Maj-Gen Feroz Khan’s bid to stop SAPS from cutting off his salary and pushing him towards a possible discharge was dealt a legal setback after the Labour Court ruled it could not step into an unfinished disciplinary fight between the officer and his employer.
The ruling means Khan, the deputy head of crime intelligence, must now continue his battle inside the SAPS disciplinary system rather than through an urgent court intervention.
No jurisdiction to halt an internal disciplinary process
The court did not decide whether SAPS was justified in invoking the disciplinary regulation against Khan, who was recovering from gunshot wounds. Instead, Judge Tarryn Prinsloo found that the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to halt an internal disciplinary process before it was completed.
The judgment leaves unresolved the central dispute that pushed Khan to court: whether SAPS could use an expedited disciplinary mechanism against a senior officer whose absence was supported by medical evidence.
Khan was shot on June 28 and hospitalised until July 17. Weeks later, SAPS initiated an expedited disciplinary process requiring him to appear before an inquiry scheduled for August 12 to 14.
Medical incapacity
His legal team argued that his absence was not defiance but the result of medical incapacity. They sought a postponement until his condition could be reassessed, while his representatives continued engaging with the process on his behalf.
But after Khan failed to appear, the chairperson invoked Regulation 9(7) of the SAPS Discipline Regulations, triggering a process that could place him on suspension without pay and, if he failed to act within the prescribed period, result in him being deemed discharged from SAPS.
That possibility formed the human stakes behind the urgent court challenge. Khan was not only fighting a disciplinary hearing. He was fighting the prospect of losing his income and employment status while still dealing with the aftermath of an assassination attempt.
The Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union, acting on Khan’s behalf, argued that the regulation had been applied against an employee whose absence was medically explained and objectively supported. The union argued that the consequences of the regulation were too severe to allow the process to continue without judicial intervention.
Khan accused of bypassing the disciplinary process
SAPS opposed the application, arguing that Khan had bypassed the disciplinary process by approaching the court instead of engaging with the chairperson about when the hearing could resume.
The court agreed.
Judge Prinsloo found that Khan’s attempt to frame the dispute as a contractual matter involving salary and benefits could not avoid the statutory labour dispute process. The court described the argument as an attempt to bypass the procedures created by the Labour Relations Act.
The ruling emphasised that the Labour Court does not have general authority to intervene in unfinished disciplinary proceedings merely because an employee alleges unfairness or procedural problems.
The court also found that Khan had another avenue available. Under Regulation 9(7), he could have contacted the disciplinary chairperson within the 10-working-day period and explained his failure to attend.
The judgment noted that Khan’s representatives had made submissions before the deadline expired, which showed that he was aware of that route.
The immediate effect is that the SAPS disciplinary process remains alive. Khan’s challenge has not been dismissed on the merits, but the court has refused to freeze the process before it reaches its conclusion.
The court also ordered Khan’s side to pay SAPS’s legal costs, saying taxpayers should not carry the expense of urgent litigation where jurisdiction and urgency had not been established.
For Khan, the fight now moves back inside SAPS, where the dispute over whether an injured senior crime intelligence officer was fairly treated will have to be tested through the labour mechanisms designed for disciplinary disputes.
- The Labour Court ruled it has no jurisdiction to halt Maj-Gen Feroz Khan’s internal SAPS disciplinary process before its completion.
- Khan, deputy head of crime intelligence, must continue his disciplinary battle inside SAPS rather than through urgent court intervention.
- SAPS started an expedited disciplinary inquiry against Khan after he missed a scheduled hearing while recovering from gunshot wounds.
- Khan’s legal team argued his absence was due to medical incapacity and sought a postponement, but failure to attend triggered potential suspension without pay or discharge.
- The court ordered Khan’s side to pay SAPS’s legal costs and rejected his attempt to bypass the statutory labour dispute process.
