Mchunu challenges committee report, alleging prejudicial findings

Suspended Police MinisterSenzo Mchunuhas challenged a draft report prepared by the evidence leaders of parliament’sad hoc committee, arguing that it contains findings that pre-empt the committee’s work and prejudice his rights. Parliament’s legal adviser, Andile Tetyana, confirmed that Mchunu’s legal team had written to the committee to object to the contents of the evidentiary overview prepared by the evidence leaders. “At the heart of his correspondence is an allegation that, in presenting their evidentiary overview, the evidence leaders have pre-empted this process by making findings across the entire scope of the terms of reference,” Tetyana told the committee.

In their evidentiary overview, the evidence leaders concluded that Mchunu acted outside constitutional and legal boundaries by issuing a directive in December 2024 to disband the political killings task team without consulting the president, the national police commissioner, the National Prosecuting Authority or the State Security Agency. Mchunu’s lawyers argue that the evidence leaders had exceeded their mandate by effectively assuming the role of decision-makers. “The minister’s lawyers submit that adopting such an approach is prejudicial to their client’s rights,” he said.

“They argue that it is impermissible for the evidence leaders to step into the shoes of the committee and become decision-makers, particularly in circumstances where no party has been afforded the right to make submissions.” President Cyril Ramaphosa placed Mchunu on special leave in 2025. KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi’s explosive July briefing led to the establishment of both the ad hoc parliamentary inquiry and Madlanga commission. The committee is investigating claims that Mchunu acted improperly when he ordered the disbandment of the political killings task team.

[paywall]

The report also found evidence suggesting that Mchunu misled parliament about the reasons for disbanding the unit. Tetyana defended the role of the evidence leaders, describing them as independent legal professionals tasked with assisting the committee. “In assisting the committee, evidence leaders operate as a support mechanism by summarising complex documents, pointing out discrepancies and empowering committee members, who are often not lawyers, to make informed and credible decisions,” he said.

The evidentiary overview was not a committee report but rather a summary of the evidence collected during the inquiry, he said. “It structures the evidence and turns raw documents and testimony into an organised record. To refer to the document presented to this committee on 28 May as [a final] report of the committee is a mischaracterisation,” he said.

[/paywall]