Madlanga Commission must expose systemic failures in South Africa's criminal justice system

OPINION - The Madlanga Commission has until 25 January 2027 to submit its final report, after President Cyril Ramaphosagranted an extension to allow more time for the consideration of additional evidence, outstanding testimony and expert recommendations.

However, exposing individuals implicated in corruption will achieve only so much if South Africa fails to address the deeper structural problems undermining its criminal justice system.

According to Dr Zizamele Cebekhulu-Makhaza, chairperson of the Safer South Africa Foundation, the commission's work must go beyond identifying those responsible for wrongdoing and examine why institutions tasked with fighting crime are struggling to fulfil their mandates.

He argues that without addressing these underlying weaknesses, reforms introduced could leave the same conditions in place and make it harder for the country to tackle crime effectively.

Cebekhulu-Makhaza identifies three key areas that require closer examination.

1. Is SAPS too centralised to police effectively?

The structure of the South African Police Service (SAPS) raises questions about whether too much operational decision-making is concentrated at national head office.

Cebekhulu-Makhaza argues that a large administrative structure could divert resources away from frontline policing, while communities continue to experience shortages of essential policing resources.

He questions why decisions about police vehicles, infrastructure and other operational needs should depend so heavily on national structures when provincial leadership is often better placed to understand local requirements.

Lengthy approval processes can delay the delivery of essential resources. For example, a growing town requiring an additional police station should not have to navigate unnecessary layers of national bureaucracy before action can be taken.

The commission's findings should help determine whether SAPS needs to reconsider how authority and resources are distributed. National head office could focus on policing strategy and oversight, while provincial structures are given greater responsibility for operational decisions and resource allocation.

2. Are South Africa's criminal justice laws still fit for purpose?

South Africa's Criminal Procedure Act dates back to 1977. Although it has undergone numerous amendments, Cebekhulu-Makhaza questions whether the existing legislative framework remains adequate for the demands of modern c.

He compares the legislation to a 1977 model car, arguing that continually replacing individual parts does not necessarily address the need to reconsider whether the vehicle itself remains fit for purpose.

The decades of amendments raise questions about whether shortcomings in the criminal justice framework have been adequately addressed, particularly regarding the powers and responsibilities of different institutions and the safeguards needed to prevent abuse.

The Madlanga Commission's findings could help identify where existing legislation and oversight arrangements have enabled wrongdoing or failed to prevent it.

Where weaknesses are identified, more fundamental legislative reform may be necessary rather than simply introducing further amendments to an ageing framework.

3. Are criminal justice institutions working effectively together?

Another area requiring scrutiny is how responsibilities are divided between investigating and prosecuting institutions.

Cebekhulu-Makhaza questions whether current arrangements encourage effective co-operation or create unnecessary duplication, placing additional pressure on already stretched resources.

He points to the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (Idac), which operates within the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), as an example.

Established to investigate and prosecute complex corruption cases, Idac asks whether combining these functions within a prosecuting authority is delivering the intended results.

He argues that the effectiveness of this arrangement, the clarity of institutional responsibilities and the allocation of resources all deserve closer examination.

Expanding investigative capacity alone will not solve the problem if prosecutors and courts cannot process cases effectively. Any proposed reforms must therefore consider how the different components of the criminal justice system work together.

Reform must address the causes, not just the consequences

Cebekhulu-Makhaza believes the Madlanga Commission must be given sufficient time to complete its work thoroughly, rather than being rushed by public pressure for answers.

Its final report should provide Government with clear recommendations on where institutional and legislative reforms are needed, supported by evidence to inform difficult decisions about the future of criminal justice in South Africa.

Identifying individuals responsible for wrongdoing is important, but it is equally essential to understand the systems that allowed it to happen.

Without addressing those underlying weaknesses, South Africa risks leaving the door open for the next scandal.