Parliament has poured cold water on Member of Parliament (MP), Fadiel Adams’ claim that a malfunctioning parliamentary laptop contributed to his extraordinary delay in accessing correspondence from the Madlanga Commission, saying its records show no such persistent computer problems existed.
The National Coloured Congress (NCC) leader found himself in hot water before Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga on Tuesday morning, after attempting to explain why correspondence sent to him by the Section 84 presidential fact-finding body had apparently escaped his attention for months.
Adams told the commission his Parliament-issued laptop had been troublesome for approximately 18 months, frequently freezing or spending time in for repairs.
The explanation raised eyebrows at the commission, but it also sent officials in Parliament digging through their own records.
Also Read: Fadiel Adams’ laptop explanation fails to convince Madlanga
Parliament’s clarification
Hours later, Parliament issued an extraordinary public clarification effectively distancing itself from Adams’ version.
“Parliament therefore has no ICT service desk record supporting the assertion that Mr Adams’ parliamentary laptop was persistently dysfunctional for approximately 18 months in the manner described before the Commission,” Parliament said.
Officials went through Adams’ ICT Service Desk history for the period in question and found no reported persistent malfunction, hardware failure or repeated freezing.
Neither could Parliament find records supporting Adams’ claim that the laptop repeatedly went in for repairs. Instead, it found five comparatively mundane ICT complaints.
These were a Windows password reset in January 2025, an ERP/Marang password reset in June 2025, assistance logging into a device the following month, a Wi-Fi update in January this year and an ERP/Marang eDisclosure request in June.
All were resolved and closed.
“Password resets, authentication or login difficulties and connectivity configuration are routine ICT support matters and are materially different from a device being technically dysfunctional or unavailable for an extended period,” Parliament said.
MPs rely on more than one computer to fulfil duties
There was another hole in the laptop defence.
Parliament revealed that MPs are not dependent on a single computer to perform their constitutional duties.
Members are supplied with multiple devices, including a laptop, tablet and smartphone, specifically so that their work can continue should one device develop problems.
“Alternative Parliament-issued devices also provide continuity of access while a particular device is being attended to,” Parliament said.
Its intervention is particularly significant because Parliament said it would ordinarily steer clear of explanations offered by an MP appearing before a commission of inquiry.
However, Adams’ evidence potentially created another impression altogether: that Parliament had left one of its MPs battling with dysfunctional equipment for about 18 months while he attempted to perform his constitutional responsibilities.
That, Parliament decided, could not be left unanswered.
“Insofar as these claims create the impression that Parliament failed over an extended period to provide a member with functional tools of trade necessary for the performance of his constitutional responsibilities, the institutional record requires clarification,” it said.
Parliament stressed that it was not expressing an opinion on whether Adams’ broader evidence before the Madlanga Commission was truthful. Its intervention was confined strictly to what its own ICT and administrative records showed.
That distinction leaves Adams with the considerably more uncomfortable task of explaining the gulf between his recollection of an 18-month computer nightmare and an ICT service history containing little more dramatic than forgotten passwords, login assistance and Wi-Fi trouble.
Also Read: Madlanga inquiry heats up as Johnson grilled on Fadiel Adams affidavit
- Parliament refuted MP Fadiel Adams' claim that his parliamentary laptop was persistently dysfunctional for approximately 18 months.
- Parliamentary ICT service records showed only five routine support complaints for Adams' laptop during the period, all resolved and closed.
- Parliament stated that MPs are provided with multiple devices, including laptops, tablets, and smartphones, to ensure continuity of work if one device has issues.
- Parliament issued a public clarification to counter the impression that it failed to provide Adams with functional equipment necessary for his constitutional duties.
- The intervention was limited to clarifying ICT records and did not comment on the broader truthfulness of Adams' evidence before the Madlanga Commission.
Parliament has poured cold water on
Adams told the commission his Parliament-issued laptop had been troublesome for approximately 18 months, frequently freezing or spending time in for repairs.
Also Read: Fadiel Adams' laptop explanation fails to convince
Hours later, Parliament issued an extraordinary public clarification effectively distancing itself from Adams' version.
"Parliament therefore has no ICT service desk record supporting the assertion that Mr Adams' parliamentary laptop was persistently dysfunctional for approximately 18 months in the manner described before the Commission," Parliament said.
Officials went through Adams' ICT Service Desk history for the period in question and found no reported persistent malfunction, hardware failure or repeated freezing.
All were resolved and closed.
"Password resets, authentication or login difficulties and connectivity configuration are routine ICT support matters and are materially different from a device being technically dysfunctional or unavailable for an extended period," Parliament said.
Parliament revealed that MPs are not dependent on a single computer to perform their constitutional duties.
"Alternative Parliament-issued devices also provide continuity of access while a particular device is being attended to," Parliament said.
Its intervention is particularly significant because Parliament said it would ordinarily steer clear of explanations offered by an MP appearing before a commission of inquiry.
However, Adams' evidence potentially created another impression altogether: that Parliament had left one of its MPs battling with dysfunctional equipment for about 18 months while he attempted to perform his constitutional responsibilities.
"Insofar as these claims create the impression that Parliament failed over an extended period to provide a member with functional tools of trade necessary for the performance of his constitutional responsibilities, the institutional record requires clarification," it said.
Parliament stressed that it was not expressing an opinion on whether Adams' broader evidence before the
Also Read:
