A senior prosecutor from the Investigative Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC) has told the Madlanga Commission that a key document used to authorise an investigation into Crime Intelligence Brigadier Dineo Mokwele was wrongly attributed to her and could not have been lawfully approved on the date reflected.
State Advocate Drushantha Ramsamy made the revelations during emotional testimony before the Commission on Tuesday while giving evidence about a Section 28(1) application, the legal instrument used to authorise investigations into complex and high-level corruption cases.
Questioned by evidence leader Advocate Lee Seegers-Ncube, Ramsamy repeatedly denied preparing the application.
She also testified that the investigation could not have been authorised by Advocate Johnson on 30 May 2025, as stated in the document.
Asked to explain why, Ramsamy referred to a meeting held three days earlier, on 27 May 2025, where she said Advocate Johnson instructed her to prepare a single “umbrella” Section 28(1) application covering all Crime Intelligence investigations.
As she began describing the meeting, Ramsamy became visibly emotional and paused several times before asking the Commission for a moment to compose herself.
“Advocate Johnson instructed me to prepare one umbrella Section 28(1) for all Crime Intelligence matters…” she said before breaking down.
Her testimony raises fresh questions about the authenticity and authorisation of documents used to launch sensitive Crime Intelligence investigations.
The Commission adjourned Ramsamy’s evidence, with her expected to return on a date yet to be announced to continue her testimony.