Parliament’s ad hoc committee investigating allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi descended into what members described as “near chaos” on Thursday.
Hours of confrontation ended shortly after 11pm in a decision to formally call forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan back to complete his testimony after he walked out.
By adjournment, members across party lines agreed he must return and warned failure to do so would trigger a subpoena. The sitting, intended to conclude O’Sullivan’s evidence before proceeding to former acting national police commissioner Lt-Gen Khomotso Phahlane, instead devolved into a prolonged dispute over conduct, authority and parliamentary process.
O’Sullivan resumed his testimony under oath, with ANC chief whip Mdumiseni Ntuli continuing questioning. Tensions escalated when MK Party MP David Skosana revived allegations that O’Sullivan had links to UK military intelligence and asked whether he was a spy.
O’Sullivan said he would not “put up with this rubbish” and demanded proof. Skosana called him a conman and a thug, and O’Sullivan replied the accusations were lies intended to protect criminals.
EFF leader Julius Malema intervened, saying O’Sullivan simply had to answer questions and could not choose which MPs to respond to. The situation intensified when a clip from an earlier eNCA interview was played where O’Sullivan referred to “those crooks in parliament” and used the Irish phrase póg mo thóin, translated as “kiss my arse”.
Skosana said MPs could not be called crooks and be expected to accept it. ActionSA MP Dereleen James said she cringed when O’Sullivan was described as a hero and criticised his repeated references to MPs’ “backsides”. ANC MP Xola Nqola questioned what MPs were being told to kiss.
Under sustained pressure, O’Sullivan withdrew the remark, apologising “in the interest of peace”. Malema said the apology should also be made publicly on television.
Evidence leader advocate Bongiwe Mkhize turned to documents from the Airports Company SA (Acsa) and the department of home affairs, questioning discrepancies in O’Sullivan’s qualifications and immigration status.
His Acsa application showed he had enrolled for a BSc in electrical engineering but had not completed it, despite previously telling the committee he studied at “Manchester Technikon”.
Asked to clarify, O’Sullivan said he could not recall the exact name of the institution and maintained he had since completed the qualification. When Mkhize read internal Acsa documents relating to alleged misconduct, he dismissed the allegations as false.
As questioning continued, O’Sullivan said he had a flight to catch and later stated he “really” needed to leave. Mkhize pressed him on his many passports and international business interests, noting testimony that such traits were associated with organised crime syndicates. O’Sullivan denied any involvement in criminal syndicates and again insisted he needed to depart.
Malema objected to him leaving. Skosana stood and shouted across the room. Despite objections, O’Sullivan exited without being formally excused by chairperson Soviet Lekganyane.
Legal adviser Andile Tetyane said a written legal opinion on possible steps could be provided the next day. That response drew criticism. EFF MP Leigh Ann Mathys said it was unacceptable to wait, noting a witness had walked out of parliament.
Malema said if no action was taken, the committee would appear sheepish and toothless, adding the Speaker should have intervened. James said the country had seen how parliament was undermined. PA MP Ashley Sauls agreed the conduct was disrespectful, though he had earlier described O’Sullivan as a “hero with holes”.
Lekganyane said it had “not been a good day”, citing lapses by the evidence leader and the witness.
After several hours of testimony from Phahlane, the committee returned to the walkout. Lekganyane asked whether O’Sullivan should be called back. Nqola said it was common cause his evidence was incomplete and stressed parliament was “not a shebeen”. He proposed O’Sullivan be required to appear by Tuesday, failing which a subpoena should be issued.
He told the committee O’Sullivan had allegedly claimed R90,000 for a previous appearance and stayed in a six-star hotel, saying the manner of his departure warranted a subpoena. MK Party MP Vusi Shongwe supported a summons, saying O’Sullivan must return and explain why he left.
ANC MP Khusela Diko said it was common cause an offence had been committed and a sanction was warranted. Mathys said he must return because he had not been released by the chair.
DA MP Dianne Kohler Barnard urged caution, noting O’Sullivan had appeared voluntarily and questioning whether a subpoena was immediately necessary. Lekganyane concluded the committee would first write to O’Sullivan instructing him to return, saying to justify a subpoena it had to show reasonable steps were taken. If he failed to comply, further action would follow.
Between O’Sullivan’s departure and the enforcement debate, the committee heard extensive testimony from Phahlane, marked by repeated clashes with evidence leader advocate Norman Arendse.
Arendse placed on record that Phahlane faced charges in the specialised commercial crime court relating to procurement from the secret service account, including fraud and contraventions of the public finance management act, referring to 192 charges and reading from charge sheets.
Phahlane insisted there was not a single criminal charge against him, later describing himself as allegedly facing charges and claiming the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) had concocted them.
When Arendse cited a recent labour appeal court ruling dismissing Phahlane’s bid to overturn his dismissal, Phahlane said the matter was before the Constitutional Court and it was unfair to selectively go through the judgment. Tensions escalated when he accused Arendse of being part of a cabal. Arendse replied he had never met former Independent Police Investigative Directorate head Robert McBride before the proceedings and said the allegation lacked sincerity.
Lekganyane intervened repeatedly, urging Arendse not to be adversarial and later stating he did not think the witness was being fairly treated. Phahlane complained parts of his affidavit had been skipped and he had been subjected to interrogation, saying he was hurt it was happening in the “people’s parliament”.
MPs also questioned him on the Ithemba contract, alleged irregularities in the blue lights procurement and his suspension by former police minister Fikile Mbalula, while Phahlane maintained his removal amounted to political interference.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.