By Simon Nare
Former National Director of Public Prosecutions Advocate Shamila Batohi has withdrawn from the Nkabinde Inquiry and will not complete her testimony, citing untenable legal limitations arising from the panel’s refusal to allow her to consult her lawyers while under oath.
Batohi’s legal team submitted a letter to the panel on Thursday in which she said she would not return to conclude her testimony.
“The refusal to permit me to consult with my attorneys, I consider it neither appropriate nor tenable for me to continue providing evidence without the benefit of legal advice,” she stated in the letter to the panel.
The inquiry is probing the fitness of South Gauteng Director of Public Prosecutions Advocate Andrew Chauke to hold office. It is chaired by retired Constitutional Court Justice Bess Nkabinde and was established by President Cyril Ramaphosa after complaints by Batohi.
Batohi walked out of the inquiry in December 2025 while still under cross-examination by Advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi SC, who is representing Chauke.
Her request for legal representation was granted, but her application to consult on the testimony she had already given was refused by the panel.
Following the ruling, the State Attorney wrote to her, enquiring through her lawyers whether and when she would be ready to return to continue her testimony.
The former NPA head wanted the letter to be read into the record. The panel refused the request on the basis that the letter was not evidence because it was not made under oath and had no probative value. The panel also said the letter made allegations against some witnesses and the panel itself.
“We are of the view that the letter has no probative value and has the potential prejudice to those mentioned in that letter, including this panel. The request is therefore refused and the letter or statement will not be handed out to form part of the record,” ruled Nkabinde.
In the letter, Batohi complained that she had faced hostile cross-examination by Chauke’s legal team even though the inquiry was a fact-finding one.
“I have, throughout, been subjected to robust, and, at times, hostile cross examination and have been labelled an “accuser” or the “complainant”, which I respectfully consider to be both incorrect and inappropriate. I was, in truth, discharging my duties as the then NDPP, in making a referral to the President in accordance with the NPA Act.
“The cumulative effect of these circumstances has, regrettably, created an environment that I have experienced as hostile, accusatory and discouraging to the full and uninhibited presentation of evidence, in an inquisitorial fact-finding investigative Enquiry of this nature. This concern is further reflective of the reluctance of certain witnesses, initially identified, to ultimately testify,” she wrote.
Batohi’s legal team submitted that the document was merely a response to a question about whether she would return to the inquiry to complete her testimony.
The team further argued that, because of the panel’s ruling that she could not consult while under oath, they were limited in how they could advise her on her next move. They also submitted that, because she was out of the country, she could not present the letter in person to the panel.
“In light of my decision not to continue with my evidence before the Enquiry, I once again record, with due respect, that I remain of the view that, as a matter of constitutional principle and procedural fairness, it would have been appropriate to allow HNM to consult with me, to advise me and to represent my interests in a meaningful and effective manner. This is regrettably not possible in the light of the decision of the Panel,” she stated.
Nkabinde noted that Batohi had left the country two days after her application to consult while under oath was denied and had not informed the panel until Thursday.
The evidence leaders submitted that, because Batohi would no longer continue with her testimony, they were closing their case. Chauke’s legal team also closed its case.
Nkabinde directed the parties to make written submissions.
“All parties are directed to file comprehensive written submissions, not limited to heads of argument, by Thursday, 14 May 2026. No submissions will be accepted after this deadline, and the Secretary of the Enquiry has been directed not to distribute any late submissions,” she said.
INSIDE POLITICS
