Corruption watchdog's own tactics questioned in police probe, raising public accountabilit

Drushanta Ramsamy, a prosecutor at South Africa’s Investigating Directorate Against Corruption, told the Madlanga Commission on Thursday that the agency’s own investigative powers were turned against two senior police officials through improper methods and incomplete evidence. Her testimony raises a question that cuts to the heart of public accountability: whether the tools designed to protect citizens from corruption were themselves misused.

Ramsamy alleged that former Idac head Andrea Johnson and senior investigator Dylan Perumal directed investigations targeting crime intelligence head Dumisani Khumalo and national police commissioner Fannie Masemola. In her words, the two officials “launched an orchestrated attack on General Masemola and Lieutenant General Khumalo using Idac’s powerful investigation tools.”

Additional reference context is available at https://mg.co.za/news/south-africa/2026-07-30-prosecutor-turns-on-former-idac-chief/.

The sequence began with Project Diversion, which Johnson initiated against Khumalo. Johnson then opened a separate investigation into Masemola’s alleged involvement in the R360 million Medicare24 scandal, framing it as part of a broader Tembisa Hospital corruption inquiry. Masemola was later added as the 16th co-accused in the Medicare24 case, which involves businessman Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala and remains before the courts.

Khumalo was arrested in October 2024 in connection with the alleged irregular appointment of Brigadier Dineo Mokwele, a former BMW SA employee, to head the technical support service within crime intelligence. The National Prosecuting Authority has since withdrawn charges against Khumalo, Mokwele and several other crime intelligence members.

At the centre of Ramsamy’s complaint is what she describes as significant discrepancies between two versions of an affidavit submitted by National Coloured Congress MP Fadiel Adams. She alleged that Johnson presented the commission with a substantially different version of Adams’ section 27 affidavit from the one used to obtain authorisation for the investigation that led to charges against Khumalo and Mokwele. The original affidavit contained extensive allegations relating to the Political Killings Task Team, former police minister Bheki Cele, procurement irregularities and the alleged abuse of the Secret Service account to purchase vehicles, properties and a hotel building. The version shown to the commission omitted all of these references, focusing narrowly on Mokwele’s appointment.

On 6 December 2024, Ramsamy testified, Johnson handed her Adams’ original section 27 affidavit along with a handwritten notepad page listing suspects to be included in a section 28 criminal investigation authorisation. The names included Khumalo, Mokwele, Nozipho Madondo, Phindile Ncube, Philani Lushaba, Josias Lekalakala and several others. Ramsamy said many of these names bore no correlation to the allegations in the affidavit. Johnson instructed her to prepare the prosecution authorisation application and told her not to show the affidavit “to anyone due to the sensitivity of the matter.” Standard procedure required a memo from the prosecutor following receipt of a section 27 complaint. No such memo existed.

The timing matters. The PKTT was disbanded on 31 December 2024 by suspended police minister Senzo Mchunu, just weeks after Ramsamy received those instructions. Johnson, for her part, had stated during her own testimony that she would “be remiss if I did not dismiss the suggestion that Lieutenant-General Khumalo was arrested because he was the coordinator of the Political Killings Task Team,” responding to accusations from KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi that the arrest was intended to obstruct the PKTT as it investigated criminal cartels in Gauteng.

Meanwhile, Ramsamy rejected Johnson’s attempt to shift responsibility onto her. During six days of testimony, Johnson had implicated Ramsamy as the person who identified the crime intelligence officers to be prosecuted. Ramsamy was direct in her rebuttal: “Advocate Johnson told many untruths about me and my involvement in what is now known as the Mokwele case. She did not disclose that I raised concerns from the outset and repeatedly thereafter.”

Ramsamy said Johnson had selected her for the assignment believing she would not challenge decisions made by senior officials. “What she did not anticipate was that Mr Mantsha Rapeshu and I would question Project Diversion from the start.” Senior investigator Mantsha Rapeshu confirmed that Johnson presented a different affidavit to the commission than the one used to prepare the section 28 investigation application.

Ramsamy also disclosed a recorded telephone conversation with Johnson from 22 July in which Johnson allegedly suggested they should “figure out how you don’t go” to the commission, effectively proposing a way for Ramsamy to avoid testifying. In the recording, Johnson reportedly told Ramsamy to answer commission questions step by step and to identify only Khumalo and Madondo as the names she had received, contradicting the full list Johnson had originally provided. When Ramsamy objected, Johnson claimed she could not recall providing the complete list.

Ramsamy also disputed earlier evidence from senior investigator Brian Padayachee that he had never seen Adams’ affidavit. She testified that Padayachee and Perumal met with Adams in November 2024 to obtain the affidavit and discuss potential suspects. “There was a lot of secrecy around this section 27 affidavit,” she said.

On the Medicare24 investigation, Johnson had testified that a risk audit alerted Masemola to the allegedly illegal contract and recommended he halt payments. She stated that Masemola’s delay in acting as accounting officer resulted in approximately R50 million being paid out “because of these unlawful corrupt activities before the contract was stopped.”

Commission chair Mbuyiseli Madlanga indicated that Johnson would be served with a rule 3 notice, giving her the opportunity to respond to Ramsamy’s allegations. Whether that response will account for the discrepancies in the Adams affidavit, or explain the recorded conversation about avoiding testimony, remains to be seen.