investigator

Investigator sent an email to Advocate Johnson on 4 December 2024 to inform her that including Ms Ramsamy, staff would be in court on another matter on 6 December 2024 and could not attend a scheduled staff meeting.

“On the morning of 4 December 2024, an investigator working on another case...sent an email to Advocate Johnson...informing her that we, including me, would be in court on another matter that Friday. In other words, he was informing Advocate Johnson that we would not be able to attend the staff meeting.”

An investigator under section 29(a) of the NPA Amendment Act may exercise powers such as search, seizure, arrest, execution of warrants, and investigation of offences subject to direction by the head of the Investigating Directorate.

“An investigator ... may, subject to the control and direction of a head of an Investigating Directorate, exercise such powers... search, seizure, arrest, execution of warrants, ... investigation of offences”

Advocate Johnson confirmed he designates investigators for cases, providing them with a Section 27 application summarizing suspected offenses, implicated persons, and investigation details, which then authorizes investigation and prosecution team formation.

“That is correct... the team would have gone through the Section 27 document and they would have come up with an application setting out suspected offences, whom might be implicated, and what kind of investigation... an application and sets out a summary of the facts as well that would then support the application... they put down the names of the persons who will form part of that team to conduct the investigation and the prosecution... it is an authorisation setting out offences and allegations, persons to be investigated... this is what they need to go and do.”

Advocate Johnson was unsure if the investigator he designated for a case had indeed seen the Section 27 referral on which charges and arrest warrants were based prior to engagement with the DPP in June 2025.

“You now, as head of IDAC... do you satisfy yourself that the person on whose affidavit you are relying to bring these charges... you now as Advocate Johnson, at no stage do you satisfy yourself that he has seen the Section 27 referral.”

No undue influence is exerted by the Investigating Director on investigators or prosecutors to act outside evidence, law, or prosecutorial policy.

“you say you have not instructed or otherwise influenced any investigator or prosecutor to act other than in accordance with the evidence, the law, the applicable prosecutorial policy”

Warrant Officer Mpangase was not the investigator and had no control over the timing for taking exhibits for analysis.

“you were not the investigator... you had no control over the timing , the investigator 's timing”

The complainants' statements were accepted as true without interrogation, leading to conclusions that suspects obstructed justice based solely on those allegations, raising questions about investigative impartiality.

“You accept the complaint as true...these people were conducting an operation...you close your mind...you accept the allegation as true and draw your conclusions...raises the question, why do you even get statements if you are not going to engage with them?”

Director Malatji received a call from an investigator in September (post-suspension) regarding the misconduct case and was taken through the allegations.

“it was in September... that I received a call from the investigator who was calling to say... I am investigating this case of misconduct against you and I wanted to check if we could meet just to take each other through what the allegations are.”