Shadrack Sibiya is demanding to be reinstated as deputy national police commissioner after being placed on a leave of absence.
Deputy National Police Commissioner for Crime Detection, Shadrack Sibiya, while demanding to be reinstated, also defended his relationship with National Police Commissioner Fannie Masemola.
Sibiya has taken Masemola to court following his superior’s July decision to place him on leave of absence, pending an investigation.
The move followed allegations from KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, who accused Sibiya of corruption and branded him a “criminal”.
Mkhwanazi claimed Sibiya played a key role in dismantling the South African Police Service’s (Saps) political killings task team.
While Sibiya has denied Mkhwanazi’s allegations, he also insisted that Masemola’s decision was unlawful and procedurally flawed.
Sibiya battles Masemola over leave of absence
During Wednesday’s hearing in the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria, Sibiya’s lawyer, Advocate Kameel Premhid, argued that his client’s forced leave amounted to unfair labour practice.
Premhid clarified that, in addition to seeking reinstatement, Sibiya also seeks to block any further disciplinary action.
“The substantive prayer that Lieutenant-General Sibiya seeks from this court is an interdict to prevent prospective disciplinary decisions and, in the alternative to that, he seeks a suspension of any disciplinary decisions that have been taken,” he told the court.
ALSO READ: Sibiya eagerly waiting to clear his name after Masemola’s allegations
The lawyer contended that Masemola had “no defence available to him” since the decision to place Sibiya on leave did not comply with the police’s mandatory disciplinary regulations.
He argued that although the national commissioner had disciplinary authority, those powers did not extend to removing an official from duty without due process.
Premhid stressed that there is no “stay-at-home power” in the regulations.
“Sibiya has a right to just administrative action and … if there is no authority ipso facto [by the fact itself], that’s unjust administrative action.”
Madlanga commission in the spotlight
Premhid further raised concerns about the overlap between the internal disciplinary process and the judicial commission of inquiry into the criminal justice system, chaired by former Constitutional Court (ConCourt) judge Mbuyiseli Madlanga.
“Given that there are questions about General Masemola’s independence, his conflict of interest, his mala fides, and so on, there is no principal reason as to why that parallel process should be allowed to proceed, in circumstances where the commission will do the disciplining in line with the terms of reference that the president gave to it.
“One of the issues that the president says the commission must investigate is whether or not disciplinary measures should be taken against people implicated in those allegations,” Premhid argued.
READ MORE: Disbanded police task team ‘tried to arrest Mchunu and Sibiya’
He added that the Madlanga commission should be allowed to carry out its work without Masemola’s “interference”.
The commission, the lawyer said, is the “appropriate forum” to decide whether Sibiya should face disciplinary action.
According to Premhid, Masemola himself is “heavily intertwined” in the matter.
“A conflicted party can’t sit as the judge in their own cause.”
Police dockets
A major point of contention is the 121 criminal dockets seized from the disbanded political killings task team.
Mkhwanazi alleged the files were deliberately shelved and locked away at Saps headquarters in Pretoria under Sibiya’s instruction.
Premhid countered that the Madlanga commission, which will take custody of the dockets, would not be performing police work but instead evaluating officials’ conduct.
“The commission is not going to be investigating the dockets. They’re not going to be doing police work.
READ MORE: Madlanga commission delay ‘problematic’ – political analyst
“What they are going to be doing is looking at the conduct of the officials in carrying out orders or not carrying out orders, evaluating that conduct and deciding whether that’s worthy of disciplinary sanction or not worthy of disciplinary sanction. That’s what the commission is going to do.”
Premhid also stressed that Sibiya, being at home, cannot be held accountable for how the police handle those dockets.
“Insofar as what must happen with those dockets on the advancement of ordinary police work, the relevant officials must take their decisions.”
Watch the case below:
Sibiya on good terms with Masemola
Speaking to the media during a court adjournment, Sibiya said he has full confidence in the judiciary and would accept its decision.
“We will hear what the judges say.”
He added that he intends to present his full version of events before both the Madlanga commission and Parliament’s ad hoc committee investigating Mkhwanazi’s claims.
Despite the high-stakes battle, Sibiya maintained that his relationship with Masemola remained respectful.
“The last time I met with my boss, we were on good terms. I still respect the national commissioner of the South African Police Service.
“I’m a disciplined member of the police and I will subject myself to his authority,” he said, noting that his relationship with Masemola and the legal dispute were “two different things”.
NOW READ: Police Minister Cachalia and Commissioner Masemola bury the hatchet over KZN dockets
