Dr. Jean Redpath, a senior researcher at the Dullah Omar Institute at the University of the Western Cape, has expressed deep concern over Parliament’s Ad Hoc Committee investigating allegations of criminal infiltration within the South African Police Service (SAPS), stating that its outcome will be “no good” regardless of the direction it takes.
The committee is examining claims that criminals have infiltrated the SAPS, including recent testimony from forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan. O’Sullivan returned to the committee after walking out during a previous session, where he faced questions from MPs about his involvement and access within police structures over the years.
Redpath argued that the Ad Hoc Committee’s work largely duplicates the efforts of the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry into Criminality, Political Interference, and Corruption in the Criminal Justice System. Chaired by retired Constitutional Court Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, the commission is tasked with delving into specific details of individual involvement in alleged wrongdoing.
Redpath noted that Parliament’s mandate would be better served by focusing on structural issues within the SAPS, such as how task teams are financed and the processes required for their operations, rather than revisiting matters already under scrutiny by the Madlanga Commission.
She highlighted two problematic scenarios: if the Ad Hoc Committee simply echoes the Madlanga Commission’s findings, it wastes valuable parliamentary time; if it undermines those findings, it raises serious issues about credibility and consistency in addressing corruption and criminality in law enforcement.
The inquiry has also disrupted the normal functioning of key parliamentary committees. Redpath pointed out that the portfolio committees on police and justice—whose members largely comprise the Ad Hoc Committee—have seen their core work “almost totally come to a halt.” This includes delays in new legislation, constitutional appointments, reviews of performance plans for entities under their oversight, and other essential duties in South Africa’s constitutional democracy.
A third potential layer of inquiry adds to the complexity: the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence was supposed to launch its own probe—announced on the same day as the current Ad Hoc Committee in July last year—but little has been heard about its progress. Redpath warned that conflicting or additional findings from a secretive intelligence-focused committee could create a “very muddy picture” for the public.
She further raised concerns about the Ad Hoc Committee’s operations, describing them as “deeply concerning” in how witnesses and attendees have been treated, including restrictions on movement that deviate from usual parliamentary practices. Redpath suggested the committee may have been “hijacked by political interests” rather than serving democratic accountability.
Regarding the reserve police system and figures like O’Sullivan, who has long been involved in police-related matters and appeared to enjoy significant access, Redpath noted that citizens sometimes turned to outsiders for help because official police resources were inadequate. She acknowledged that good reservists can positively impact policing but said the tightening of the reservist system in recent years—reducing their numbers—had an overall negative effect by widening resource gaps.
While affirming Parliament’s right to hold inquiries—citing examples from the state capture era—Redpath proposed ways to improve such processes. These include allocating specific hours for ongoing committee work to prevent backlogs, focusing strictly on areas Parliament can address (such as legislative changes, holding government members accountable, and scrutinizing budgets and expenditures), and ensuring tighter chairing of proceedings.
She specifically questioned the allocation of R9.5 billion in the SAPS budget listed under “cost of employment” but not tied to specific individuals or roles. Redpath suggested this unallocated funding could potentially expand the detective service by a third if properly directed, yet the committee has not pursued detailed explanations from police leadership on its use.
Redpath also highlighted the disruptive impact on parliamentary staff, who have been required to work late into the night on a regular basis due to extended sessions.
Her comments underscore broader worries about overlapping inquiries, institutional overload, and the risk that multiple probes—combined with issues like the suspension of the Inspector-General of Intelligence—could hinder rather than advance efforts to root out criminality and corruption in the criminal justice system.