Freedom Under Law application

General Mkhwanazi was aware of the unlawful obstruction allegations central to the Freedom Under Law application and chose to sidestep those allegations in his deposition, thus acquiescing to the cover-up by omission or deliberate participation.

“General Mkhwanazi was aware of the allegations in the Freedom Under Law application because the founding affidavit had been served on SAPS while he was Acting National Commissioner and he had deposed to the initial answer ... but chose to sidestep the unlawful obstruction allegation and simply not comment ... if he knew and chose to keep quiet, he colludes by omission ... or he was part of the cover-up.”

General Mkhwanazi made a grievance against General Phiyega for being untruthful in her answering affidavit to the High Court, indicating he knew of the allegation of unlawful obstruction to him at the center of the application.

“General Mkhwanazi therefore knew that the allegation of an unlawful obstruction to him was at the centre of the application and the reply from General Phiyega would have to admit that central allegation if she was not going to perjure herself.”

General Mkhwanazi suspended General Mdluli again on 25 May following the launch of the Freedom Under Law urgent application.

“General Mkhwanazi re-suspended General Mdluli on the 25th of May”

General Mkhwanazi had to re-suspend General Mdluli because he received the urgent application on his desk and had no choice but to act accordingly.

“he did not really have much of a choice, because this application landed on his desk on the 15th of May. So ten days later, while he is doing his affidavit to respond to this application, this urgent application, he re-suspends him, and I am saying he was in a corner. He had no choice. He had to do it”