Why is the MK party fighting the Madlanga Commission?

As the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Criminality, Political Interference and Corruption in the Criminal Justice System finally started its hearings on Wednesday, 17 September 2025, members of the uMkhonto Wesizwe (MK) party protested outside the venue, the Brigitte Mabandla Justice College in Pretoria. Their message was clear — the commission should not have started and its very existence is flawed.

The commission, chaired by Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, was initially meant to begin hearings on 1 September but was delayed after the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development failed to provide the necessary infrastructure. While the commission got its ducks in a row, the Jacob Zuma-led party says the hearings should have been postponed further until its court challenge to the legality of the commission had been resolved.

Read more: SA’s R147m cop commission countdown — disrupted careers and ‘dirty politics’ point to imminent policing bombshells

That court case is expected to proceed on Thursday and Friday.

“We’re saying that they should have held off and said, ‘Well, let’s allow the court process to unfold and ensue. Let’s see what the outcome thereof is,’ and then off the back of what the outcome of the court is, take it forward.

“But instead, they chose a date just on the brink of a full sitting of three judges, a full bench. So if you look at it, what does that mean? It prejudices the South African purse and the South African public,” said MK party spokesperson Nhlamulo Ndhlela. 

The commission was announced by President Cyril Ramaphosa in July, following explosive allegations by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.   

Mkhwanazi alleged that Police Minister Senzo Mchunu had attempted to disband the Political Killings Task Team to shield politically connected criminals. Mchunu denied the claims, but Ramaphosa placed him on special leave and appointed Firoz Cachalia, who is not a Cabinet member, as acting police minister. 

Read more: Madlanga Commission: Mchunu has big questions to answer as Mkhwanazi starts spilling the beans 

At the heart of MK’s legal challenge is Ramaphosa’s handling of the issue.  It argues that he should have dismissed Mchunu outright rather than granting him paid leave and perks, and that Cachalia’s appointment was unconstitutional.

Why MK doesn’t trust the commission

MK leaders insist the judiciary cannot investigate itself, pointing to Mkhwanazi’s claim that judges were also implicated.

“We have stated categorically that there is no need for a judicial commission of inquiry. If you review the allegations made by General Mkhwanazi, he states that the judiciary itself is complicit and implicated. So you cannot have a situation where you’re going to have a presiding over yourself or peers.

“How do we know that Madlanga himself is not the one that’s investigating himself? So that alone from the optics, is not something that we believe, you know, brings about any level of trust, public trust, in that case,” Ndhlela said.

There has been no evidence or suggestion that Madlanga has been accused of wrongdoing. 

University of Cape Town Department of Public Law head, Professor Pierre de Vos, has previously written: “As the leader of the MK party should know from personal experience, [this] claim does not hold water. Judges are presumed to be impartial and have a duty to recuse themselves from hearing a matter if they are conflicted. A party which has evidence to the contrary should apply for the recusal of the specific judge.”

Read more: MK party’s ConCourt challenge to Mchunu’s removal raises important constitutional law issues

The party has also raised concerns about the cost of the proceedings, which are expected to run for six months at an estimated R147-million.  

“It is simply unacceptable,” argues the MK party, “because the commission cannot make binding findings, but will seek to establish the facts and make recommendations, as Parliament already has oversight committees for such matters.”

The legal battle

The MK party first approached the Constitutional Court to stop the inquiry, but the court dismissed its bid, saying it lacked jurisdiction. The case has now shifted to the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Johannesburg, where it is scheduled to be heard on 18 and 19 September.

For MK and its legal team, led by advocate Dali Mpofu, the apex court’s dismissal was a “travesty of justice”.

Read more: ConCourt judgment reserved on legality of Ramaphosa's actions in wake of Mkhwanazi allegations 

The party has previously staged nationwide marches in support of Mkhwanazi, praising him for having “exposed the system”. In a “total shutdown” march to the Union Buildings, the party said it was tired of judges and police allegedly being bought, and vowed to lead from the front as the country’s official opposition. In the same march, it also called for Ramaphosa’s resignation. 

Ndhlela said the party was confident the high court would rule in its favour. If not, it would “explore other avenues available”.

The commission is expected to deliver an interim report within three months and a final one in six, but its progress rests on the outcome of the MK party’s court challenge. DM