When Fadiel Adams, leader of the National Coloured Congress (NCC), stood before a packed parliamentary gallery in October 2025, he didn’t just defend his actions—he tore down the narrative that the Democratic Alliance (DA) had led the charge against corrupt police officials. "We didn’t wait for them to notice the rot," Adams said. "We dug it up. And now they want to pose as the heroes?" The moment captured a bitter, months-long power struggle over who deserves credit for exposing deep-seated corruption within the South African Police Service (SAPS), particularly its elite Crime Intelligence unit.
How It All Started: The Crime Intelligence Scandal
The firestorm began in early 2025 when the Inspector-General of Intelligence uncovered a web of illegal property acquisitions by senior officers in SAPS Crime Intelligence. Documents revealed luxury homes, high-end vehicles, and offshore accounts linked to Major-General Philani Lushaba and at least four other officials—all with salaries that couldn’t possibly cover such assets. The findings weren’t leaked; they were formally submitted to Parliament in May. But who pushed for action? That’s where the war began.By June, Dianne Kohler-Barnard, a DA MP on the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, publicly demanded Lushaba be summoned to testify. Her statements made headlines: "This isn’t just corruption—it’s institutional betrayal." But Adams, who had been quietly gathering evidence since January, called it a political stunt. "They waited six months to speak up. We were already in courtrooms and backroom meetings with whistleblowers," he told local reporters.
The Accusations Mount: Credit, Control, and Confidentiality
The NCC had filed its own formal complaints with the Public Protector in February, long before the DA’s public statements. Adams claims his team secured sworn affidavits from three Crime Intelligence insiders, including a forensic accountant who traced payments to shell companies in Mauritius. The DA, he argues, only jumped on the story once it became politically convenient—after media pressure mounted and the public outcry grew.Then came the counterattack. In September, Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner, accused Adams and Kohler-Barnard of "recklessly exposing classified operations" by discussing internal Crime Intelligence files in media interviews. Mkhwanazi claimed the NCC had accessed documents marked "Top Secret" through unauthorized channels—a claim Adams denies. "I don’t steal files," Adams shot back. "I receive them from people who’ve lost faith in the system."
By October 30, the conflict turned personal. Mkhwanazi filed a formal complaint with Parliament’s ethics committee, alleging Adams committed perjury after retracting testimony about a meeting with a key whistleblower. Adams had initially claimed the meeting occurred in Pretoria in March; later, he admitted it was in Cape Town in April. "It’s a detail," Adams said. "The facts haven’t changed. The truth is still the same."
Who’s Really in Charge? The Oversight Battle
At the heart of this feud isn’t just ego—it’s jurisdiction. The DA, as part of the official opposition, operates through parliamentary committees. The NCC, a smaller but vocal civil society group with deep roots in Cape Town’s Coloured communities, operates outside Parliament but wields influence through grassroots pressure and legal channels. The Ad Hoc Committee on Police Accountability, established in August 2025, became the battleground.Delays plagued the committee. Key documents weren’t submitted until October 6, forcing a two-week postponement of hearings. Police Minister Mchunu acknowledged the backlog, saying, "We’re working with what we have, but the lack of cooperation from within SAPS is staggering." Meanwhile, Ian Cameron, chair of the Portfolio Committee on Police, publicly criticized the NCC for "undermining institutional integrity" by going public before formal processes concluded.
But here’s the twist: Cameron’s own committee had failed to summon Lushaba until September—three months after the Inspector-General’s report was tabled. The NCC had already forced a preliminary inquiry through the courts.
Why This Matters Beyond Politics
This isn’t just about who gets the press release. It’s about who gets to hold power accountable in South Africa. The SAPS Crime Intelligence unit was once seen as a shield against organized crime. Now, it’s suspected of being part of the problem. And if civil society groups like the NCC can’t act without being accused of overstepping, then who will?For communities in Khayelitsha, Athlone, and Gugulethu—where police corruption has eroded trust for decades—the NCC’s role has been lifeline, not liability. When residents reported missing money from their pensions or illegal vehicle seizures, it was the NCC’s legal team that filed the first complaints. The DA didn’t respond until the story hit national TV.
"We’re tired of being treated like noise," Adams said. "When the system fails, people don’t wait for permission to speak up."
What’s Next? The Clock Is Ticking
The Ad Hoc Committee is scheduled to resume hearings in mid-November 2025. Lushaba is expected to testify, along with two other Crime Intelligence officers under investigation. The Inspector-General’s full report is due by December 15. Meanwhile, the National Prosecuting Authority has opened a preliminary investigation into the perjury allegations against Adams.But the bigger question looms: Will Parliament finally act—or will this become another case of accountability delayed, then forgotten?
Frequently Asked Questions
What exactly did the Inspector-General of Intelligence uncover about SAPS Crime Intelligence?
The Inspector-General’s investigation found that senior Crime Intelligence officials, including Major-General Philani Lushaba, had acquired at least R12.7 million in luxury property and vehicles between 2020 and 2025 using unexplained funds. Bank records showed payments routed through shell companies in Mauritius and the British Virgin Islands, with no official declarations. The report also revealed that internal audits were deliberately suppressed by unit leadership.
Why is Fadiel Adams being accused of perjury?
Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi alleges Adams changed his testimony about the location and date of a meeting with a whistleblower—claiming it was in Pretoria in March, then later admitting it was in Cape Town in April. Adams maintains the discrepancy is minor and doesn’t affect the substance of his claims. Legal experts say such inconsistencies, while problematic, rarely constitute perjury unless intent to deceive is proven—which has not been established.
How has the DA responded to the NCC’s accusations?
The DA has not issued a direct rebuttal to Adams’ claims of credit appropriation. Instead, DA officials have emphasized their parliamentary actions—such as submitting formal questions to the police minister and demanding Lushaba’s summons—as evidence of their leadership. They’ve also criticized the NCC for bypassing formal channels, calling their methods "unorthodox and potentially dangerous." But they’ve avoided addressing whether their own response was delayed.
Are other groups supporting the NCC’s stance?
Yes. The South African Human Rights Commission issued a statement in September expressing "grave concern" over the suppression of whistleblower testimony and the politicization of accountability. Several civil society organizations, including the Institute for Security Studies and the Legal Resources Centre, have publicly backed the NCC’s right to act outside parliamentary structures when state institutions fail. Even some SAPS rank-and-file officers have privately confirmed the NCC’s early efforts helped protect them from retaliation.
What’s the risk if this conflict isn’t resolved transparently?
If Parliament continues to delay or allows internal power struggles to overshadow justice, public trust in institutions will collapse further. In areas like Khayelitsha, where police corruption is already a daily reality, citizens may stop reporting crimes altogether. Worse, it could embolden other units within SAPS to operate with impunity, believing no one will hold them accountable unless it’s politically convenient.
Could this lead to criminal charges against SAPS officials?
Absolutely. The National Prosecuting Authority has confirmed it’s reviewing the Inspector-General’s findings for potential charges of fraud, money laundering, and obstruction of justice. Major-General Lushaba and at least two other officials are under active investigation. If the evidence holds, they could face trial by mid-2026. The real test will be whether the state has the will to prosecute high-ranking officers—even if it means confronting its own political allies.