A senior Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (Idac) prosecutor has told the Madlanga Commission that Maj-Gen Philani Lushaba appeared to be the victim of a criminal syndicate that preyed on men through sex workers, questioning why investigators decided to prosecute the police general instead of treating him as the complainant.
Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Adv Peter Serunye delivered the startling assessment on Wednesday while giving evidence about the controversial Crime Intelligence investigations that have come under intense scrutiny before the commission.
‘Case had no prosecutorial merit’
Serunye testified that when the Lushaba docket landed on his desk on August 8 2025, he immediately concluded that the case had no prosecutorial merit.
“In particular, I did not understand why the complainant (Gen Lushaba), who on the face of the docket was the victim, had been charged,” Serunye told the commission.
“As I understood the matter, it concerned a complainant who had been drugged and robbed after encountering a sex worker, and who then found himself charged. On the material in the docket there was nothing to sustain a charge against him, and I regarded the matter as untenable.”
The Lushaba matter became one of several Crime Intelligence investigations pursued by Idac under former head Adv Andrea Johnson.
The case originated after Lushaba reported that his SAPS-issued laptop, cellphone and other state property had been stolen after he was allegedly drugged during an encounter with a woman. It later expanded into allegations that Crime Intelligence secret-service resources were improperly used in the aftermath of the incident, forming part of the broader investigations that ultimately led to criminal charges against several senior officers.
However, Serunye said the evidence before him pointed in the opposite direction.
He told the commission he immediately alerted the prosecution team and Johnson that he had serious concerns about both the legal basis of the prosecution and whether the matter even fell within Idac’s anti-corruption mandate.
Those concerns eventually reached Idac chief investigator Dylan Perumal.
Provisional statement
According to Serunye, Perumal informed him by email that he had discussed the matter with Crime Intelligence deputy head Maj-Gen Feroz Khan and obtained what he described as a provisional statement aimed at addressing the prosecutor’s concerns.
“Chief Perumal indicated in an email that he has had a discussion with Maj-Gen Khan and obtained a provisional statement aimed at clarifying some of the queries I was raising regarding the Lushaba incident,” Serunye testified.
“The unsigned statement of Maj-Gen Khan was attached to Chief Perumal’s email.”
The additional statement did little to persuade him.
“I responded by email on 31 August to the effect that such statement was going to add little value to the state’s case,” he said.
Serunye told commissioners that objective evidence in the docket supported Lushaba’s version that he had been robbed.
He said bank records showed Lushaba’s card was used after it had been reported stolen, while CCTV footage allegedly showed the woman involved climbing over a fence after the incident.
“It is clear he was robbed and that he had a visitor in the house,” Serunye said.
“What is the crime that this man has committed? It was established that there was a syndicate.”
Duplicated charges
The veteran prosecutor also criticised the legal formulation of the case, saying investigators had duplicated charges relating to defeating the ends of justice and appeared to pursue a matter that did not properly fall within Idac’s statutory mandate.
Looking back after hearing weeks of evidence before the Madlanga Commission, Serunye suggested the prosecution may have been influenced by deeper internal battles within Crime Intelligence rather than the evidence itself.
“I didn’t understand then, but if you look at it now, it appears there is some conflict between these investigators in Crime Intelligence,” he said.
The Madlanga Commission continues hearing evidence into the origins of the Crime Intelligence investigations, with prosecutors and investigators increasingly questioning how several of the high-profile cases were initiated and authorised.
- A senior Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (Idac) prosecutor has told the Madlanga Commission that Maj-Gen Philani Lushaba appeared to be the victim of a criminal syndicate that preyed on men through sex workers, questioning why investigators decided to prosecute the police general instead of treating him as the complainant.
- Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Adv Peter Serunye delivered the startling assessment on Wednesday while giving evidence about the controversial Crime Intelligence investigations that have come under intense scrutiny before the commission.
- ‘Case had no prosecutorial merit’ Serunye testified that when the Lushaba docket landed on his desk on August 8 2025, he immediately concluded that the case had no prosecutorial merit.
- “In particular, I did not understand why the complainant (Gen Lushaba), who on the face of the docket was the victim, had been charged,” Serunye told the commission.
- “As I understood the matter, it concerned a complainant who had been drugged and robbed after encountering a sex worker, and who then found himself charged.
