General Khumalo Walks Free as Prosecutors Drop Corruption Case Against Police Officers

Dumisani Khumalo walked into the Madlanga commission on Monday facing corruption charges. He will likely walk out of court a free man.

The National Prosecuting Authority will withdraw charges against Khumalo, a Lieutenant General in police crime intelligence, along with five other senior officers, after NPA head advocate Andy Mothibi completed a comprehensive review of the case. NPA spokesperson Kaizer Kganyago confirmed the decision on Monday. The matter must still pass through formal court processes before it is officially removed from the roll, but the prosecutorial conclusion is clear. “For now, with the facts before him, the NDPP decided to withdraw the matter after the review process,” Kganyago said.

Khumalo’s co-accused are Major General Philani Lushaba, Major General Nosipho Madondo, Major General Josias Lekalakala, Major General Zwelithini Gabela, and Brigadier Phindile Ncube. All six faced corruption-related charges tied to the hiring of Brigadier Dineo Mokwele, a former BMW engineer brought into the crime intelligence unit. The Investigating Directorate Against Corruption had characterized Mokwele as an unqualified civilian. Evidence at the Madlanga commission told a different story: Mokwele possessed the necessary academic qualifications and relevant experience for an engineering-related position within the unit.

The withdrawal sets a high bar for any future prosecution. The directorate would need to produce substantial new evidence to re-enrol the case, a prospect that now appears remote.

What changed the trajectory of this case was not just the prosecutorial review. It was what emerged about how evidence had been gathered in the first place. At the commission on Monday, evidence leader Mahlape Sello disclosed that two directorate officials, investigator Mantsha Raphesu and prosecutor advocate Ramsamy, will testify this week that supplementary statements obtained from MP Fadiel Adams, the main complainant against Khumalo, may have been fabricated. The statements were purportedly commissioned by the directorate’s chief investigator, Dylan Perumal, on January 6, 2025.

The contradiction is specific and damaging. The commission holds two sets of statements: four attributed to Raphesu and four attributed to Perumal, all supposedly obtained on the same day. Raphesu and Ramsamy say that is impossible. In a voice note played at the commission, Raphesu was direct: “There was no way that Dylan would have obtained that affidavit that day.” He added that one signature appeared altered, though he acknowledged not being a handwriting expert. Ramsamy went further. “Why would two investigating officers sitting in the same boardroom have taken two different statements on the same day. I can confirm in my presence, there were only four statements taken. The A1 was not taken in my presence and it could have not been taken on January 6 2025.”

Perumal, the central figure in the dispute, has been hospitalized. His legal representative, advocate Apla Bodlani, told the commission he could not confirm when Perumal would be available to testify.

Outgoing directorate head advocate Andrea Johnson acknowledged the severity of the contradictions. She said Perumal must explain whether he obtained statements independently and stated that parallel investigations cannot be permitted. “It puts us in a conundrum where three people are saying they were together. It is something that has to be dealt with,” Johnson said. She resigned from her position on Monday after submitting a request to President Cyril Ramaphosa, stepping down as scrutiny over the directorate’s crime intelligence investigations intensified.

The case has also strained relations with KwaZulu-Natal provincial commissioner Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, who previously testified that the corruption investigation against Khumalo was designed to obstruct serious organized crime work by the political killings task team.

A further inconsistency surfaced around Adams’ primary affidavit. The version Johnson supplied to the commission contained no reference to the political killings team. The version held by the prosecutor did. Johnson testified that the directorate’s investigations had no connection to the political killings task team, a claim the second affidavit directly contradicts.

Whether Perumal will appear before the commission to answer those contradictions, and what his testimony will reveal about how the investigation was run, remains the question the commission has yet to resolve.