, Masemola began discussing the murder of whistleblower Babita Deokaran, which the PKTT had investigated. Justice Madlanga interrupted him, asking evidence leaders to consider if such detail was necessary.
The exchange drew attention to Masemola’s inaction. Despite acknowledging his power to resist unlawful orders, he did not prevent the PKTT’s disbandment or safeguard its critical dockets.
Structural Weakness: Non-Binding Recommendations
Legal experts warn that, like other commissions, the Madlanga Commission’s findings are non-binding. Advocate Matthew Chaskalson clarified:
“Our recommendations don’t bind the president … The function of this body is to conduct a public hearing for the purpose of making recommendations.”
This means that even the most damning revelations will not automatically result in prosecutions or policy changes unless acted upon by the President.
Budget, Scope and Public Expectations
The commission has a budget of R147.9 million for 2025–2026. Critics argue that the scope, spanning police, intelligence, and judiciary, may be too ambitious for the timeframe.
Civil society groups such as Corruption Watch have emphasised that the commission’s success depends on its ability to expose systemic corruption and push for genuine reforms.
Broader Lessons from Past Commissions
South Africans remain sceptical. The legacies of the Zondo, Seriti, and Marikana commissions show how detailed reports can fail to translate into accountability.
International relations expert Moses Kau stressed:
“This one is a ‘make or break’ for South Africa and the People of South Africa.”
Key Takeaways So Far
- Direct political interference by Mchunu and Cele is now on record.
- Syndicate penetration of SAPS is confirmed by leaked dockets and messages.
- Constitutional concerns have emerged around Presidency involvement.
- Whistleblower safety and unresolved cases highlight weak institutional protection.
- The commission’s non-binding powers may undermine accountability.
Get the latest update in KZN Police Chief Mkhwanazi Sues Paul O’Sullivan for Defamation.
What Comes Next?
The Madlanga Commission has already produced shocking revelations in its opening weeks. From claims of syndicate infiltration to accusations against senior political leaders, the hearings expose the depth of South Africa’s institutional crisis.
However, questions remain. Will its findings translate into reforms, or will it follow the path of earlier commissions whose reports gathered dust? The answer lies not only with Justice Madlanga’s team but with President Ramaphosa’s willingness to act.
For now, the Madlanga Commission highlights serve as both a warning and an opportunity. South Africa must decide whether to let the justice system collapse further or to rebuild it with integrity and accountability.
