Mchunu ethics probe at ‘very advanced stage’, says public protector

The public protector says its investigation into the conduct of suspended police minister Senzo Mchunu under the executive members’ Ethics Act is at an advanced stage.

“We are at a very advanced stage, and the nature of such investigations is that as you think we are now closing, there is more information that becomes available. We are following up on that information as we edge closer to the end of the investigation,” said chief operating officer advocate Nelisiwe Nkabinde.

She said the investigation was being conducted within its mandate under the executive members’ Ethics Act after allegations that Mchunu had breached the act and the applicable code of ethics for cabinet members.

This came as public protector advocate Kholeka Gcaleka released the quarter two findings on investigation reports on Thursday.

Nkabinde confirmed the public protector had received co-operation, including from KwaZulu-Natal provincial police commissioner Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.

“We have received full co-operation from everyone, and that has led to us getting more information and evidence as we continue with the consultations. We are not running parallel to the Madlanga commission. We are investigating within the mandate of the public protector.”

Mchunu was placed on a special leave of absence by President Cyril Ramaphosa on July 13 2025, pending an inquiry into allegations of corruption, fraud and political interference in policing.

She said the public protector has found no irregularities in the appointment of Leonard Lekgetho as COO of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU).

Lekgetho is head of the SIU and was officially appointed by Ramaphosa in September after acting in the role since February, when the former head, advocate Andy Mothibi, was appointed national director of public prosecutions.

The public protector investigation stems from a complaint by a person referred to only as P Maharaj on July 19 2024, who challenged the recruitment and selection process used to appoint the SIU’s COO.

Maharaj applied for the position and was shortlisted. Maharaj believed the SIU recruitment process was significantly flawed for a variety of reasons.

According to Maharaj, the SIU advertised the vacancy in February 2023. Maharaj was subsequently informed that they had met the selection threshold and would proceed to further assessments, including a presentation and psychometric assessment.

Maharaj alleged that the SIU appointed Lekgetho, whom Maharaj said did not meet one of the advertised minimum requirements for the position of COO.