Hearing record

Day 85

Evidence led by Advocate Teboho Mosikili (chief evidence leader)

Tshwane Metro Police head Yolande Faro takes the stand, distancing herself from the alleged security-tender irregularities and telling the Commission that Sergeant Nkosi had no right to interfere in TMPD matters. Faro denies wrongdoing and no findings have been made.

Still from Day 85 of the Madlanga Commission

The day in brief

What you need to know

  • Tshwane Metro Police Department chief Yolande Faro testified before the Commission as the inquiry into the department's security spending continued, according to Sowetan and IOL.
  • Inside Metros reported that Faro told the Commission that Sergeant Fannie Nkosi had no right to interfere in TMPD matters, distancing the department's leadership from his alleged role.
  • IOL reported that the abuse of ad hoc security services came under the spotlight, with evidence that the TMPD at one point had 43 sites requiring ad hoc security arrangements.
  • Faro was expected to give detail on three companies alleged to be linked to a criminal syndicate that secured millions from TMPD-linked tenders, a linkage that remains an allegation before the Commission.
  • Daily Maverick reported that Faro said she faced a smear campaign amid the R2 billion-plus security-contract scandal and denied links to irregular payments, an account the Commission still has to weigh.
  • Faro, the named companies and other officials are entitled to the presumption of innocence, and the syndicate and tender allegations have not been the subject of any court finding.

Full coverage

The day, in depth

The TMPD chief takes the stand

Sowetan and IOL reported that TMPD head Yolande Faro testified as the Commission pressed on with the department's security-tender scrutiny. Inside Metros reported that she told the panel Sergeant Nkosi had no right to interfere in TMPD matters, seeking to separate the department's leadership from his alleged conduct. The competing accounts are for the Commission to reconcile.

Ad hoc security and a contested reputation

IOL reported that the alleged abuse of ad hoc security services was a focus, with the TMPD said to have had 43 sites on ad hoc arrangements at one point. Daily Maverick reported that Faro cast herself as the target of a smear campaign and denied any link to irregular payments in the R2 billion-plus contract scandal. She was also expected to address three firms alleged to be tied to a criminal syndicate; those claims remain untested.

Our analysis

The bottom line

Faro's testimony is the department leadership's answer to the whistleblower evidence heard days earlier, and the two do not sit comfortably together. Her position, that Nkosi had no standing to interfere and that she is the subject of a smear campaign, is a plausible account that the Commission is entitled to test against the documents and the other witnesses. It is worth noting how much of the dispute turns on who controlled or influenced procurement, a factual question the panel will have to resolve rather than accept from either side.

The scale signalled here, dozens of ad hoc sites and a contract scandal running into billions, explains the intensity of the scrutiny, but scale is not proof of personal wrongdoing by any individual. Faro's denial and her smear-campaign claim are themselves evidence to be weighed, not dismissed. The fair reading of this day is that the TMPD's security procurement is under serious, legitimate examination, while Faro and everyone else named retains the presumption of innocence until the Commission makes any finding.

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.