Malema denies role in plot to oust former intelligence IG as Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema has strongly rejected allegations that he conspired to remove former Intelligence Inspector-General Setlhomamaru Dintwe through an alleged scheme involving suspended Crime Intelligence deputy head Feroz Khan and businessman Muhammad Sayed.

The allegations emerged before the Madlanga Commission, where evidence leaders presented WhatsApp exchanges allegedly linking Khan, Sayed, and Malema. However, Malema insists he had no knowledge of the conversations and denies any unlawful conduct.

The controversy has intensified public scrutiny of the relationship between senior political figures, intelligence officials, and parliamentary oversight processes.

Julius Malema rejects conspiracy allegations

EFF leader Julius Malema submitted a sworn affidavit to the Madlanga Commission, categorically denying claims that he participated in any effort to orchestrate the removal of former Intelligence Inspector-General Setlhomamaru Dintwe.

Responding to allegations stemming from WhatsApp messages exchanged between suspended Crime Intelligence deputy head Feroz Khan and businessman Muhammad Sayed, Malema stated:

“I deny that I conspired to orchestrate the removal of Dr Dintwe.”

The affidavit forms part of the commission’s ongoing investigation into allegations of political interference and misconduct involving senior intelligence officials.

Malema argued that the commission had not established the authenticity of the WhatsApp conversations and therefore he could not meaningfully respond to claims based on unverified communications.

Madlanga Commission examines WhatsApp exchanges

The Madlanga Commission heard evidence that Khan allegedly communicated with Malema indirectly through businessman Muhammad Sayed.

Evidence leader Matthew Chaskalson told the commission that Sayed allegedly acted as an intermediary, passing messages and draft parliamentary questions between Khan and the EFF leader.

According to evidence presented before the inquiry, Khan prepared parliamentary questions targeting then Intelligence Inspector-General Setlhomamaru Dintwe.

Those draft questions were allegedly later placed on official EFF parliamentary letterheads before being submitted to Parliament.

Chaskalson argued that this arrangement suggested a possible quid pro quo between Khan and Malema.

Alleged parliamentary strategy under scrutiny

Draft questions targeting Intelligence Inspector-General

Evidence before the commission suggests that Khan prepared questions probing Dintwe’s alleged relationship with convicted drug dealer Timmy Marimuthu.

The commission heard that these questions appeared designed to pressure or potentially trap Dintwe during parliamentary proceedings.

According to Chaskalson, the objective may have been to create circumstances that could justify Dintwe’s removal as Intelligence Inspector-General.

The evidence leader argued:

“It has very much the appearance of a favour in return for a favour. An illegal favour in return for a favour.”

These allegations remain contested, and Khan has not yet provided testimony before the commission.

Feroz Khan yet to testify

Suspended Crime Intelligence deputy head Feroz Khan remains unable to testify before the commission after reportedly recovering in hospital from an alleged assassination attempt outside his Houghton residence.

Khan is also currently on bail facing charges linked to an alleged illicit precious minerals syndicate.

Although absent from the witness stand, his legal representatives continue participating in the proceedings while commission evidence leaders present allegations involving him.

His future testimony is expected to be one of the commission’s most anticipated appearances.

Julius Malema questions authenticity of evidence

Malema argued that he could not verify whether the WhatsApp conversations presented before the commission were genuine.

In his affidavit, he stated:

“I evidently cannot confirm whether these extracts are a true recordal of their engagements or the authenticity of those extracts.”

He added that without confirmation of their authenticity, he could not properly defend himself against allegations arising from the messages.

Malema maintained that any inference suggesting unlawful conduct on his part should therefore be rejected.

EFF Parliament allegations explained

Information gathering is part of parliamentary oversight

Malema defended his interactions with intelligence officials and other public servants by saying Members of Parliament regularly receive information from various sources.

He explained:

“In any event, I regularly receive information from various sources, some covert, some public, that relates to my work as a member of Parliament.”

According to Malema, obtaining information from officials does not amount to wrongdoing.

Instead, he argued that receiving information enables elected representatives to perform effective parliamentary oversight and hold public institutions accountable.

Malema cites previous public disclosures

The EFF leader also pointed out that several relationships mentioned during the commission’s hearings had already been publicly disclosed years earlier.

He referenced businessman Adriano Mazzotti, saying he had openly acknowledged during the EFF’s tenth anniversary celebrations that Mazzotti had contributed funding used to register the political party.

Malema further noted that it was publicly known that his wife previously lived in the same residential complex as Mazzotti.

According to him, these publicly acknowledged relationships undermine suggestions that he attempted to conceal associations.

Meetings with senior police officials defended

AKA murder investigation referenced

Malema also defended his meetings with senior police officials, including KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.

He explained that Mkhwanazi had briefed him regarding the investigation into the murder of South African rapper AKA.

According to Malema, such engagements fall within his constitutional responsibilities as a Member of Parliament tasked with overseeing government departments.

He said:

“I have met with General Mkhwanazi, who shared with me the investigation about the murder of a popular artist known as AKA.”

Malema maintained that obtaining information from senior public officials cannot automatically be interpreted as improper conduct.

Commission examines alleged political influence

The Madlanga Commission continues examining whether political influence may have affected intelligence structures and parliamentary oversight mechanisms.

Central to the inquiry are allegations that Khan attempted to use parliamentary processes to target perceived rivals while allegedly seeking political protection.

Evidence leaders argue that draft parliamentary questions prepared by Khan could demonstrate attempts to manipulate oversight institutions for personal or strategic purposes.

However, these allegations remain contested.

Neither Malema nor Khan has admitted any wrongdoing.

Parliament’s oversight role under spotlight

The allegations have reignited debate about the independence of Parliament’s oversight functions and the relationship between intelligence agencies and political parties.

Experts note that Members of Parliament frequently receive confidential information from whistleblowers, officials and members of the public.

The key legal question before the commission is whether those interactions crossed into unlawful coordination or improper political influence.

The commission’s final findings could have broader implications for intelligence oversight and parliamentary accountability in South Africa.

Political implications for the EFF

The allegations arrive during a politically sensitive period as the EFF continues positioning itself as a vocal opposition party.

Malema has consistently portrayed the commission’s allegations as unproven and based largely on disputed electronic communications.

The EFF leader maintains that his parliamentary conduct has always been guided by constitutional oversight responsibilities rather than personal interests.

Whether the commission ultimately accepts that explanation remains to be seen.

YOU MAY LIKE:

Treasury withholds funds from 69 municipalities in nine provinces

Julius Malema seeks Didiza’s removal over Phala Phala

Investigation continues

The Madlanga Commission is expected to hear further evidence relating to Feroz Khan, Muhammad Sayed and several other individuals allegedly linked to the broader intelligence controversy.

Investigators continue examining documentary evidence, witness testimony and electronic communications before reaching any conclusions.

For now, Malema denies role in plot to oust former intelligence IG, insisting that he neither participated in any conspiracy nor had knowledge of the WhatsApp exchanges cited during the commission’s hearings.

As proceedings continue, the commission’s findings are expected to shape future debates around intelligence oversight, parliamentary accountability and political influence within South Africa’s security structures.

Mainstream Media References

1. eNCA – Madlanga Commission continues with Feroz Khan evidence
   https://www.enca.com/news-top-stories/live-madlanga-commission-continues-feroz-khan-evidence
2. Daily Maverick – EFF’s Julius Malema provided political protection for Feroz Khan, Madlanga Commission investigator reveals
   https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2026-06-09-effs-julius-malema-provided-political-protection-for-feroz-khan-madlanga-commission-investigator-reveals/
3. AllAfrica (republishing Daily Maverick) – EFF’s Julius Malema Provided Political Protection for Feroz Khan, Madlanga Commission Investigator Reveals
   https://allafrica.com/stories/202606090015.html
4. eNCA – WATCH | Madlanga Commission continues with Feroz Khan evidence (Live Coverage)
   https://www.enca.com/news-top-stories/live-madlanga-commission-continues-feroz-khan-evidence