Here’s a summary of the provided content, along with key takeaways and paragraph breaks:
Key Takeaways
- Isaac Mapiyeye, the suspended head of the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Police Department (EMPD), testified at the Madlanga Commission.
- His testimony focused on a report he submitted recommending that acting EMPD head Julius Mkhwanazi be vetted for the permanent position.
- Mkhwanazi allegedly refused the vetting process, referencing the terms of his appointment.
- Mapiyeye argued that the EMPD lacks the authority to conduct investigations, a role he believes is solely the responsibility of the South African Police Service (SAPS).
- Mapiyeye also detailed alleged irregular appointments made by Mkhwanazi.
Summary
The Madlanga Commission has heard testimony from Isaac Mapiyeye, the suspended head of the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Police Department (EMPD). Mapiyeye’s appearance before the commission puts him in a challenging position, as he is being questioned about issues within the metro police force and his role within the organization.
The core of Mapiyeye’s testimony centered on a report he had previously submitted to the city manager. In this report, Mapiyeye specifically recommended that Julius Mkhwanazi, who was serving as the acting head of the EMPD at the time, undergo a formal vetting process. This vetting was intended to assess Mkhwanazi’s suitability for the permanent position of EMPD head. The recommendation suggested that such a thorough review was necessary to ensure the right person was appointed to lead the department.
However, according to Mapiyeye’s testimony, Mkhwanazi allegedly declined to be vetted. Mkhwanazi purportedly justified his refusal by referencing the specific terms and conditions outlined in his acting appointment. This raised questions about whether the terms of his appointment indeed shielded him from being vetted, or whether his refusal to be vetted raised questions about his conduct in the acting role.
Adding to the complexity of the situation, Mapiyeye also presented his perspective on the EMPD’s investigatory powers. He asserted that the metro police department does not possess the authority to conduct formal investigations. Instead, Mapiyeye maintained that this responsibility falls exclusively under the purview of the South African Police Service (SAPS). This statement, if true, has significant implications for the role and function of the EMPD, as it suggests a more limited scope of authority than may have been previously assumed.
Furthermore, Mapiyeye provided details regarding a series of alleged irregular appointments. These appointments, according to his testimony, were purportedly made by Mkhwanazi during his tenure as a deputy chief officer within the EMPD. The specifics of these irregular appointments were not explicitly detailed, but their alleged nature suggests potential violations of protocol, regulations, or perhaps even legal requirements within the department’s hiring processes.
