CAPE TOWN — Former acting national police commissioner Khomotso Phahlane told Parliament on Wednesday that his 2017 removal by then-Police Minister Fikile Mbalula was unlawful and part of a politically driven and controversial step-aside policy, describing himself as the “guinea pig” of the system.
In a stark admission, Phahlane stated that political interference in the SAPS has been a long-standing reality. “We must not shy away from that political interference has been prevalent in the South African Police Service,” he said, tracing a significant escalation to the aftermath of the ANC’s 2007 Polokwane Conference. “From there on we started seeing practices that were not a norm.”
Phahlane denied he was removed due to corruption, dismissing the widely held view that graft allegations forced him out as “misleading.” He characterised his removal as a rushed, informal decision by the minister fueled by intense media pressure.
Highlighting that his suspension was a “politically motivated hit” rather than a mere legal oversight, he stated: “I was removed by the minister, who was legally prohibited from doing so… No law provides for such; that is why we continue to say my removal from office cannot be found anywhere in the prescripts.”
Phahlane’s Account of 2017 Suspension
Phahlane said he received a call from Mbalula’s office in June 2017 instructing him to immediately travel from Pretoria to Cape Town. Upon arrival, he waited over three hours before a meeting lasting less than five minutes.
During the meeting, Mbalula allegedly told him that the media “drama” around him was embarrassing and that he should “step aside”. No written notice, formal suspension letter, or instructions on handing over duties were provided.
“I asked two questions: who do I hand over to, and what does stepping aside mean? The answer was simply: ‘Go home,’” Phahlane said.
Phahlane stressed that only the President of the Republic has the authority to suspend or remove a national police commissioner under the Constitution and SAPS Act. He is currently pursuing the matter in the courts and with the Public Protector.
At the time, Phahlane was under investigation linked to the “blue lights” tender and panoramic cameras contracts, which he told MPs he never personally procured.
Paul O’Sullivan and Security Concerns
The ad hoc committee’s hearings also include forensic investigative Paul O’Sullivan, who has refused to appear in person citing security risks while based in London. This follows calls by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi for an investigation into O’Sullivan’s alleged influence over IPID — claims tied to Mkhwanazi’s broader police capture allegations.
Committee chair Molapi Soviet Lekganyane has insisted all witnesses testify in person and that parliamentary mechanisms will be used to compel attendance.
Judiciary and Political Tensions
The hearings have sparked debate over judicial accountability. EFF leader Julius Malema cautioned against broad attacks on the judiciary, stabilising proceedings, as detailed in our coverage: How Malema saved Parliament’s ad hoc committee from collapse.
The ad hoc committee was established after President Ramaphosa responded to Mkhwanazi’s syndicate claims, which painted a picture of entrenched corruption and political interference in SAPS. Pressure has since intensified, including calls for immediate criminal prosecutions.
The hearings also unfold amid broader shifts in the justice system, including Ramaphosa’s appointment of Andy Mothibi as NDPP.
