By Johnathan Paoli
IDAC state advocate Drushantha Ramsamy has accused former directorate head Andrea Johnson and chief investigator Dylan Perumal of manipulating investigations into senior police officials.
She told the Madlanga Commission on Thursday that the pair bypassed internal safeguards and pursued cases without an adequate evidentiary basis.
Ramsamy said Johnson exercised unchecked authority within IDAC, routinely deviated from established procedures and relied heavily on Perumal when making key decisions.
She alleged that Johnson used “Project Diversion” to ring-fence a group of Crime Intelligence-related investigations arising from a Section 27 referral by National Coloured Congress MP Fadiel Adams.
ALSO READ: Cabinet approves 10-year validity for some driving licence cards
The matters included an investigation into the appointment of Dineo Mokwele as a brigadier and head of Crime Intelligence’s Technical Support Services unit, as well as other allegations involving senior Crime Intelligence officials.
“Adv Johnson and Mr Perumal launched an orchestrated attack on (since suspended national police commissioner) General Masemola and (Crime Intelligence head) Lt General Khumalo using IDAC’s powerful investigation tools, and this will become evident in my statement and testimony,” Ramsamy said.
Ramsamy opened her evidence by accusing Johnson of misleading the commission during her earlier testimony.
She said her concerns extended beyond the Mokwele matter and the wider Crime Intelligence investigations to a separate case involving Masemola.
The case against Masemola arose from allegations linked to the approximately R228-million Medicare24 health-services contract and was separate from the Crime Intelligence investigations.
According to Ramsamy, Johnson established Project Diversion shortly after the Section 28(13) authorisation of the Crime Intelligence investigation.
“I do not know why she chose this name other than what is stated in her WhatsApp message,” she said.
Ramsamy said Johnson had earned the nickname “Flip Flop, Knee Jerk” among staff because of her tendency to reverse decisions.
“Adv Johnson frequently diverged from established protocols and exhibited an independent approach to tasks. These deviations from documented procedures were consistent and accompanied by an atmosphere of intimidation,” she said.
Ramsamy said Johnson’s approach changed dramatically once Perumal became involved.
She told the commission that Johnson “always listens to Perumal” and alleged that employees who questioned instructions faced consequences, including internal investigations.
ALSO READ: Labour Dept: 55% of inspected Gauteng petrol station employers breached labour laws
“No matter how the decision was made in a rational manner, it would then change according to what Mr Perumal wanted.”
Ramsamy also painted a troubling picture of the working environment within IDAC, saying many staff members required counselling.
“A review of the wellness report would reveal a surprising number of staff members are currently receiving counselling. This situation is not attributed to the nature of the work itself,” she said.
She claimed that the absence of effective oversight created opportunities for investigations to be manipulated.
“It’s so easy to manipulate statements, evidence included and who the witness will be. This has been done by Johnson and Perumal. There are no checks and balances. That’s the reason we are here today,” Ramsamy said.
According to Ramsamy, Johnson personally selected members of the Project Diversion team and believed junior prosecutors would not challenge her decisions.
“It is my belief that Adv Johnson handpicked me to be part of this Project because we had successfully investigated another section 27 referral matter. I also believe that Adv Johnson picked me because she thought I would not ask questions because I am a state advocate, not a senior state advocate or a deputy director of public prosecutions,” she said.
“What she did not anticipate was that Mr Mantsha Raphesu and I would question Project Diversion from the start,” Ramsamy added.
The IDAC state advocate went further, accusing Johnson and Perumal of manipulating the investigation arising from Adams’s complaint from its inception.
Ramsamy alleged that Johnson handed her the confidential Section 27 referral affidavit together with a handwritten note identifying people who were to be listed as suspects, despite their names not appearing in the referral itself.
She said Johnson told her that they were the suspects that “chief and I discussed are to be included”, referring to Perumal.
Ramsamy said Johnson and Perumal drove the investigations without an adequate evidentiary basis and later attempted to shift responsibility for the missing original Section 27 referral affidavit onto her.
Johnson is expected to be given an opportunity to respond through a Rule 3 notice.
The commission continues.
