By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
The Pretoria High Court has dismissed the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party’s bid to challenge the suspension of Senzo Mchunu as police minister.
Mchunu was placed on suspension in July 2025 by president Cyril Ramaphosa following allegations of his involvement in organised crime. Professor Firoz Cachalia has since been acting as South African Police Service (SAPS) Minister.
Mchunu has denied any wrongdoing.
Ramaphosa also set up the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry to investigate allegations of corruption and political interference in the SAPS, following an explosive media briefing held by KwaZulu-Natal police chief, Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.
MK party wanted the high court to set aside Ramaphosa’s decision to place Mchunu on special leave.
They also sought the invalidity, nullity, and unconstitutionality of the appointment of Cachalia as acting police minister and the establishment of a commission of inquiry, and their setting aside.
According to court documents, the court found that the party failed to vindicate any constitutional infringements.
Judge Anthony Millar ruled that suspending a minister pending serious but unverified allegations, and instituting an independent inquiry to establish the facts, are both rational and lawful exercises of executive power.
“In this instance, President, on the facts presented, did rationally apply his mind to the establishment of the Madlanga Commission. It is a decision that cannot be faulted from a legality and rationality vantage point. In the premises, the entire application falls to be dismissed.”
Millar said it was apposite for the court to briefly address the issue of the suspension or interdict referred to in the Notice of Motion.
“[Dali] Mpofu correctly submitted that a setting aside of a President’s decision required confirmation by the Constitutional Court – hence a suspension pending confirmation. As already outlined, this Court is not making such a declaration. We do mention in passing that a temporary interdict or temporary relief mentioned in section 172(2)(b) still has to tick all the boxes applicable to an interdict remedy, failing which a court must refuse to exercise its discretionary powers 31.”
“On this score, the applicants have failed to persuade the Court. What the applicants sought is a temporary interdict contemplated in section 172(2)(b) of the Constitution. Since no constitutional invalidity order has been made, that should be the end of the enquiry,” Millar said.
The application was dismissed on the merits, with each party to pay its own costs.
Meanwhile on the 15TH of December, the KZN legislature will vote in the motion of no confidence in Premier Thami Ntuli.
The MK Party are arguing that Ntuli has failed to act against corruption and maladministration.
Ntuli heads the government of provincial unity (GPU), which incorporates the African National Congress (ANC), his Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), the Democratic Alliance (DA), and the lesser-known National Freedom Party (NFP).
Seventeen months ago, the GPU emerged victorious, but by a whisker in the 80-member provincial legislature.
The MK party swept the floor in the 2024 elections in KZN, securing 37 of the 80 seats, but the opposition united to keep it out of power.