Calling for Urgent Intervention in the Khawula Matter and Warning Against Weaponisation of the System

Johannesburg, Tuesday, 4 February 2026 — Serious and disturbing revelations emerging before the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry point to possible political pressure and executive interference in the arrest and incarceration of Mr Musa Khawula. If accurate, these disclosures strike at the heart of prosecutorial independence and constitutional governance.

We are cognisant of January 2025 media reports indicating that Mr Khawula was remanded in custody for alleged bail violations and prior failures to appear in court for an incident that occurred in 2021. It is our understanding that he failed to appear on two occasions in respect of a reckless and negligent driving matter, resulting in the forfeiture of his bail to the State. An alternative charge of attempted murder was subsequently added, together with a further charge of failure to render assistance and/or report an accident to the police.

While Public Interest SA does not minimise the seriousness of these charges, nor condone non-appearance by accused while on bail, it is also reported that Mr Khawula faces separate charges in the Randburg Magistrate Court that are primarily speech-based in nature. These charges, on their face, would ordinarily be processed through standard investigative and summons procedures and do not justify extraordinary policing measures or prolonged pre-trial incarceration.

Sworn testimony alleges that political and executive interference contributed to his "special" arrest and continued incarceration.

With hindsight, it is plausible that Mr Khawula, who reportedly abandoned his bail application on 29 January 2026, did so out of fear for his life and/or utter despair, in light of allegations that Deputy National Police Commissioner Lt Gen Shadrack Sibiya — an alleged member of a criminal cartel network — personally ordered his arrest and incarceration at the behest of a deputy police minister, high-profile politician and a businessman.

Lt Gen Sibiya and others implicated alongside him have yet to testify to rebut these serious claims.

In these circumstances, and notwithstanding his own ill-advised actions, there exists a reasonable apprehension that Mr Khawula’s continued incarceration may be unlawfully influenced by politically connected individuals. Continued opposition to bail therefore appears punitive, disproportionate and inconsistent with the constitutional presumption of innocence.

Public Interest SA is particularly alarmed by indications that the criminl justice system itself may be weaponised to punish Mr Khawula before trial.

Bail is not a privilege to be dispensed at the whim of the State; it is a constitutional safeguard designed to prevent arbitrary detention and to uphold the presumption of innocence. At the same time, bail is not a privilege to be abused by those who have been granted it. However, as set out herein, exceptional circumstances appear to exist in the case of Mr Khawula.

As provided for in section 22 of the National Prosecuting Authority Act 32 of 1998, the National Director of Public Prosecutions is empowered to intervene in prosecution processes, including matters relating to bail, in order to ensure consistency, legality and compliance with constitutional imperatives.

We therefore call upon the National Director of Public Prosecutions to exercise his discretion and intervene urgently by:

1. Conducting an immediate internal review of all prosecutorial decisions relating to Mr Khawula’s arrest, detention and opposition to bail;

2. Publicly affirming that no prosecutorial decisions in this matter are being influenced by political office-bearers, senior members of the South African Police Service, or external actors;

3. Ensuring that Mr Khawula receives fair, impartial and constitutionally compliant treatment; and

4. Directing that bail, with appropriate conditions, not be opposed where the legal requirements for release are met.

Selective justice is injustice.

The credibility of the criminal justice system, and indeed of South Africa’s constitutional democracy, depends on visible and decisive action against any abuse of prosecutorial or policing power.

Public Interest SA reaffirms its unwavering commitment to the rule of law and to the equal application of justice without fear, favour or prejudice.

We will continue to monitor this matter closely and will not hesitate to pursue all lawful avenues to safeguard constitutionalism, prosecutorial independence and the rights of all persons subjected to state power.

END