By Johnathan Paoli
Forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan has levelled sweeping allegations of corruption, abuse of state resources and deliberate deception against senior South African Police Service (SAPS) officials, while accusing Parliament’s Ad Hoc Committee probing police misconduct of obstructing his efforts to testify.
In a detailed written submission to the Ad Hoc Committee investigating allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, O’Sullivan alleges a coordinated pattern of criminality within senior SAPS structures, particularly in KwaZulu-Natal, centred on the misuse of covert operational funds, unlawful property acquisitions and the shielding of compromised officers.
“From a criminal’s perspective, the slush fund is a proverbial ‘manna from heaven’. The slush fund is easily available cash, to the tune of over half a billion Rand pa., with ZERO controls over how it is spent.
“The slush fund budget has increased by more than 500% in the last 13 years, which is way higher than inflation. The best part about the slush fund, is that it can be withdrawn and spent in secret and if anyone asks any questions, they are told that ‘The fund is TOP-SECRET, and you may not enquire about the utilisation on of it,'” O’Sullivan said in his written submission.
He has positioned his submission as a rebuttal to testimony already heard by the committee, arguing that Parliament has been misled through statements he claims are demonstrably false, incomplete or intentionally deceptive.
He maintains that his allegations are supported by documentary evidence, including bank records, company registrations, property deeds and internal SAPS documentation, and says several matters have already been referred to oversight and law-enforcement bodies.
One of O’Sullivan’s most serious allegations concerns the existence of a covert slush fund linked to the Provincial Killings Task Team (PKTT) in KwaZulu-Natal. He alleges that funds earmarked for legitimate crime-fighting operations were diverted into private accounts and used for unauthorised purposes, including personal benefit.
He disputes claims that the PKTT operated lawfully and transparently, alleging that its financial arrangements contravened the Public Finance Management Act and SAPS regulations.
According to O’Sullivan, testimony suggesting that the PKTT neither controlled nor benefited from these funds is false, and he alleges that senior officers were fully aware of, and complicit in, the irregular financial structure underpinning the unit.
O’Sullivan accuses Mkhwanazi of making material misrepresentations to Parliament, particularly regarding his knowledge of PKTT funding arrangements, his relationship with individuals allegedly benefiting from PKT-linked funds, and his awareness of alleged criminal conduct by officers under his command.
The submission also implicates suspended Deputy National Commissioner Lt-Gen Shadrack Sibiya, whom O’Sullivan alleges played a central role in authorising or defending irregular practices.
He disputes claims that Sibiya acted to dismantle corruption, instead alleging that Sibiya shielded compromised officers and interfered in both disciplinary and criminal processes.
A substantial portion of the submission focuses on property and asset acquisitions allegedly inconsistent with declared income.
O’Sullivan alleges that certain SAPS officials acquired high-value properties through opaque financial arrangements involving trusts, family members or corporate entities.
He contends that public explanations for these acquisitions are contradicted by deeds office records and bank transactions, raising prima facie grounds for investigation under anti-corruption and anti-money-laundering legislation.
Beyond financial misconduct, O’Sullivan alleges that specialised crime-fighting units were abused for unlawful purposes, including targeting internal SAPS rivals, intimidating witnesses and interfering with investigations.
He claims these abuses were systemic rather than isolated, and that whistle-blowers were marginalised, threatened or discredited instead of protected.
A recurring theme in the submission is O’Sullivan’s assertion that claims of a “plot” or “agenda” against certain SAPS leaders are fabricated to deflect attention from misconduct, undermine investigators and politicise oversight processes.
He says that Parliament itself has been misled, urging the committee to treat certain testimony as potential perjury, refer aspects of the evidence for criminal investigation, and compel full disclosure of financial and operational records.
While his written allegations have now been placed before Parliament, O’Sullivan’s appearance before the Ad Hoc Committee remains unresolved. He has accused the committee, chaired by Soviet Lekganyane, of deliberately obstructing his attempt to testify by refusing to allow him to appear virtually.
O’Sullivan insists that security concerns prevent him from testifying in person, saying he is willing to testify via video link or from a South African embassy abroad, provided his location is not disclosed.
He has warned that should the committee subpoena him to appear physically, his legal team will seek urgent court relief.
The committee has rejected his request, insisting that he must appear in person in Parliament.
Lekganyane has said the committee will not be dictated to by witnesses regarding the terms of their appearance and has confirmed that a subpoena has been authorised.
The committee continues this week with a meeting on Monday on the schedule ahead.
INSIDE POLITICS