The uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party has penned a scathing legal letter to President Cyril Ramaphosa, demanding clarity over the suspension of Police Minister Senzo Mchunu and questioning the legitimacy of Professor Firoz Cachalia’s appointment as Acting Police Minister. The party, acting on behalf of former President Jacob Zuma, also calls on Ramaphosa to resign for what it terms “unconstitutional and irrational” conduct.
The letter, dated 4 August 2025 and authored by KMNS Inc. on instruction of Zuma, comes in the wake of explosive claims by KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Police Commissioner, Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, who alleged during a public briefing in July that there is entrenched corruption within the police service and judiciary.
In the 8-page legal letter, the MK Party accuses Ramaphosa of breaching his oath of office and manipulating state institutions to silence whistleblowers. The party says Mchunu’s removal from active duty on 13 July 2025 and the subsequent swearing-in of Cachalia on 1 August are not only procedurally flawed but also raise suspicions of executive overreach and political cover-up.
“Our client is acting in various capacities including as a concerned citizen, voter, taxpayer and former President,” the letter states. “The impugned conduct remains illegal, irrational and unconstitutional.”
The MK Party now demands that Ramaphosa immediately reverse his decisions, provide a full timeline of events surrounding Mchunu’s removal, clarify the constitutional status of a “Minister Designate,” and explain why a Deputy Police Minister was not considered to act in Mchunu’s place.
The party also questions the legality of appointing an Acting Minister without a formal inquiry into Mkhwanazi’s allegations, and further challenges the legitimacy of the newly announced Judicial Commission of Inquiry, chaired by Acting Deputy Chief Justice Mandisa Maya.
“Where in our law do you, as President, derive the power to delegate a Judicial Commission the authority to investigate members of the judiciary, who are themselves implicated in the very allegations under inquiry?” the party asks.
The letter lists 15 pointed questions, including:
- When exactly was Mchunu placed on leave and when was Cachalia informed of his appointment?
- What legal definition does a “Minister Designate” hold in the Constitution?
- Why is South Africa paying for two Ministers of Police simultaneously?
- On what legal grounds is Mchunu entitled to an inquiry before his dismissal?
- Why was a Deputy Minister not promoted instead of bringing in an external appointment?
Furthermore, the MK Party demands that Ramaphosa explain the public value of maintaining two ministers in the same portfolio during a time of growing insecurity and budgetary constraints.
“Your continued presence in office is no longer tenable. We demand your immediate resignation,” the letter concludes. “Failing compliance with these demands by 10h00 on Friday, 08 August 2025, our client reserves all rights, including approaching the courts for urgent relief.”
African Times understands that this legal offensive follows weeks of internal consultations between Zuma’s legal team and MK Party leadership after Mkhwanazi’s public briefing rocked the national security establishment.
In July, Mkhwanazi stunned the nation when he confirmed that he had been sidelined after initiating investigations into high-level corruption in the police ranks, implicating senior officers and reportedly reaching into judicial circles. While no names were officially mentioned, his statement unleashed a political firestorm.
President Ramaphosa responded to the fallout by announcing a judicial inquiry and placing Mchunu on leave, a move the Presidency said was aimed at ensuring the integrity of the process. However, critics view this as a ploy to manage political fallout while shielding implicated individuals.
When contacted for comment on Monday, presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said the legal department will handle the matter.
“Legal team will deal with it,” Magwenya said briefly.
Constitutional law experts say the MK Party’s demands, while politically charged, may force the Presidency to provide a fuller explanation of the decisions made under intense pressure. Legal analyst Advocate Vuyo Mbele told journalists that the MK Party’s insistence on a precise timeline exposes vulnerabilities in the executive’s public communication.
“The Presidency’s announcements have been vague and ambiguous at best. The legal questions raised are important for public accountability, especially given the gravity of Mkhwanazi’s allegations,” said Mbele.
Mchunu, known for his close ties to Ramaphosa, has kept a low profile since his sudden leave of absence was announced. He has not publicly responded to the allegations or to suggestions that his departure may be linked to efforts to suppress sensitive investigations.
Meanwhile, Cachalia has already assumed active duties as head of the police ministry, briefing the media on priorities around crime prevention and stating his discomfort with “shoot-to-kill” rhetoric.
The MK Party’s move signals a broader escalation in its campaign to delegitimise Ramaphosa’s presidency and bolster Zuma’s narrative that state institutions are captured by elites who use legal mechanisms to maintain control and silence dissent.
As the deadline for a presidential response looms, all eyes are now on the Union Buildings. Whether Ramaphosa will formally respond or dig in his heels remains to be seen — but the MK Party has made clear it is ready to take the fight to court.
