Prosecutor reveals how top cop arrests bypassed legal safeguards

JOHANNESBURG, October 2025. The arrest of Crime Intelligence head Dumisani Khumalo and several senior officers on fraud and corruption charges was handled from the start without the prosecutorial oversight that such a sensitive case demanded, a senior prosecutor told the Madlanga Commission this week.

Advocate Peter Serunye, a deputy director of public prosecutions at the Independent Directorate Against Corruption, testified that he learned of the arrests only after they occurred on 26 June 2025, despite holding a position that would ordinarily place him in charge of exactly this kind of matter. “I had no prior knowledge of the matter,” he told the commission. “No one appeared to know which DDPP was responsible, which I found unusual, since every matter is headed by a DDPP as its project owner.”

The case centres on charges of fraud and corruption linked to Brigadier Dineo Mokwele’s appointment. It is the kind of prosecution, touching senior police officials and a politically sensitive task team, that carries obvious public weight. Yet the lawyers assigned to carry it forward were junior.

Junior prosecutor Drushanta Ramsamy was appointed lead prosecutor in the case against Mokwele. Junior prosecutor Joy Hlatywayo led the prosecution against Crime Intelligence chief financial officer Philani Lushaba. Hlatywayo reported directly to Serunye, but he had not been consulted about her assignment. “It was strange that a junior prosecutor who was reporting to me was allocated to this case without me having been engaged,” he said.

Advocate Paul Louw, who routinely handled Crime Intelligence matters and would ordinarily have served as project owner, also appeared to have no knowledge of the case, despite being in the office that morning. The structural gap was complete.

The consequences showed at the first court appearance. Hlatywayo appeared overwhelmed, Serunye testified. The charge sheet had not been completed despite seven accused persons, and she struggled to answer the magistrate’s questions. The state had failed to prepare a bail affidavit or identify witnesses, leaving the magistrate unconvinced of a strong case. The accused were granted bail of R10 000 each.

Serunye, advocate Jacyntha Witbooi, and chief financial investigator Sibusiso Tshikovhi sought permission to appear in court to assist. Then-Idac head Andrea Johnson granted that request. The underlying problem, however, remained: a prosecution involving the arrest of senior police officials was moving forward without a deputy director overseeing it from the outset.

“I was concerned that a matter of this magnitude, involving the arrest of senior members of the police, was being handled without such support and without a DDPP overseeing it,” Serunye said.

The magistrate, for reasons that were never stated, imposed a bail condition prohibiting the accused from entering Crime Intelligence premises anywhere in the country. Neither the state nor the investigating officer had requested it. That condition has since become a subject of major controversy before the commission. The magistrate has been subpoenaed and has recused himself.

By contrast, the broader question of who directed the prosecution in the first place remains sharply contested. Johnson has denied allegations that she orchestrated the case to target Khumalo, who led the Political Killings Task Team. Ramsamy previously told the commission that Johnson had orchestrated an attack on Khumalo through an investigation code-named “Project Diversion.”

Serunye said Johnson convened a brief meeting on 8 August 2025, following KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi’s explosive media briefing on 6 July, at which she informed Serunye he would be appointed as DDPP on the matter. The National Prosecuting Authority, now under new head advocate Andy Mothibi, has since withdrawn the case entirely.

Serunye acknowledged that he had initially doubted Mkhwanazi’s public allegations against Idac. “However,” he said, the testimony of Johnson and Ramsamy before the commission over the preceding two weeks had caused him to reconsider those allegations.

Whether the commission will find that the structural failures Serunye described were the product of oversight or design is the question that now hangs over the proceedings.