Jury Out on Whether MPs will Act Without Fear or Favour

Prof. Bheki Mngomezulu

On July 6, 2025, Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, the Police Commissioner in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) convened a media briefing. During his address, Mkhwanazi made very serious allegations about interference in the police service. Those implicated included members of parliament, the judiciary, businesspeople, and the media.

Invoking Sec 84(f) of The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, President Cyril Ramaphosa appointed a Commission of Inquiry chaired by Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga. When it officially began its work on September 17, 2025, as expected, Mkhwanazi was its first witness. He reiterated his earlier allegations and provided evidence to substantiate his claims. Most of these claims were subsequently corroborated by Lt General Dumisani Khumalo.

Similarly, Parliament embarked on a parallel process by appointing an eleven-member Ad Hoc Committee which is chaired by Molapi Soviet Lekganyane. An Ad Hoc Committee is a special committee that is set up to perform specific and temporary tasks assigned to it. The Committee was tasked to investigate the same allegations made by General Mkhwanazi and to submit its report to the Speaker of the National Assembly.

According to Sec 55(2)(b) of the constitution, one of the powers of the National Assembly is to maintain oversight. This includes monitoring the national executive and other organs of the state.

While this constitutional imperative is clear, previous experiences show that there has been dereliction of duty on the side of the National Assembly. For example, following the 2012 Marikana incident where mineworkers were killed by the South African Police Service (SAPS), there was no evidence that the National Assembly knew what its mandate was in exercising this oversight role.

Secondly, following the infamous Phala Phala saga which involved President Cyril Ramaphosa, the National Assembly failed to exercise its constitutional obligation. Instead of ensuring that it followed the Constitution by holding Ramaphosa who was part of the executive accountable, it shielded him.

Ramaphosa was aware of the public cry. He was also aware that he had promised South Africans that he was going to root out corruption and maladministration. In his resolve to live up to people’s expectation that he would be honest, he penned his resignation letter from the position of being South Africa’s president.

Ideally, this should have made the job of the National Assembly easier. In exercising its oversight role, it should have urged him to resign, especially since the allegations he faced were serious. Instead, the ANC, which had the majority in Parliament at the time, advised him to rescind his resignation letter. It assured him that the party (ANC) would use its majority in parliament to protect him against Sec 89 of the constitution which talks about the removal of a sitting president of the country.

Indeed, Ramaphosa survived possible impeachment. While this decision helped the president, it dealt the ANC a serious blow. The electorate blamed the party of talking right and walking left. On the one hand, it talked about fighting corruption and renewing itself. On the other hand, it condoned wrongdoing and even made parliament abandon its constitutional responsibility to hold the executive accountable. This made mockery of parliament and rendered the constitution ineffective.

Against this background, it becomes necessary to question the wisdom in establishing the Madlanga Commission. Was it the right move? Was the decision genuine or was it a box ticking exercise? Why was General Mkhwanazi not asked to lay formal charges against any implicated individual and have these cases heard in public to ensure transparency?

Commissions do not have prosecutorial powers. The Ad Hoc Committee claims that it will be more effective than the Commission. In principle, this is plausible. However, experience shows that what politicians say and what they do are two different things.

It may be premature to conclude if what will arise from the work of the parliamentary committee will demonstrate that it has teeth or if all we shall see are optics. However, previous experiences including the ones enumerated above cast doubt about the sincerity in this exercise.

Another concern is whether members of the Ad Hoc committee will execute their mandate diligently as a collective or push their party agendas. This concern is given credence by the fact that the Local Government Election (LGE) is scheduled for 2026. This heightens prospects of trying anything and everything to score political points even at the expense of the electorate.

An important concern is what transpired on the first day of Mkhwanazi’s appearance before the Ad Hoc Committee on October 7, 2025. There was no indication that the Committee prepared well for this important assignment.

This was strange since some members of the Committee were impatient with Mkhwanazi when he told the chairperson that he was not available to appear before them earlier than September 17, 2025. He was scheduled to give evidence at the Madlanga Commission. Julius Malema insisted that Mkhwanazi could not tell them what to do, how, and when. He forgot that it was not Mkhwanazi who appointed parallel structures.

Advocate Norman Arendse who is the evidence leader seemed negligent. He termed Mkhwanazi’s statement “supplementary statement.’ This forced Malema to rise on a point of order. At least this time Malema made critical and genuine points which resulted in the meeting adjourning to correct this mistake.

The discussion above leads to another justifiable concern. Will the coalition government act appropriately or will it use this matter to either reignite the coalition or collapse it? This question is important because some political parties have their members implicated in different wrongdoings. The temptation would be for Members of Parliament to defend their own, not to serve the people of South Africa but for political expediency.

Numbers will play a critical role when items need a vote. While the ANC does not enjoy the majority as was the case during the Phala Phala saga, it still has more numbers in the coalition government. If it lures some smaller parties, it could succeed in ensuring that things go its way.

* Prof. Bheki Mngomezulu is Director of the Centre for the Advancement of Non-Racialism and Democracy at Nelson Mandela University.

** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.