‘It was O’Sullivan’s own investigation, not Ipid’: Ex-NPA prosecutor details Paul’s ‘interference’

2026-03-04 - 19:53

A former National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) official has told parliament’s ad hoc committee that forensic expert Paul O’Sullivan was deeply involved in an Independent Police Investigative Directorate (Ipid) investigation he was not authorised to lead. Molatlhwa Michael Mashuga, a former senior prosecutor, testified in Cape Town on Wednesday that O’Sullivan was deeply embedded in Ipid’s affairs during an investigation into former acting national police commissioner Khomotso Phahlane. Paul O’Sullivan prosecution Mashuga previously led the state’s case against O’Sullivan, his former assistant Sarah-Jane Trent, and Ipid investigators Mandlakayise Mahlangu and Temane Binang. The group was arrested in 2017 and appeared before the Pretoria Magistrate’s Court on charges including fraud, extortion, intimidation and alleged breaches of the Ipid Act. ALSO READ: Ex-national police commissioner Phahlane takes dismissal fight to ConCourt The charges stemmed from claims that O’Sullivan and his co-accused involved themselves in the Phahlane investigation and contravened the Prevention of Organised Crime Act. However, the matter was later struck off the roll by the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria because of delays. O’Sullivan was released from custody and the case was not reinstated. ‘Sustained interference’ During Wednesday’s proceedings, evidence leader Norman Arendse confirmed that National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) Andy Mothibi had granted Mashuga, who reportedly resigned in 2024, limited permission to testify. Arendse informed the committee that Mothibi submitted a report explaining why the NPA halted the prosecution. According to the report, Mashuga had preferred racketeering charges under the Prevention of Organised Crime Act, but it was concluded that there was insufficient evidence. READ MORE: McBride claims Sibiya was framed, details Phahlane investigation and calls for Ipid reform The report also emphasised that such charges require authorisation from the NDPP. Mashuga was, therefore, directed to reconsider the charges, resulting in a delay of the prosecution. In his testimony, Mashuga stressed that O’Sullivan infiltrated Ipid during the tenure of former executive director Robert McBride between March 2014 and February 2019. O’Sullivan previously denied the allegation. According to Mashuga, he was subjected to “sustained interference”, “insults” and accusations of being “captured” – all simply for doing his job by pursuing O’Sullivan and his co-accused. Watch the ad hoc committee below: R200 000 ‘gratification’ Mashuga raised concerns about O’Sullivan and Trent’s involvement in the Phahlane probe as the pair was not vetted as required by the Ipid Act. “There’s always been this question, whether Mr Paul O’Sullivan and Trent were entitled to involve themselves in this investigation, and whether Ipid had abdicated its statutory power and duties and functions to a private person,” Mashuga told MPs. The former prosecutor argued that the probe lacked independence because it was driven by individuals “who were not only biased and not independent, but who had a motive to falsely implicate Phahlane”. He reminded the committee that O’Sullivan himself admitted to making a R200 000 donation toward McBride’s legal fees. READ MORE: ‘You can be the white Brown Mogotsi’: MPs accuse Paul O’Sullivan of not being truthful McBride at the time had been suspended, but returned to work following a 2016 Constitutional Court (ConCourt) ruling. The former NPA official contended that the payment constituted unlawful gratification under the Prevention of Organised Crime Act. “He paid that money for the legal expenses of Mr McBride as a forbearance for himself being involved in the investigation and exercising the functions and powers of Ipid. “That amounts to gratification in terms of the Act,” Mashuga remarked. Alleged threats Mashuga further painted a picture of O’Sullivan’s alleged tactics. From threatening Phahlane with jail time to orchestrating the forced sale of his home through an auction. “He would buy it at an auction and sell it just like he did with the house of [Czech convicted crime boss Radovan] Krejčíř.” He added that O’Sullivan and Trent reportedly impersonated Ipid officers and obtained witness statements while Mahlangu and Binang did nothing to intervene. “The two Ipid officers did not stop them; they allowed the contravention to continue.” The fraud and intimidation charges, Mashuga pointed out, allegedly stemmed from O’Sullivan and Trent misrepresenting themselves to Sable Hills Waterfront Estate manager Chris Jooste to get confidential house plans of Phahlane’s property. “It was O’Sullivan who took pictures with his phone of the house plans. It was O’Sullivan’s own private investigation, not Ipid. They were just using Ipid officers as a cover,” Mashuga said. O’Sullivan is expected to return on Thursday after walking out during his testimony last week, and Trent is also scheduled to testify. NOW READ: ‘My loyalty is to South Africa’: Paul O’Sullivan denies being foreign agent