Hearing record
Day 67
Evidence led by Advocate Matthew Chaskalson SC (senior evidence leader)
The commission lost a sitting day when a new Crime Intelligence witness fell ill soon after proceedings opened. Chairperson Madlanga adjourned the hearing as evidence leaders voiced frustration over a medical note they said was incomprehensible.
The day in brief
What you need to know
- A new witness with Crime Intelligence expertise had been expected to give fresh evidence on alleged police misconduct and criminal-network ties.
- Shortly after the session opened the witness reportedly took ill, and the commission stood the matter down.
- According to EWN, senior evidence leader Matthew Chaskalson said he was concerned about repeated instances of witnesses falling ill when they were due to appear.
- Chaskalson reportedly asked that the witness's lawyers produce a clearer, better-motivated medical certificate, describing the existing note as incomprehensible.
- The witness's lawyers committed to obtaining an affidavit explaining the nature of the illness or injury.
- Chairperson Madlanga adjourned the commission until Thursday, when Day 68 resumed.
- No substantive evidence was led; nothing on this day should be read as a finding against any person.
Full coverage
The day, in depth
Adjourned after witness falls ill
EWN reported that the commission was adjourned when the scheduled Crime Intelligence witness fell ill soon after proceedings began. The witness had been expected to speak to police misconduct and alleged links to criminal networks.
Evidence leaders frustrated
In a separate report EWN said evidence leaders were frustrated because the medical note did not specify the nature of the illness or injury. Chaskalson requested that the matter be stood down and asked for a clear and better-motivated certificate. The witness's lawyers undertook to file an affidavit from their client.
Our analysis
The bottom line
Procedural days rarely make headlines, but they carry information. The commission's public irritation, voiced through Chaskalson, at vague medical notes reflects a recurring management problem for inquiries of this kind: witnesses said to be unavailable, and the difficulty of compelling attendance without clear medical grounds. The archive notes that this pattern surfaced again later in the commission's life.
Nothing turns, evidentially, on a lost day. The fair-comment point is narrow: the commission signalled that it would scrutinise the reasons for non-appearance rather than accept them at face value, a posture that protects the integrity of the record. It made no finding about the witness, who remains entitled to the presumption of innocence and to genuine medical accommodation if it is warranted.
Analysis is the archive’s own comment on the public proceedings, grounded in the record above. It weighs the evidence and the process; questions of individual guilt are for the courts and the commission to decide. Everyone named is presumed innocent.
In the room & on the record
Counsel, the panel and sources
Evidence led by
- Advocate Matthew Chaskalson SC (senior evidence leader)
On the panel
- Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga (chairperson)