O’Sullivan demands action on “ambushing” MP who broke numerous laws, put a witness’s life in danger

Key topicsO’Sullivan seeks a Madlanga Commission probe into the ad-hoc parliamentary committee after what he describes as a hostile, two-day “ambush” during testimony. O’Sullivan demands action on “a…He alleges unlawful disclosure of sensitive material, including the naming of a protected Section 204 witness, which he says put that person at serious risk. O’Sullivan demands action on “a…He requests urgent corrective steps: an off-the-record committee meeting, destruction of unredacted documents, and transcript redactions to protect lives.Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here..BizNews Reporter.Forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan is asking the Madlanga Commission to investigate Parliament’s ad-hoc committee. Last week, numerous MPs on the committee subjected him to two days of relentless attack, using their Parliamentary Privilege to defame him on live national television. In O’Sullivan’s opinion, “certain members are covering up for corrupt criminals in the criminal justice system - it’s shocking the way they attacked me and then publicly named a protected state witness, putting his life at risk.”The founder of Forensics for Justice has shared an email he sent to the Madlanga Commission, requesting their urgent intervention due to what he maintains is unlawful conduct by members of the ad hoc Parliamentary Committee, particularly ActionSA MP Dereleen James.During the session, Ms James accused Paul O'Sullivan of misleading the committee under oath. She tabled internal memoranda and proof of payment showing that O'Sullivan had allegedly received R100,000 from a confidential Directorate of Special Operations (DSO) fund. This contradicted O'Sullivan's earlier testimony, in which he stated that he had never received funds for his public interest work.O'Sullivan denied the money was from a "slush fund," arguing it was a partial reimbursement for expenses incurred while assisting with investigations (linked to the Jackie Selebi case) at the state's request.His email demanding action reads: “I refer to the ambush by Ms James on 2026-02-11. I have attached a document that Ms James published at the meeting on Wednesday. I have redacted the name of a person whom I turned into a state witness back in 2006 under Section 204 of the Criminal Procedures Act. Ms James has broken the law in this regard by naming a person who cooperated in an operation aimed at taking down an international drug cartel, leading to the breaking up of the syndicate, which had tentacles in London, Portugal, Canada, Australia and the US.I flew to London, Portugal, and Australia at my own expense and assisted the police in identifying and bringing the syndicate members in those countries to justice. In Australia, I spent three weeks working with the Australian Federal Police to trace the suspects. I covered the cost of my own flights, car rental and hotels in all those trips. Ms James also published the cellular phone downloads from the time of her attack on Mr Robert McBride. It should be noted that it is a criminal offence, punishable by a 10-year prison sentence if convicted, to be in unlawful possession of anyone’s phone records or data intercepted from that phone. Ms James was provided the data by someone on the wrong side of the law in the criminal justice system. Otherwise, how did she obtain the same? The same applies to the DSO documents, which I have redacted and attached hereto. She should be placed in the witness box and required to explain how and where she obtained the documents in question, so that the ad hoc committee can ascertain the identity of those trying to protect criminals, who are having gullible, reckless, and/or dishonest members of the committee ambush witnesses. In addition, her conduct was reckless, in that she did not take the time to redact the name of the transnational drug syndicate member, whom I had turned into a cooperative Section 204 witness. That reckless conduct could very well result in the syndicate member being murdered, as all the persons who went to prison have already served their time and are now out of prison. It is no coincidence that the drug busts led to the arrest and conviction of Glenn Agliotti, which in turn revealed his role in bribing then commissioner of Police, Jack Selebi, as well as his links to the murder of Brett Kebble. Exposing the inner workings of a five-year investigation could put many lives at risk. I shall request that the Madlanga Commission investigate the conduct of the ad hoc committee to ascertain whether any of its members are associated with the criminal element that has captured the Criminal Justice System from within. In particular, I will request that they focus on those members who miraculously found themselves in possession of documents intended ONLY to attack the credibility of witnesses. The ineluctable conclusion is that current corrupt members of the criminal justice system are in close contact with certain members of the committee, with a view to attacking the integrity of certain witnesses, in order to protect criminals in the CJS from being exposed to further scrutiny. This conclusion becomes patently obvious when considering the easy ride through the member questions that certain criminals have received whilst testifying at the committee.URGENT REQUEST As a result of all the above, I humbly, and urgently, beseech you to: -Have an off-the-record meeting with all members of the committee who may have been provided the document Ms James unlawfully published.At such a meeting, require all of them to destroy the unredacted version of the document, which Ms James unlawfully published.Since I do not want to be accused of trying to cover up the document itself, said members could be issued an attached redacted version, which would ensure the safety of the person I turned into a valuable witness to help take down an international drug cartel.Finally, when transcribing the meeting record from 2026-02-11, the transcription was redacted to remove the name of the person mentioned by Ms James and to correct my inadvertent repeated mentions. Again, this is necessary to prevent a possible murder..Download and read supporting documents below

O’Sullivan demands action on “ambushing” MP who broke numerous laws, put a witness’s life in danger

Key topics

Related Stories