By Johnathan Paoli
Controversial forensic examiner Paul O’Sullivan’s confrontation with Parliament’s ad hoc committee intensified on Thursday when he threatened to withdraw his cooperation from the committee, following what he claims as “interrogation” from MPs.
In the final stretch of his first day on Tuesday, O’Sullivan said he appeared before the committee to provide evidence about entrenched corruption in the criminal justice system not to defend himself against what he insists are malicious claims manufactured by “people who belong in prison”.
“Am I here to give evidence or to be interrogated? I am going to withdraw my cooperation. I am not going to assist in a kangaroo court. I came here to give evidence about the corruption in the criminal justice system which has resulted in the mess that we have in the criminal justice system today,” he said.
“The false allegations that have been made against me will take a lot more than an hour to get through. And if it’s going to be curtailed because people don’t want to hear the truth, it means what we’re actually doing is not allowing a witness to explain why this happened and why that happened.”
He accused several unnamed “criminals”, referring to some of the previous witnesses, of peddling false narratives that he had infiltrated the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID), the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and the South African Police Service (SAPS) for ulterior motives.
“What I cannot contemplate is that everyone should think I woke up one day and decided to infiltrate IPID, the police and the NPA, because that pack of lies has been peddled in this House by multiple witnesses that belong in prison,” he said.
“I didn’t come here just to defend myself against the allegations of criminals. And if that’s the only thing the committee wants to hear, then it will be a problem, because the reality is that those allegations were only made against me because I took steps to hold them accountable for their criminal conduct.”
His testimony was also dominated by his long-running battles with senior SAPS leadership including former acting commissioner Khomotso Phahlane and former national commissioner Riah Phiyega, whom he has accused of enabling, protecting or participating in corruption.
O’Sullivan detailed how he first met former IPID head Robert McBride in January 2015 and briefed him on emails he had sent to then-national commissioner Phiyega about alleged wrongdoing inside SAPS.
He said he later became aware, through the so-called “spy tapes”, that senior officials were discussing plans to “deal decisively with the O’Sullivan factor”, which he saw as confirmation that elements within SAPS leadership viewed him as a threat to entrenched corrupt networks.
The confrontation with the committee worsened as MPs demanded that he stop recounting what some described as “success stories” and begin responding directly to allegations raised against him by previous witnesses.
ActionSA’s MP Dereleen James expressed open frustration, as members signaled to the chair that they were “tired of his stories” and intended to subject him to tougher questioning on Wednesday.
“We brought this witness here today to respond to allegations made by other witnesses against him. We are not here to sit and listen to him day and night for two days,” she said.
EFF leader Julius Malema also rebuked O’Sullivan for what he viewed as attempts to lecture or challenge the committee.
“When we started here, you tried to tell us how to conduct our business. You are not going to come here and disrespect us. Treat us with respect, we are honourable members. We are running these proceedings, you are not running these proceedings,” Malema told him.
Ad hoc committee chairperson Soviet Lekganyane similarly pushed back after O’Sullivan insisted he would not answer questions that could “violate” his personal security.
O’Sullivan said he has survived multiple threats to his life and that revealing certain personal details or operational matters could endanger him.
Lekganyane reminded him of the obligations of a witness.
“So any allegations that have been made or any information that members of the committee want to probe with you, they are going to do so. Let me remind you that you are under oath; let’s cooperate,” he said.
As the first day closed, O’Sullivan’s testimony remained incomplete, with MPs warning that he will face pointed cross-examination when the hearing resumes.
The committee must still interrogate serious allegations against him, including claims that he interfered in police operations, accusations he insists were manufactured by the very senior officials whose corruption he exposed.
INSIDE POLITICS
