The South African Police Services used to be feared by criminals. Though sophisticated crime syndicates operating in South Africa chafed under the SAPS, they all accepted its authority over law and order. Throughout its various reform and transformation journeys, those who were at variance with the law knew their limits. As a result, society knew and believed the police would protect them against criminality.
The commencement of the Madlanga Commission might be one of the clearest signs that those days could be behind us. The revelations during Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi's press conference about divisions within the criminal justice system value chain may have dealt a severe blow to the trust between SAPS, in particular, and society. These revelations, apart from casting doubt on the credibility of the policing system and elites, are the culmination of a system that had already begun to suffer from an integrity gap with the public.
The private household expenditure on security, asset insurance, car tracking services and recently kidnappings and anti-GBV litigation costs reflect a country where the police can no longer be trusted to ensure citizen safety or uphold the rules-based order that the constitutional framework promises. The unchecked freedom of criminals in society, the contempt for lawfulness and the theft of strategic infrastructure at the expense of scrap metal and underworld copper wire syndicates demonstrate a nation abandoned by its policing system.
In Mkhwanazi’s vocabulary, which the Madlanga Commission is established to either confirm or disprove, the senior levels of the criminal justice system are mingling with kingpins involved in criminal activities. The arrest of senior officials in the SAPS crime intelligence unit, the suspension of the police minister, the sidelining of the second-in-command at SAPS and the turmoil surrounding certain police dockets point to a system in crisis. There is no doubt that among those running the system, several high-ranking officers are compromised.
It is not only the revelations of new or different personalities such as Vusi ‘Cat’ Matlala that will be at stake; it will be about understanding why the system allowed such personalities access to the powerful and their influence.
While the country expects criminality to be scrutinised at the Madlanga Commission, the judge’s opening statement will reveal who or what is truly on trial. The foundation of the executive authority’s indecisiveness that has overwhelmed South Africa has strengthened the criminal element, leading them to believe that the government has neglected its primary duty of safeguarding its citizens.
The Mkhwanazisation, a condition where police officers become confident only in loyally executing lawful policies and orders of the government of the day, of SAPS, might be on trial more than criminality if society does not remain vigilant.
Though some commissioners have already stated that the president will not be bound by its findings, the commission undoubtedly continues the post-Apartheid state’s journey of self-reflection. It will send positive and strategic signals about how the entire public service should be supported in its mission to loyally execute the lawful policies of the government of the day. Judge Madlanga faces a historic moment that few before him have experienced. He will define or redefine what it means to tell the truth to power beyond 2026 and 2029.
It is not only the revelations of new or different personalities such as Vusi ‘Cat’ Matlala that will be at stake; it will be about understanding why the system allowed such personalities access to the powerful and their influence. It is the innocence of the South African establishment, its political elites and most importantly its legal cognitive elites who will also be on trial. In Thuli Madonsela’s terminology, this will not be the state capture commission but a criminal justice cluster chapter of the state of capture inquiry. The focus of the public concern, which the law states is the basis upon which the president exercises his power to establish commissions, is unequivocal.
When the commission begins sitting, there will be a temptation to submit criminal dockets that should usually be handled by regular policing. The police service, especially its Mkhwanazis, would have to overhaul everything about policing to survive, especially as the commission might become an active participant, though with noble intents, in efforts to further undermine the inherent independence of the criminal justice system.
While it is true that the president exercises executive authority as head of state alongside other cabinet members, in this case, the minister of police, the constitution clearly states who controls policing. It assigns the supervision and management of the police service to the national police commissioner and, through a formal delegation process, to other commissioned officers. This provision endorses the Mkhwanazisation of the police services in a way that might offer South Africa a chance to escape from deep state capture, which judge Madlanga would help South Africa understand to what extent.
Clearly, the police service is a constitutional institution; professional officers can work together to safeguard policing as a vocation that lawfully executes the lawful policies (and orders) of the government of the day. As a professional body, the police should focus beyond self-preservation towards the safety and security of citizens. It should involve weakening the criminal elite and its power networks. The Madlanga commission is more than merely an inquiry; it is a stepping stone for ethical policing.
With the establishment of a coalition government system, there will be an increase in individuals serving as head of state loyal to the interests of a coalition that commands a certain threshold. This means that the advantage of size and scale in politics will decrease, and single-issue politics, which might be unlawful, could become more dominant, with power held by a strong interest group defending an individual. During these times, public functions such as policing, defence and national intelligence will need to rethink what it means to loyally carry out the lawful policies and orders of the government of the day. It is a national responsibility.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.