EDITORIAL | We must keep Idac, but ensure the right people run it

As evidence mounts against the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (Idac), much of it suggesting its leaders abused their power to launch illegal investigations and malicious prosecutions, there is a growing clamour for the anti-graft body to be disbanded.

We believe these calls, though understandable, are misguided. South Africa cannot afford a repeat of the mistake that led to the disbandment of the Directorate of Special Operations (the Scorpions). This is especially so given corruption is becoming an existential threat to our relatively young democracy.

In the early 2000s, the Scorpions proved themselves to be effective in fighting corruption in the public service and solving high-profile criminal cases. Their successes were largely attributed to their prosecution-led approach and the fact that their investigative teams were often composed of seasoned police officers, highly trained lawyers and forensic experts.

However, after taking down several politicians and high-profile criminal syndicates, the Scorpions were disbanded by the ANC-dominated parliament amid allegations they had abused their powers and conducted politically motivated investigations whose aim was to influence leadership succession within the then-ruling party.

The disbandment was a terrible mistake that led to corruption in the public sector reaching new heights, culminating in the devastating phenomenon that became known as state capture.

It is with this history in mind that Idac was created, first as the Investigative Directorate — a unit within the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) that was to run for only two years — and then in its current form.

In replacing Johnson … the NPA and the department of justice must recommend to the president an individual whose probity is beyond question

But when President Cyril Ramaphosa heeded one of the recommendations from justice Raymond Zondo’s state capture commission to establish Idac as a permanent body, many of us celebrated the return of a “Scorpions-like” body. We did not consider that, if left unchecked, such a body could also fall into the hands of unscrupulous individuals who would hijack it for their own selfish ends.

Not much thought was given to the checks and balances needed to ensure this did not happen.

Hence, this week at the Madlanga commission, as testimonies revealed more of what had gone wrong with Idac’s investigation of the police crime intelligence division, Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga had to ask, “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” (Who guards the guardians?)

It was a regrettable oversight by the authorities that it took this long to appoint an Idac oversight judge, and the absence of an ombud seems to have allowed Idac boss Andrea Johnson and her team to become a law unto themselves. Retired judge Takalani Raulinga, who was appointed Idac ombud just 20 days ago, will now have his hands full trying to deal with complaints about the body’s conduct, many of which predate his appointment.

But beyond the creation of the ombud’s office, more structural changes will have to be made at Idac to ensure the body works strictly within its mandate and that its processes are not abused by its employees. In replacing Johnson, who has resigned under a cloud, the NPA and the department of justice must recommend to the president an individual whose probity is beyond question.

Too often well-meaning structures and institutions fail, not because they are ill-conceived, but because they are handed over to individuals who do not meet the moral standards required and are given free rein owing to the absence of effective checks and balances to hold them accountable.

This has been the problem with Idac, but the solution is not to do away with the institution. Rather, we need to appoint the right people at the top and ensure there are effective mechanisms to keep them honest.