By Palesa Matlala
- Two investigators told the Madlanga Commission that a statement used in court and linked to Member of Parliament Fadiel Adams was not taken during their official interview with him.
Outgoing Investigating Directorate Against Corruption head Advocate Andrea Johnson admitted the timeline presented to the commission did not appear to make sense and raised serious questions about how the statement was produced.
Fresh controversy has erupted at the Madlanga Commission after serious allegations were made against a senior investigator from the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption.
The commission heard claims that chief investigator Dylan Perumal submitted a statement that two members of his own investigation team say was never taken from National Coloured Congress leader and Member of Parliament Fadiel Adams.
The allegations surfaced while outgoing IDAC head Advocate Andrea Johnson was giving evidence on Monday.
The disputed statement forms part of an investigation into corruption allegations involving senior Crime Intelligence officials.
Adams had laid a complaint accusing Crime Intelligence boss Lieutenant General Dumisani Khumalo, Brigadier Dineo Mokwele and other senior officers of fraud, corruption, abuse of state resources, intimidation, interference in investigations and irregular appointments.
The commission heard that Perumal and two other investigators travelled to Cape Town on 6 January to interview Adams.
Advocate Drushanta Ramsamy and investigator Mantsha Raphesu told the commission that only four supplementary statements were taken during that interview.
They both rejected another statement, known as “A1”, which Perumal later submitted as evidence in court and before the commission.
Ramsamy questioned how two different versions of Adams’ statement could exist when all the investigators worked together during the interview.
She said there was only one interview and only four supplementary statements were taken.
Raphesu also said the disputed statement could not have been obtained on that day because it did not form part of the interview.
The allegations raised alarm at the commission.
Co-commissioner Sandile Khumalo said the evidence suggested there could have been serious misconduct.
Johnson did not challenge the evidence given by her investigators.
Instead, she agreed that the sequence of events did not appear possible.
She said it did not make sense for one investigation team, working together at the same place and on the same day, to produce different statements from the same witness.
It is not yet known when Perumal will appear before the commission to respond to the allegations.
Johnson is expected to continue giving evidence on Tuesday.
Meanwhile, another twist has emerged in the Crime Intelligence investigation.
National Director of Public Prosecutions Advocate Andy Mothibi has provisionally withdrawn fraud and corruption charges against Lieutenant General Dumisani Khumalo, Brigadier Dineo Mokwele and five other accused before they could enter their pleas in court.
The charges relate to allegations surrounding Mokwele’s appointment as a brigadier in the South African Police Service.
The case was opened after a complaint by Adams.
Mokwele said she was disappointed by the decision because she wanted the matter to continue in court.
Her lawyers questioned the National Prosecuting Authority’s claim that investigations were still incomplete.
They argued that investigators had previously indicated the investigation had already been completed.
The legal team said they would study the decision before deciding on their next legal steps.
The National Prosecuting Authority has stressed that the charges have only been withdrawn provisionally, meaning they could be reinstated if prosecutors decide to proceed with the case.
Pictured above: The Madlanga Commission has heard allegations that a senior corruption investigator used a disputed witness statement during investigations into Crime Intelligence officials.
Image source: Crime Connect/Facebook Page
