Paul O'Sullivan v Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi battle intesifies

KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi has hit back at forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan's denial that he received money from any slush fund.

"Whether you call it a slush fund or secret fund, the bottom line is it's the same. It's money that was paid to him from a discretionary fund allocated to the then Scorpions by National Treasury for covert operations so he can't say it's not a slush fund and he never benefited," Mkhwanazi told IOL.

He was responding to O’Sullivan's claim at parliament's ad hoc committee investigating corruption in state agencies, including the police force.

O’Sullivan told the committee he had never benefited from any slush fund – before being confronted with proof from ActionSA MP Dereleen James, who produced receipts of a single payment of R100,000 made to O’Sullivan from an alleged slush fund belonging to the then Directorate of Special Operations (DSO).

While O’Sullivan has insisted the payment was simply a refund for work he had carried out for the Scorpions and not from a secret slush fund, his denial has been dismissed by James – and now by Mkhwanazi.

"The secret fund account is a budget allocated by National Treasury to pay for covert operations. The then Directorate used to be allocated the same funds as CI [Crime Intelligence], SSA [State Security Agency] and Defence Intelligence. The fact is Mr O’Sullivan benefited from Government Secret Funds through DSO," added Mkhwanazi.

ActionSA is also considering whether to lay a formal complaint against O’Sullivan over his denial of having received the funds.

Mkhwanazi also questioned O’Sullivan's claims of an alleged hit squad in the disbanded Political Killings Task Team (PKTT). O’Sullivan, in his testimony before the committee, claimed to have affidavits from three former alleged members of this squad who claimed to have received cash for killings.

"If there is any truth to this, then those making such allegations must take it to the relevant authorities who can act on such information. They must report it to the police and open a case. If they fear the police are involved, then they can go to the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID), which will investigate their claims. They can also contact the whistleblower line. Why go to a private investigator? All his claims at the committee are from unnamed sources or someone told him or he read it somewhere in the media," added Mkhwanazi.

O’Sullivan's testimony is set to continue at a later date, after it was cut short due to health concerns. His testimony so far has been explosive and controversial. He has been praised by some for his bravery in speaking out but also widely criticised for failing to provide proof of his claims. He has cited security risks for refusing to name his sources – or claimed to have sourced his information from media articles.

His testimony has cast the net wide, with serious allegations of corruption in state agencies – including the police force – by implicating senior officials in and branding them, including Mkhwanazi, as "criminals".

O’Sullivan himself stands accused of trying to capture state agencies, particularly IPID and certain officials. During his testimony, it emerged that he had also paid the legal fees of former IPID head Robert McBride, who previously successfully challenged his suspension in court before leaving IPID.

Mkhwanazi is currently locked in a R5 million legal defamation suit with O’Sullivan over what he says are false allegations. O’Sullivan, in turn, has responded with a counter-suit of R10 million – and a demand that Mkhwanazi be dismissed from his role.

O’Sullivan is trying to sell his properties in South Africa while he also operates in the United Kingdom, where he has business interests.

Asked if he believed that O’Sullivan may be trying to dispose of his assets amid the lawsuit, Mkhwanazi replied: "We are aware he is trying to sell his properties. He holds three passports and can escape to any of those countries, but the legal process must take its course. He failed to respond to our letters by the due date, but that does not stop the legal process, which will continue."

IOL