By Johnathan Paoli
IDAC state advocate Drushantha Ramsamy on Thursday accused the directorate’s former head, Andrea Johnson, of telling “many untruths” about her involvement in the investigation into Brigadier Dineo Mokwele.
The allegation prompted the Madlanga Commission to direct that Johnson be served with a Rule 3 notice, giving her an opportunity to respond.
“I have to set the record straight at the outset regarding Advocate Andrea Johnson’s testimony before the Commission,” Ramsamy told commissioners.
ALSO READ: SA government doesn’t have a backbone, Ngobese-Zuma tells Australian broadcaster
“Advocate Johnson told many untruths about me and my involvement in what is now known as the Mokwele case. She did not disclose that I raised concerns from the outset and repeatedly thereafter,” she added.
Commission chair Mbuyiseli Madlanga said allegations contained in Ramsamy’s statement had not been canvassed during Johnson’s evidence and questioned why they had not been put to the former IDAC head while she was on the witness stand.
Evidence leader Advocate Lee Segeels-Ncube told the commission that the allegations only came to light during Johnson’s testimony and that Ramsamy’s statement had been finalised the previous evening.
As a result, Johnson is to be served with the Rule 3 notice.
Seegels-Ncube said that during Johnson’s testimony on 22 July concerning Mokwele, she received a message from a Hawks official saying Ramsamy had made “certain disclosures” and wanted to make those disclosures to the commission.
According to Segeels-Ncube, Ramsamy sought to testify after Johnson implicated her during earlier evidence, prompting her to come forward with allegations.
ALSO READ: Impeachment committee to appeal Phala Phala interdict ruling
Ramsamy, who joined IDAC in March 2023, told the commission she would deliver her evidence in two separate statements because of its scope.
She said her first statement would deal with her consultation with complainant Fadiel Adams on 6 January 2025 and the origins of the Crime Intelligence investigations.
Her second statement would focus on subsequent developments, including the Crime Intelligence investigations and the Medicare24 Tshwane contract.
Ramsamy said her concerns also included investigations involving suspended National Police Commissioner General Fannie Masemola.
She alleged that Johnson decided to consolidate those matters into what she called “Project Diversion” shortly after authorisation was granted for a section 28(13) preparatory inquiry into the Crime Intelligence-related allegations.
Ramsamy further rejected any suggestion that responsibility for allegedly irregular processes rested with her, insisting Johnson directed the project from the beginning.
“I am profoundly disturbed, but not surprised by Advocate Johnson’s testimony. She sought to blame me for so-called irregular or problematic processes,” Ramsamy said.
She alleged that Johnson personally selected the project’s team and believed she would not question decisions because she was a state advocate rather than a senior advocate or deputy director of public prosecutions.
Ramsamy also claimed she prepared documents on Johnson’s instructions that were inconsistent with IDAC’s standard operating procedures and her own assessment of the merits of Adams’ complaints.
The commission continues.
