Piecemeal Announcements Provide neither Certainty nor Transparency

The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) notes the decision by President Cyril Ramaphosa to extend, for a second time, the lifespan of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Criminality, Political Interference and Corrutption in the Criminal Justice System, chaired by retired Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga. The final report is now due to be submitted on November 16, 2026 with an evidence deadline of 2 October, 2026.

The EFF recognises that the Commission has uncovered troubling evidence relating to the infiltration of South Africa’s criminal justice system by organised criminal syndicates, the abuse of state institutions, political interference in law enforcement agencies, and widespread corruption within institutions responsible for protecting the Republic.

However, the manner in which the Presidency continues to administer the Commission through piecemeal announcements provides neither certainty nor transparency. This is now the second extension granted to the Commission, yet President Ramaphosa refuses to state openly how much time the Commission genuinely requires to complete its mandate, nor any comprehensive explanation of the Commission’s outstanding work, the anticipated completion of its investigations, or whether adequate financial and institutional resources have been made available to ensure that no further delays become necessary. Even more troubling is the continued secrecy surrounding the Commission’s interim reports. The first interim report was submitted to President Ramaphosa in December 2025 and contained recommendations that immediately resulted in referrals for criminal investigations, prosecutorial consideration, and administrative action against implicated individuals. The second interim report was submitted in May 2026 and the Presidency has similarly acknowledged that it contains recommendations requiring further prosecutorial and investigative action while the Commission continues its work.

Yet despite these significant developments, both interim reports remain hidden from the South African public. This Commission does not belong to President Ramaphosa, it belongs to the people of South Africa. These are not matters of private correspondence between the Commission and the President but they concern the constitutional integrity of the Republic itself. It is therefore unacceptable that the President alone determines what the public may know while simultaneously implementing prosecutorial and administrative recommendations arising from reports that no one outside the Executive has been permitted to scrutinise.

This lack of transparency is particularly alarming because one of the structural problems that has contributed to the current crisis is the continued location of the State Security Agency within the Presidency itself. The concentration of intelligence authority under the direct political control of the President has repeatedly created opportunities for abuse, manipulation, and political interference.

President Ramaphosa is himself not a detached observer of these concerns. The Independent Panel established under Section 89 of the Constitution found prima facie evidence that, following the theft at Phala Phala, President Ramaphosa utilised members of the South African Police Service (SAPS) and elements associated with state security to privately investigate a matter concerning his personal business interests. Those findings demonstrated precisely why intelligence and policing institutions cannot be subordinated to the political interests of the President of the Republic.

The EFF therefore calls for the immediate publication of both the first and second interim reports, subject only to the limited redactions that may be strictly necessary to protect ongoing criminal investigations, witnesses, or legitimate national security concerns. The public deserves to understand the basis upon which repeated extensions are being granted, the progress already achieved by the Commission, and the recommendations that have already informed criminal investigations and executive decisions.

Furthermore, while we support the work of the Commission, we also believe that its terms of reference still remain too narrow to confront the full extent of criminal infiltration across South Africa’s law enforcement institutions. It is therefore concerning that several institutions and jurisdictions where credible allegations of criminal capture already exist fall outside the effective scope of the Commission’s work. The City of Cape Town, for example, has not featured meaningfully despite the arrest of former Democratic Alliance Mayoral Committee Member for Human Settlements, Malusi Booi, on allegations linked to a construction and extortion syndicate.

Similarly, there has been little meaningful interrogation of the role of the eThekwini Metro Police or numerous other metropolitan police departments across the country, despite longstanding allegations of corruption, collusion with organised crime, political interference, and failures to combat extortion syndicates.

The EFF therefore believes that while the Commission must be afforded the time and resources necessary to complete its current mandate, its findings should not mark the end of South Africa’s reckoning with criminal infiltration of the state. Their work must produce broader investigations into all institutions where credible evidence of organised criminal influence exists, irrespective of which political party governs them. No municipality, police service, or intelligence structure should be beyond scrutiny.

The EFF has faced legal challenges related to its protests and public demonstrations.

Read More at the Source