Serious concerns about the handling of the Medicare24 investigation by the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (Idac) emerged before the Madlanga commission of inquiry on Tuesday, as prosecutor Drushantha Ramsamy questioned the sequence of key legal documents used to launch the probe.
Ramsamy’s testimony focused on the Tshwane District Medicare24 contract and the conduct of former Idac head Adv Andrea Johnson. She told the commission that significant discrepancies had come to light regarding the preparation of a Section 28(1) authorisation application and the Section 27 referral that should have preceded it.
According to Ramsamy, the matter first came to her attention during a meeting on April 16 2025, when former Idac Chief Investigator Dylan Perumal informed Johnson that senior prosecutor Adv Tilas Chabalala had already drafted a Section 28(1) authorisation application relating to Medicare24.
She said Johnson appeared visibly upset by the revelation.
Ramsamy’s contemporaneous notes recorded Johnson saying the process “should never have been done that way” and indicating that she had not assigned the Medicare24 matter to Chabalala.
Alarm bells ring for prosecutor
At the time, Ramsamy said she did not fully appreciate the significance of Johnson’s reaction because she had not previously worked on the case.
That changed on May 13 2025, when Johnson instructed her to assist in finalising the Section 28(1) application.
“I immediately appreciated the gravity of the situation,” Ramsamy told the commission.
The central concern, she explained, was that the authorisation application appeared to have been prepared before a formal Section 27 referral affidavit existed.
Ramsamy testified that Perumal had directed Chabalala to prepare the Section 28(1) application despite the absence of such a referral.
The commission was presented with Ramsamy’s notes from the April meeting, which referred to a forensic procurement report and recorded that Chabalala had already completed an authorisation application.
Dispute over referral documentation
The testimony also focused on the role of Gen Charity Matlou, chief risk officer and head of the risk and integrity management unit at SAPS national head office.
Matlou acted as the primary whistleblower and complainant in the Medicare24 tender investigation. Ramsamy said she understood that Matlou was expected to depose to the Section 27 referral affidavit.
However, this raised further concerns when Ramsamy discovered that no formal referral affidavit existed at the time the authorisation application was being prepared.
Instead, she testified that during a meeting with Perumal and Johnson, she was told that a preliminary audit report and an email from Matlou were being treated as the referral documents.
“I was never shown this email. I did not have the preliminary report either,” Ramsamy told the commission.
She later obtained the preliminary report from Chabalala via WhatsApp.
Conflicting accounts examined
Ramsamy further testified that she had never seen a Section 27 referral dated February 16 2025, despite Johnson referring to such a document during her own testimony before the commission.
According to Ramsamy, the only referral she was aware of was signed by Matlou in June 2025, after the Medicare24 investigation had already obtained its Section 28(1) authorisation in May.
She also questioned Matlou’s dual role in the matter, noting that the SAPS official submitted the Section 27 referral as a complainant while simultaneously serving on the investigation team.
Ramsamy said investigators informed her that Matlou’s involvement had been authorised by Johnson.
Testimony to continue this week
Proceedings were temporarily halted after Ramsamy developed a persistent cough while giving evidence.
The commission stood her testimony down, with her evidence scheduled to resume on August 14 as the inquiry continues examining the circumstances surrounding the Medicare24 investigation and the processes followed by Idac officials.
ALSO READ: Cat Matlala admits corruption charges in R360m SAPS tender scandal
- Prosecutor Drushantha Ramsamy testified to the Madlanga commission about discrepancies in the legal process of the Medicare24 investigation by Idac, focusing on the Tshwane District contract and former head Andrea Johnson's conduct.
- Ramsamy revealed that a Section 28(1) authorisation application was drafted before the required formal Section 27 referral affidavit existed, which she discovered after being instructed by Johnson to assist in finalising the application.
- The primary whistleblower Gen Charity Matlou, who was expected to depose to the Section 27 referral affidavit, had no formal referral affidavit completed at the time the authorisation was prepared, only an email and a preliminary report were treated as referral documents.
- Ramsamy noted she never saw a Section 27 referral dated February 16, 2025, only one signed by Matlou in June 2025, after the Section 28(1) authorisation was granted, and questioned Matlou’s dual role as both complainant and investigation team member.
- Ramsamy’s testimony was paused due to illness and is set to resume on August 14 as the commission continues investigating the Medicare24 probe and Idac’s procedural conduct.
Serious concerns about the handling of the Medicare24 investigation by the
Ramsamy's testimony focused on the
Ramsamy's contemporaneous notes recorded Johnson saying the process "should never have been done that way" and indicating that she had not assigned the Medicare24 matter to Chabalala.
At the time, Ramsamy said she did not fully appreciate the significance of Johnson's reaction because she had not previously worked on the case.
"I immediately appreciated the gravity of the situation," Ramsamy told the commission.
Ramsamy testified that Perumal had directed Chabalala to prepare the Section 28(1) application despite the absence of such a referral.
Matlou acted as the primary whistleblower and complainant in the Medicare24 tender investigation. Ramsamy said she understood that Matlou was expected to depose to the Section 27 referral affidavit.
However, this raised further concerns when Ramsamy discovered that no formal referral affidavit existed at the time the authorisation application was being prepared.
Instead, she testified that during a meeting with Perumal and Johnson, she was told that a preliminary audit report and an email from Matlou were being treated as the referral documents.
"I was never shown this email. I did not have the preliminary report either," Ramsamy told the commission.
Ramsamy further testified that she had never seen a Section 27 referral dated February 16 2025, despite Johnson referring to such a document during her own testimony before the commission.
Ramsamy said investigators informed her that Matlou's involvement had been authorised by Johnson.
ALSO READ: Cat Matlala admits corruption charges in R360m SAPS tender scandal
