The organisation, Freedom Under Law, has lodged an urgent application in court to interdict the redeployment of controversial crime intelligence boss Richard Mdluli.
The organisation, which counts Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu and academic dr Mampela Ramphele, among its directors, lodged the application on Tuesday and the matter set down for June 5.
Freedom Under Law says it wants to interdict General Richard Mdluli from continuing to discharge any function as a police officer pending the judicial review of a series of decisions relating to his recent reinstatement as head of Crime Intelligence.
The organisation's spokesperson, advocate Jeremy Gauntlett SC, says they are concerned about the extraordinary decision by Police Minister Nathi Mthetwa to shift Mdlulu, who faces several criminal charges, to an as yet unspecified position with in the police service.
"If the Minister won't suspend General Mdluli then civil society has to act by going to court and asking the court to grant an interdict against general Mdluli doing a single thing as a police officer and asking for the Minister to be interdicted against giving him a single task to do until such time as the judicial review can take place of the whole series of decisions according General Mdluli this extraordinary favoured son status," he said.
FUL deponent in the matter, Dr Mampele Ramphele, and in her founding affidavit she "draws on on an official report as well as affidavits made by two senior police officers who investigated criminal charges against Gen Mdluli."
According to an FUL statement Rampehele describes the sequence of decisions which the rule of law body seeks to be judicially reviewed.
These are: (i) the decision by the Head: Specialised Commercial Crime Unit on 6 December 2011 to withdraw criminal charges of fraud, corruption and money-laundering against Gen Mdluli; (ii) the decision by the Acting National Director of Public Prosecutions on 2 February 2012 to withdraw criminal charges including murder, kidnapping and defeating the ends of justice; (iii) the decision by the National Commissioner: SAPS on 29 February 2012 withdrawing disciplinary proceedings against Gen Mdluli; and (iv) the decision on 31 March 2012 by the National Commissioner to reinstate Gen Mdluli as head of Crime Intelligence.
Dr Ramphele points out that both Gen Jackie Selebi and Gen Bheki Cele were suspended by the Minister of Safety and Security although facing less serious criminal charges (and that currently nearly 600 SAPS officers are under suspension).
Dr Ramphele says "the way in which Gen Mdluli had been dealt with by the respondents reflects an extraordinary degree of a lack of accountability and a breach of a culture of justification under the Constitution which our courts have sought to impose on those who exercise public power."
She refers also to Gen Mdluli's extraordinary recent allegations of a conspiracy involving other senior members of SAPS, including the Provincial Commissioner of Police for Gauteng, Gen Mzwandile Petrus, and the Head of the Hawks, Gen Anwar Dramat.
She points out that this claim "itself has generated further mistrust and instability in the SAPS, to such a degree that the Minister has himself had to intervene, by making an unexpected announcement in Parliament on Thursday 10 May." The Minister set up a task team to investigate the allegations, and announced that Gen Mdluli would be moved from his current position to another post, not yet determined.
"Patently [this] does not resolve the problem caused by Gen Mdluli's reinstatement, and his far-reaching claims of conspiracy. By his conduct, the Minister accepted that there was a need to act, but has not initiated suspension proceedings, or any other measure which would remove Gen Mdluli from active daily service in SAPS … . He remains vested with the authority of his rank … able to exercise the powers vested in a police general under the Police Act and related legislation".
Dr Ramphele contends that the treatment of Gen Mdluli in terms of the various decisions by the respondents "is partial and selective".
The purpose of the proceedings instituted by FUL is to remedy the series of unlawful and unconstitutional decisions by the respondents, and to give effect to the rule of law.
