Forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan fears for his life after receiving threats following what he describes as KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi’s incitement of violence against him.
The sleuth has now formally asked the Madlanga commission to protect him. This urgent plea was made in official email correspondence to the commission secretary, submitted alongside a damning dossier of allegations.
The communication, dated October 10, reveals the depth of O’Sullivan’s apprehension. In one email, he writes, “Due to the threats against me and the violence that Lt-Gen Mkhwanazi has publicly incited against me, I would request that we have an urgent discussion to take steps to prevent an attempt at my murder.”
This plea to the commission is intrinsically linked to the escalating public feud between the investigator and the police boss. The situation escalated legally just hours after O’Sullivan’s email was sent.
His lawyers then launched a formal counter-offensive, demanding R10-million in damages from the provincial police leader for reportedly instigating the violence against their client.
The counterclaim doubles the value of Mkhwanazi’s ongoing defamation lawsuit against their client.
O’Sullivan’s legal team, led by Ulrich Roux, has demanded that Mkhwanazi retract his statements and issue a public apology within two business days, failing which, the counterclaim for the damages will continue.
O’Sullivan accuses Mkhwanazi of making false and defamatory statements at the Madlanga commission and a parliamentary ad hoc committee.
The most incendiary statement, according to his letter, came during the parliamentary ad-hoc committee on October 8, 2when Mkhwanazi reportedly said, “It is time that this country must not sit back and be run by Mr Paul O’Sullivan. And if the government fails to act on it, the men and women in this country are going to take it upon themselves to do something drastic about it.”
O’Sullivan’s attorneys argued that this statement constitutes an incitement to
violence, pointing out that it has already led to threats against their client.
“These intentionally false allegations were unsubstantiated by any evidence whatsoever,” the letter stated.
The feud between O’Sullivan and Mkhwanazi began last month, when Mkhwanazi filed a R5-million defamation lawsuit against O’Sullivan in the Johannesburg High Court. Mkhwanazi claimed that the investigator had made “wrongful and defamatory” statements about him in media interviews between July and August.
These statements included accusations of corruption, being part of a police “hit squad”, and misusing state funds.
The dispute originated in July when Mkhwanazi held a press conference claiming criminals had infiltrated the South African justice system. Following this, O’Sullivan questioned Mkhwanazi’s character and motives in various media appearances.
Mkhwanazi stated that the legal action was initiated after O’Sullivan reportedly refused to retract his allegations and apologise.
However, before O’Sullivan could file his plea, Mkhwanazi allegedly made a series of public statements that O’Sullivan’s legal team claims were defamatory and damaging.
On September 19, during the Madlanga commission, Mkhwanazi alleged that O’Sullivan was under investigation for unspecified crimes in KwaZulu-Natal.
“Your client falsely alleged that our client has committed some or other unspecified crime that he has ‘picked up’ and that your client has ‘registered a case’,” the letter stated.
O’Sullivan’s attorneys categorically deny these claims, asserting that their client has not committed any crimes.
The accusations escalated further when Mkhwanazi made additional claims before the parliamentary ad hoc committee, including that O’Sullivan could be “an agent working for someone else, or perhaps another government”; that the operations of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate were “planned, coordinated, and executed” at O’Sullivan’s residence; and that O’Sullivan has “got control all over”, and is effectively running the country.
O’Sullivan’s attorneys have dismissed these statements as “false and defamatory”, emphasizing that their client’s income is derived from legitimate business activities, including property investments, and that he has no involvement in police operations.
The letter warned that the public nature of Mkhwanazi’s statements has amplified their impact, with major media outlets such as SABC News, Cape Times, EWN and IOL reporting on the allegations.
Headlines like “Mkhwanazi Calls for Parliamentary Probe into Paul O’Sullivan” and “Mkhwanazi Drops Another Mchunu Bombshell” have fueled public scrutiny and intensified the reputational stakes for both parties.
O’Sullivan’s legal team argued that the widespread media coverage has compounded the harm to their client’s reputation.
“The false and defamatory statements about our client were made with the intention of harming our client’s good name and reputation and his dignity,” the letter stated.
O’Sullivan said the allegations have not only tarnished his reputation but also
jeopardised his business and personal safety.
O’Sullivan’s attorneys claim that the incitement to violence has already resulted in real-world consequences, including members of the public making threats against him.
As of today, Mkhwanazi has a limited time to respond to O’Sullivan’s demands.
Failure to retract his statements and issue an apology by the deadline will likely escalate the matter to court, where a detailed scrutiny of the allegations and counterclaims will take place.
