The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has defended its decision to withdraw fraud and corruption charges against Crime Intelligence head Dumisani Khumalo and his co-accused, saying the move was informed by developments before the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry.
The charges related to the appointment of Dineo Mokwele as head of the Technical Support Services Unit within Crime Intelligence.
The Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC) had alleged that Mokwele did not possess the necessary qualifications for the position and accused Khumalo of manipulating the recruitment process to gain control of the unit.
The withdrawal of the charges comes just days after the Madlanga Commission found there was no basis for the investigation that resulted in the arrests.
Speaking on Monday evening, NPA spokesperson Kaizer Kganyago said National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) Andy Mothibi had carefully considered the commission's findings before making the decision.
"Those are the things that were considered by the NDPP when he took that decision," Kganyago said.
"That is why he has given a clear instruction to say, 'Based on all of these things that are happening, including what is happening at Madlanga, I'm withdrawing this case, these charges against these people. And if anybody wants to re-enrol them, they must come back to me and prove to me why they need to re-enrol them. We are not re-enrolling this thing until there is a different view that might convince me differently.'"
Meanwhile, former IDAC head Advocate Andrea Johnson continued her testimony before the Madlanga Commission on Monday, where she defended her decision to authorise an investigation into alleged irregularities involving security clearances within the Crime Intelligence Unit.
Johnson has come under scrutiny over IDAC's investigation into claims that security vetting processes had been manipulated and that security clearances were unlawfully granted to senior Crime Intelligence officials.
Addressing the commission, Johnson said she had relied on the information presented to her by investigators before approving the investigation.
"I was satisfied with the briefing that I was given, that as an investigation team, they identified that this is the investigation that is outstanding. This is what they require for the investigation, and this is what it is that must be subpoenaed," she said.
The Madlanga Commission continues to examine the conduct of the investigation, including whether there was sufficient evidence to justify the arrests and the legal processes that followed.