Feroz Khan facing criminal charges for defying subpoena to appear at inquiry

Embattled former Crime Intelligence officer Feroz Khan was at home on Monday, 28 September 2026, instead of testifying before the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry.

Khan should have appeared before the commission in person or via video link – a subpoena had been issued to ensure this.

But late on Sunday, his legal team launched what it termed a postponement application to try to have Khan’s appearance rolled over for a month.

This did not go down well with commissioners and evidence leaders.

More criminal charges against Khan

Speaking during the proceedings, which Khan should have attended on Monday, evidence leader Adila Hassim said she had “very, very grave concerns” about the so-called postponement application.

Hassim described it as a “fait accompli”.

She ultimately said that the Madlanga Commission should record Khan’s non-appearance, which breached a section of the Commissions Act, and refer the matter to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) for consideration.

Hassim reiterated that Khan’s “defiance” of the subpoena and his breach of the act needed the NPA’s attention.

Commission chairperson Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga also said that it seemed the subpoena, stating Khan should appear on 28, 29 and 30 September, had meant nothing.

Madlanga refused the postponement application.

He also had strong words for Khan and his lawyers: “His non-appearance today is a flagrant disregard of a subpoena of this commission.”

The saga then escalated, with Madlanga announcing that criminal charges would be lodged against Khan “for his failure to attend” the commission, physically or virtually, on Monday.

Firing line

This now adds to Khan’s woes. He is already facing criminal charges in a case linked to unrought gold and the release of a suspect.

Khan was officially dismissed from the South African Police Service earlier this month, on 2 September, for failing to appear before an officer involved in a disciplinary process against him.

He was initially meant to have testified before the Madlanga Commission at the start of July, but just days before he was wounded in a shooting in Houghton, Johannesburg.

Read more

Khan out, Khumalo cleared: How the Crime Intelligence tables have turned

September 3, 2026

Khan’s subsequent admission to hospital and health issues had previously prevented him from testifying before the commission.

That, however, did not stop evidence about him being read into the record.

The Madlanga Commission heard allegations against Khan about tweaked tenders, a tobacco boss and a politician.

Khan’s proximity to disgraced former Investigating Directorate Against Corruption boss Andrea Johnson also came under scrutiny.

Khan’s case and ‘triggers’

During Monday’s commission proceedings, Khan’s legal representative Muhammed Vally repeatedly tried to defend Khan’s non-appearance.

Vally said an expert report by a doctor (who the commission had approved) agreed with the findings of another doctor.

It was suggested that instead of physically appearing at the Madlanga Commission, a virtual arrangement be made for Khan.

Read more

Feroz Khan — Centrifugal force in SAPS tender dealings with tobacco bosses, inquiry hears

July 3, 2026

Based on what Vally said, it sounded like Khan was sensitive and easily stressed.

Vally explained that Khan needed to be in a familiar environment when testifying to avoid “triggers” that could lead to his testimony being interrupted.

Khan would also need regular breaks.

‘Relapse’

Hassim put it to Vally that the option for Khan to appear via virtual link – in other words, remotely – had previously been put to Khan’s lawyers.

A section of a communication to them stated that his scheduled appearance before the commission on Monday had been confirmed. It also said: “We request that you advise on your requirements for facilitating the said virtual appearance.”

Hassim said that “this was rejected by Mr Khan’s attorneys”, and their response to it was to say that he had experienced a relapse.

During the proceedings, Vally kept referring to what a doctor had stated about Khan. But Madlanga pointed out that no doctor had said that Khan was not fit to appear (physically or virtually) before the commission on Monday.

This underpinned Madlanga’s announcement that criminal charges would be lodged against Khan.

Another part of Monday’s commission proceedings may focus on an application for sections of Khan’s evidence to be dealt with in camera, given sensitivities around certain information.

If that application is granted, those proceedings may be heard on 6 October. DM