The National Prosecuting Authority’s Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC) has filed an urgent application with the Pretoria High Court to review Magistrate Vusi Mahlangu’s decision to recuse himself from a high-profile corruption case involving three senior police generals.
The case, against Lieutenant-General Dumisani Khumalo, Major-General Josias Lekalakala, and Major-General Nosipho Madondo, has been mired in controversy since Mahlangu abruptly withdrew from proceedings this week, citing his upcoming appearance before the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry into corruption in the justice and law enforcement sectors.
When the case resumed on Wednesday, state prosecutor Peter Serunye informed the new presiding officer, Magistrate Mphahlele, that the State was appealing Mahlangu’s recusal.
“The State will appeal the recusal of Magistrate Mahlangu,” Serunye told the court, confirming that IDAC’s legal team was finalising its High Court application to be filed later in the day.
Mahlangu’s recusal followed revelations that he had been subpoenaed to testify before the Madlanga Commission after KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi raised questions about the bail conditions Mahlangu had imposed on Khumalo and his co-accused. Those conditions prohibit the accused from returning to work pending the outcome of their trial, a decision that, according to Mkhwanazi’s testimony, drew concern over possible judicial interference.
The trio, along with four other senior SAPS officials, faces charges of fraud and corruption linked to the appointment of an allegedly unqualified civilian in the Crime Intelligence Division. The State alleges that the accused conspired to bypass recruitment procedures and manipulated procurement processes to benefit associates.
The accused maintain their innocence and have consistently argued that the case is politically motivated. They are currently out on bail under strict conditions that restrict their movements and bar them from performing official duties.
Adding to the drama in court, Advocate Malesela Teffo appeared during Wednesday’s proceedings, announcing his intention to apply to be admitted as a friend of the court (amicus curiae). Teffo claimed that the applicant in the case, IDAC, is also investigating him, and therefore, he wished to provide independent legal insight.
However, his attempt drew immediate opposition from the defence. Advocate Zandile Mshololo, representing one of the accused, objected strongly, arguing that there was no formal application before the court.
“There is no such application yet before this court,” she said. Magistrate Mphahlele noted both positions before allowing the prosecutor to proceed.
The case has faced several delays over the past month. Two weeks ago, Khumalo reportedly “fell ill” ahead of his scheduled second appearance before the Madlanga Commission. His sudden illness forced a postponement, further stalling both the commission’s and the court’s proceedings.
Legal observers say the case has become emblematic of the broader institutional strain between the judiciary, the prosecuting authority, and law enforcement. “This case sits at the intersection of judicial accountability and prosecutorial integrity,” said an unnamed senior legal expert. “When a magistrate recuses himself because of allegations made elsewhere, especially in an untested forum, it blurs the line between perception and proof of bias. It could set a dangerous precedent where judicial officers withdraw simply to avoid public controversy.”
In its formal statement, IDAC spokesperson Henry Mamothame confirmed the High Court review application, stressing that Mahlangu’s recusal was neither necessary nor legally justified. “The IDAC is of the view that the magistrate should not have recused himself from the matter, as allegations made at the commission have no bearing on the matter before court,” he said.
The directorate argues that the recusal threatens to derail progress in a sensitive corruption case involving senior police officials and undermines confidence in the judiciary’s ability to manage politically charged matters.
The Madlanga Commission of Inquiry, established to probe alleged corruption and state capture within the police and justice system, has exposed deep divisions and competing interests within key institutions. Its hearings have drawn in high-ranking officers, prosecutors, and now, members of the judiciary.
Legal analysts warn that the overlapping investigations and recusals could paralyse the justice system. “There’s a real risk of systemic paralysis,” the legal expert said. “If judges and magistrates begin to withdraw whenever their names appear at a commission, even peripherally, it could bring high-level corruption prosecutions to a standstill.”
For now, the Khumalo case stands adjourned until 6 November 2025, when the High Court is expected to rule on the review. The outcome could determine not only the future of this trial but also set the tone for how South Africa’s courts handle sensitive matters amid growing scrutiny from public commissions.
