Controversial forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan will return to parliament’s ad hoc committee on Thursday to conclude his testimony — one week after walking out of proceedings without being formally excused.
O’Sullivan appeared before the committee on February 26 while under questioning by evidence leader advocate Bongiwe Mkhize. As she was concluding her questions, he stood up, packed his bags and left, despite requests from chair Molapi Soviet Lekganyane and members that he remain seated and complete his examination.
O’Sullivan later defended his departure, saying it had been agreed he would appear only until 1pm as he needed to catch a 3.15pm flight to Johannesburg to avoid financial penalties.
The walkout triggered immediate concern. Lekganyane met National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza, who requested an urgent report detailing the circumstances under which O’Sullivan left without permission.
The committee subsequently resolved that he should return to complete his evidence. Parliament’s legal adviser, Andile Tetyana, told members during a housekeeping meeting on Monday correspondence was sent to O’Sullivan on February 27 inviting him to appear on March 5, as he had been “still under examination when he decided to abandon committee proceedings without the permission of the chairperson”.
Evidence leader advocate Norman Arendse said O’Sullivan had confirmed he would attend on Thursday to conclude questioning, adding Mkhize had “two or three questions” remaining.
A legal opinion by senior parliamentary legal adviser Frank Jenkins found that O’Sullivan’s conduct may constitute an offence under section 7 of the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act, which prohibits improperly interfering with or impeding the work of parliament or its committees.
The opinion states that his departure impeded the committee in the performance of its functions because members were unable to complete his examination.
It further finds that his conduct may also fall within section 17 of the same act, which creates an offence where a person fails, without sufficient cause, to answer fully and satisfactorily all questions lawfully put to them while under examination.
The opinion advises the committee is entitled to invoke its powers under section 56 of the constitution to summon any person to appear before it to give evidence on oath or affirmation, should O’Sullivan fail to comply with its invitation. It concludes that the committee is within its rights to pursue available legal remedies if he does not return to complete his testimony .
Tetyana confirmed that a summons has already been prepared should O’Sullivan refuse to attend voluntarily.
The ad hoc committee, which is sitting concurrently with the Madlanga commission of inquiry, is investigating allegations of political interference and criminal infiltration in the criminal justice system after claims made in July 2025 by KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.
O’Sullivan’s evidence forms part of the committee’s examination of those allegations. His return on Thursday will determine whether the matter proceeds without escalation into formal summons proceedings or potential criminal referral under the act.
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.