Veteran investigative journalist Mzilikazi waAfrika has used the anniversary of his controversial 2010 arrest to draw parallels with the recent legal troubles involving SAPS Crime Intelligence head Lieutenant-General Dumisani Khumalo.
WaAfrika, who was arrested on 4 August 2010 while working for the Sunday Times, said he was “arrested, humiliated and treated like a hoodlum on trumped charges for standing for the truth and exposing corruption.”
In a strongly worded social media post, he argued that the alleged use of law enforcement agencies to intimidate people linked to politically sensitive investigations has a long history in South Africa.
“People think what IDAC is doing to General Dumisani Khumalo and others started today,” waAfrika wrote.
WaAfrika was arrested in connection with an alleged fraudulent resignation letter purportedly written by then Mpumalanga Premier David Mabuza to President Jacob Zuma.
He faced charges of:
– Fraud
– Forgery
– Uttering (using a forged document as genuine)
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) later withdrew all charges in September 2010 after reviewing the docket and deciding that further investigation was required.
The matter was never successfully pursued against him, and he later won a wrongful arrest claim against the police, with reports indicating that the arrest was acknowledged to have been wrongful and unlawful.
The case became one of the most significant press freedom controversies of the post-apartheid era.
WaAfrika’s comments come amid ongoing controversy surrounding Lieutenant-General Dumisani Khumalo, the head of SAPS Crime Intelligence.
Khumalo became embroiled in a dispute involving the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC) over allegations linked to the appointment of Brigadier Dineo Mokwele to a senior Crime Intelligence post.
IDAC alleged that the appointment process involved fraud, forgery, corruption and defeating the ends of justice.
WaAfrika did not claim that his case and Khumalo’s are identical, but suggested that both raise broader concerns about the use of state institutions against individuals who become inconvenient to powerful interests.
About the Author
