Ad hoc committee asks for new extension as witness seeks to have her evidence scrapped
· Citizen
Parliament’s ad hoc committee probing claims of corruption, criminal infiltration and political interference within South Africa’s justice system is facing growing pressure to wrap up its work, as divisions have emerged over timelines.
The committee, which concluded its public hearings two weeks ago, is now tasked with compiling a final report for submission to the National Assembly.
Visit freshyourfeel.org for more information.
Its last witness was KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.
Ad hoc committee seeks extension
At a virtual meeting on Tuesday, 31 March 2026, members of the committee debated whether more time is needed to complete the report.
Committee chairperson Soviet Lekganyane confirmed that MPs had approached National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza to request an extension until the end of June.
“The speaker has already responded and the meeting will be informed on the number of days that the speaker has allocated to the committee,” Lekganyane said.
ALSO READ: ‘Parliament is an embarrassment’: Heated clash erupts as MPs walk out of ad hoc committee
However, parliamentary legal adviser Andile Tetyana revealed that the speaker was reluctant to approve such a lengthy delay.
“She proposed that the date for submission of the report to the House should be 30 April,” Tetyana said.
If approved, this would mark the fourth extension since the committee began its work on 7 October 2025.
Previous deadlines were pushed from 31 October to 28 November, then to 20 February, and most recently to 31 March.
Watch the ad hoc committee below:
Parliamentary content adviser Nicolette van Zyl-Gous outlined a proposed work plan that would see MPs deliberate and finalise the report between 13 April and 11 May.
“In the event that no audi alteram partem process is required, the committee could adopt the final report on 24 April,” van Zyl-Gou said.
But she warned that the timeline overlaps with Parliament’s budget process as well as the constituency period – both of which could significantly limit members’ availability – between 22 April and 8 May.
MPs clash on proposed deadlines
The proposed deadlines exposed clear divisions within the committee.
ANC MPs supported the proposed schedule, but opposition members raised concerns about its practicality.
MK Party MP David Skosana argued that more time was needed to ensure comprehensive coverage of key institutions.
“We can’t leave correctional services untouched. We can’t leave the judiciary untouched because then it means we are not resolving the problem,” Skosana said.
READ MORE: Ramaphosa makes important move on ad hoc committee into police corruption
DA MP Glynnis Breytenbach strongly opposed the timeline, citing workload pressures.
She emphasised even if MPs and parliamentary staff worked 24 hours a day, completing the task would still be impossible.
Breytenbach also warned that rushing the process could compromise quality.
“I think we should really be realistic and have a good look at the amount of work that needs to be done,” the DA MP said.
Other committee members backed her position.
Alternative plan
An alternative timeline – delaying work until 11 May and concluding on 10 June – was also tabled to accommodate parliamentary commitments.
However, ANC chief whip Mdumiseni Ntuli rejected the idea of postponing work.
“I don’t think that is acting responsibly,” Ntuli remarked, adding that the committee should stick to the 14 May deadline.
READ MORE: ‘What you did to us today is horribly wrong’: Witness slammed for ‘abusing’ ad hoc committee
ANC MP Khusela Sangoni-Diko echoed concerns about prolonged delays affecting other parliamentary processes.
“We really don’t want this process to stretch out any longer than it has,” she told MPs.
Despite this, not all members were convinced that the compressed timeline was workable.
Lekganyane warned that another extension could be rejected.
“If we request an extension and it does not work, we will look very clumsy, so let’s put the matter of the extension aside,” he said.
“For now, the deadline we have is the 30th of April,” the chairperson added.
Witness testimony
Tetyana later disclosed that Sarah-Jane Trent, a former assistant to forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan, wants her evidence to be declared invalid, citing mental health concerns.
In a letter, Trent said she was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) – diagnosed in 2017 – at the time of her appearance on 9 March.
She described experiencing severe distress during her testimony, stating that she suffered a “secondary trauma which led to complete helplessness on her part”.
She also claimed she was unable to properly engage with questioning.
“She even makes allegations that she was held against her will,” Tetyana said.
The committee has not yet received supporting medical documentation, and Tetyana told MPs that only a court can order evidence to be “excised”.
Trent drew widespread attention after becoming visibly emotional and breaking into tears while responding to questions.
NOW READ: ‘Good Christian country’: Inside Paul O’Sullivan’s letter ‘pleading’ to move to SA during apartheid