The testimony of Advocate Andrea Johnson, head of the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (IDAC), was postponed after she failed to appear before the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry on Monday.
The commission heard that Johnson was unable to testify after falling ill and being rushed to the hospital.
Proceedings briefly halted as commissioners were informed of Johnson’s absence, with officials explaining that her scheduled appearance could not go ahead due to her medical condition.
“She, unfortunately, will not be available today to testify, and her counsel is ready to address the commission on the circumstances leading to this stage of affairs,” said evidence leader, Advocate Mahlape Sello.
No further details regarding the nature of her illness or her condition were disclosed during the proceedings.
Johnson had been expected to provide evidence before the commission, which is probing matters within its terms of reference. However, her testimony is postponed until further notice.
The commission is expected to announce a new date for Johnson’s testimony once her health permits her to appear.
Medical certificate
Johnson’s legal counsel explained that, shortly before arriving at the commission venue on Monday morning, a representative from the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) received a telephone call from one of Johnson’s protection officers, informing them that she had been rushed to hospital.
“This happened this morning, as we arrived at the venue,” counsel said.
During a short adjournment, the legal team obtained a medical certificate from Johnson’s doctor. Counsel said the NPA representative had also spoken directly to the doctor before the adjournment and was informed that Johnson was receiving treatment for serious health-related issues that could not be disclosed publicly.
The medical certificate states that Johnson is unfit for work from July 13 to July 15.
Counsel acknowledged that the development had disrupted the commission’s programme but said the circumstances were beyond anyone’s control.
“I do accept that this affects the conduct of the affairs of the commission, because the commission had its own agenda and programme for the week. But the circumstances are such that the person who was scheduled to be here is not able to be here,” counsel submitted.
Date of future appearance to be determined
Sello confirmed that copies of the medical certificate had been provided to the commissioners before requesting that Johnson’s appearance be postponed to a date yet to be determined.
“In light of the fact that the witness is unwell and is only being attended to today, I would request that the commissioners postpone her appearance to a date to be determined. I fear that if we fix a specific date, we may be back before you to seek a further postponement because she is still indisposed.”
After receiving the certificate, Commission Chairperson Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga remarked that the document provided little useful medical detail.
“This is one of those medical certificates that are useless. But we know that Advocate Johnson is not here,” Madlanga said.
He ruled that the commission had no option but to postpone Johnson’s testimony.
“We are forced in the circumstances to postpone the hearing of Advocate Johnson’s testimony to a date to be determined.”
Best she appears in person
Madlanga also raised the question of why the commission could not proceed in the same manner it had with previous witnesses, such as Mike van Wyk and General Feroz Khan, by placing documentary evidence on record in the witness’s absence.
Responding, Sello explained that the nature of Johnson’s evidence made that approach impractical.
She said previous instances involved WhatsApp messages that could be read into the record and later responded to by the witnesses. In Johnson’s case, however, the evidence consists of a detailed statement and a supplementary statement that are narrative in nature.
“The only option would be to read her statements into the record, but her statements are already responding to questions that have been posed. At best, it would require me to go and find the questions and then read what she says, whereas she can sit in the witness box and give the narrative as she has set it out in her papers.”
Sello added that simply reading the statements would defeat the purpose of the hearing because commissioners would be unable to question Johnson or probe aspects of her evidence.
“It would not save much purpose because we would want to engage her or probe on the narrative that she gives. The nature of Advocate Johnson’s testimony does not lend itself to that option.”
