By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC) Oversight Judge Joseph Raulinga said the Office of the IDAC Oversight Judge, established under Section 22A of the National Prosecuting Authority Amendment Act, completes an important component of South Africa’s constitutional architecture by providing independent judicial oversight over IDAC.
The IDAC Ombud is mandated to investigate allegations of abuse of power, probe allegations of improper conduct, maladministration and related complaints at the directorate.
The IDAC Ombud Office was established in terms of Section 22A of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Act, 1998, as amended by the National Prosecuting Authority Act, 2024. The legislation empowers the Minister, after consultation with the Chief Justice, to appoint the IDAC Ombud.
Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, Mmamoloko Kubayi together with the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP), Adv Andy Mothibi have expressed serious concerns on the developments emerging from the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry relating to IDAC.
This follows testimonies by witnesses, making serious allegations on the conduct of IDAC officials and its head. This has raised serious credibility concerns and has visibly impacted on public trust in the IDAC operations.
This has also compelled the Minister and the NDPP to meet urgently with the IDAC Investigating Director to address these concerns and formulate practical solutions that will build public trust in institutions of government that are entrusted to deal with criminality.
Fullview learnt that part of the discussions included the possible suspension of Andrea Johnson, head of the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC).
Johnson, then a senior prosecutor, is accused of interfering in the investigations.
She is expected to testify at the commission on Tuesday, 21 July 2026 – with the threat of an inquiry into her fitness to hold office and possible suspension hanging over her head.
Raulinga stressed that the Office was not created to obstruct law enforcement, but to strengthen institutional integrity by ensuring that power is exercised within the bounds of legality, accountability and fairness.
“By providing independent judicial scrutiny, the Office contributes to public confidence in the justice system and reinforces the principles that sustain our constitutional democracy.”
He said institutional independence should not be confused with institutional isolation, noting that effective functioning of the justice system depends on principled and respectful engagement between institutions whose mandates may intersect but remain distinct.
“It is therefore important that all institutions respect clear jurisdictional boundaries while maintaining appropriate channels of communication where matters require procedural clarity or cooperation,” Raulinga said.
The retired judge said the Office will investigate complaints relating to alleged improper conduct by persons who fall within its oversight mandate, and these include prosecutors, investigators, deputy directors, seconded officials and other personnel appointed to support the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption, as provided for in section 7(4)(a) of the National Prosecuting Authority Amendment Act.
Its mandate covers serious, high-profile or complex corruption, commercial crime or financial crime arising from commissions of inquiry, referrals by the National Director of Public Prosecutions, statutory referrals and complaints lodged by members of the public.
Raulinga assured that every complaint will be assessed objectively and fairly.
“The Office will operate with strict judicial detachment. We do not participate in public debate, nor are we influenced by external pressure or popular opinion.”
“Our mandate is executed through the careful and objective assessment of facts and law. Every complaint will be considered fairly, with due regard to the rights of both the complainant and the person who is the subject of the complaint,” the retired judge said.
He emphasised that justice will be administered without regard to “status, influence or affiliation”.
The Office receives complaints from both internal and external complainants and will provide strict confidentiality to whistleblowers and complainants in accordance with the Protected Disclosures Act.
Raulinga said although the Office is still establishing its internal structures, members of the public will soon be able to submit sealed written complaints through a secure drop-box at the SALU Building, 316 Thabo Sehume Street in Pretoria.
Complaints can already be submitted electronically to complaints.idac@justice.gov.za.
He also noted that the Office does not investigate intelligence matters falling under the Inspector-General of Intelligence, nor does it replace the investigative powers of the South African Police Service or the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation.
“The Office operates within clearly defined constitutional and legislative boundaries, complementing existing law enforcement and oversight mechanisms,” he said.
Raulinga said the Office reports to the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and is ultimately accountable to Parliament through the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, a reporting framework designed to safeguard its independence.
He announced that the Office will undertake a stakeholder engagement programme to establish working relationships with relevant institutions and partners.
“Reports and public updates will be issued in due course, where appropriate and consistent with the requirements of confidentiality and the law,” Raulinga said.