The high-profile inquiry into Johannesburg prosecutions boss Andrew Chauke resumes on Monday morning, drawing renewed public attention to the internal battles within the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) Shamila Batohi, who took the stand as the very first witness when the commission began last week, is set to return for further testimony. Her continued presence underscores the importance of this investigation, which probes allegations of politically influenced decision-making at the highest levels of the prosecuting authority.
The inquiry, established to investigate serious concerns about prosecutorial integrity, places Andrew Chauke at the centre of accusations that he abused his authority by making prosecutorial decisions based on political considerations rather than legal merit. As the complainant, Batohi has presented the commission with extensive testimony disputing the legitimacy of Chauke’s actions in several critical cases.
At the heart of the inquiry are two major prosecutorial decisions that Andrew Chauke handled during his tenure. The first involves the controversial 2012 racketeering charges against former KwaZulu-Natal Hawks boss Johan Booysen. These charges were later withdrawn, raising questions about the basis and motivation for their institution in the first place. The second relates to Chauke’s decision not to prosecute former Crime Intelligence head Richard Mdluli for the alleged 1999 murder of Oupa Ramogibe, who had been romantically involved with Mdluli’s partner. Both cases attracted national attention for their political sensitivity, prompting deeper scrutiny into whether prosecutorial discretion had been compromised.
Andrew Chauke inquiry resumes with Shamila Batohi returning to give further testimony
Last week, the commission focused primarily on the Booysen matter. Batohi testified that Andrew Chauke had overstepped his jurisdiction by assuming leadership of the prosecution team in a region where he had no authority. As the Johannesburg Director of Public Prosecutions, Chauke had no official mandate to intervene in KwaZulu-Natal matters, a point Batohi strongly emphasised. She stated that his involvement not only breached protocol but also undermined the authority of the acting KwaZulu-Natal DPP.
According to Batohi, Chauke’s interference suggested an intention to influence the outcome of the Booysen case, raising concerns about impartiality and the independence of the NPA. Her remarks underscore the core issue before the commission: whether Chauke’s conduct reflects a pattern of politically motivated decisions that violated both ethical and legal standards.
While the inquiry into Andrew Chauke’s actions is of major significance, the commission has not been without its administrative challenges. The panel, chaired by retired Justice Bess Nkabinde, noted several procedural issues during last week’s sessions. Among the most pressing concerns was the poor pagination and general disorganisation of key documents submitted to the commission. These issues not only slowed proceedings but also highlighted the need for more rigorous preparation by the parties involved.
Justice Nkabinde openly criticised the technical errors, stressing that a case of such national importance requires thorough, accurate documentation to ensure the integrity of the inquiry. The administrative flaws were acknowledged by evidence leader Advocate David Mhlamonyane, who reassured the commission that these problems would be rectified and that he would be fully prepared for Monday’s continuation of testimony.
The assurance comes at a crucial time, as the commission moves into deeper, more complex aspects of the probe. With Batohi returning to the stand, the inquiry is expected to delve further into the second major case involving Mdluli. Observers anticipate that her testimony will provide insight into why Chauke chose not to proceed with prosecution in a case that carried significant national interest and longstanding controversy.
As the inquiry continues, the spotlight remains firmly on Andrew Chauke and the allegations that his prosecutorial decisions were swayed by political considerations. The outcome of this commission has far-reaching implications—not only for Chauke’s future within the NPA but also for public confidence in South Africa’s prosecutorial independence.
The next stages of testimony will be critical in determining whether Andrew Chauke’s actions constituted misconduct or abuse of power. With Batohi leading the charge as the primary complainant, the commission’s findings may set an important precedent for how the NPA handles internal accountability and oversight in the years ahead.
Source- EWN