A high-stakes legal confrontation is unfolding in Johannesburg as Gauteng Hawks head Maj-Gen Ebrahim Kadwa challenges the seizure and continued retention of his mobile phone, which he claims contains sensitive “state secrets.”
The dispute now involves the Madlanga commission of inquiry and acting police minister Firoz Cachalia, setting up a complex legal clash over investigative powers and constitutional rights.
The case stems from Kadwa’s arrest in May and has since escalated into a broader constitutional dispute over access to digital evidence and alleged unlawful seizure.
Arrest, Charges and the Origins of the Dispute
Kadwa was arrested in May in connection with alleged violations of the Precious Metals Act, alongside accusations of defeating and obstructing the course of justice.
The charges relate to an earlier 2021 investigation in which he is also accused alongside police crime intelligence operational support head Maj-Gen Feroz Khan and businessman Tariq Downes.
Kadwa has strongly rejected the allegations, describing them in court papers filed at the High Court in Johannesburg as “unfounded.”
His legal team argues that the case against him is built on flawed assumptions and improper investigative procedures.
Legal Action Expands to Include Madlanga Commission
On Monday, Kadwa expanded his legal application, adding the Madlanga commission of inquiry as a respondent alongside senior police leadership, including Lt-Gen Dumisani Khumalo and investigating officer Calvin Khorommbi.
The amendment follows revelations that his seized phone had been transferred to the commission, which is investigating alleged criminal infiltration within law enforcement structures.
In his supplementary affidavit, Kadwa argues that if the device is in the commission’s possession, it must be returned immediately, insisting the original seizure was unlawful and lacked proper legal authority.
Contested Seizure and Claims of Unlawful Police Action
Central to Kadwa’s argument is the claim that while police had a valid warrant for his arrest on May 10, they did not have judicial authority to confiscate his phone.
He is now asking the court to order the return of the device and prevent any future seizure without either consent or a court-issued warrant.
He further contends that the phone contains highly sensitive material linked to his role in the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI), raising concerns about the handling of classified or restricted information.
State Attorney Pushback and Commission Involvement
The state attorney’s office has informed Kadwa that the device was handed over to the Madlanga commission, suggesting that the matter may be moot.
Officials argue that the commission, acting under its investigative mandate, had instructed police to transfer the phone along with forensic copies and related documentation.
According to correspondence cited in court papers, investigators were directed to provide forensic images, passwords, chain-of-custody records, and other materials relevant to the commission’s inquiry.
Authorities maintain that the handover took place on May 29, and that police no longer possess the disputed device.
Commission Powers and Legal Tensions
The Madlanga commission, chaired by retired justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga and supported by secretary Dr Nolitha Vukuza, is empowered to compel individuals and institutions to produce documents or evidence relevant to its investigation.
This legal authority is now central to the dispute, as Kadwa’s legal team argues that the commission cannot retain property that was allegedly seized unlawfully in the first place.
Refusal to Provide Phone Access and Security Concerns
Kadwa has also disclosed that he refused to provide his phone’s PIN code during the investigation, citing the presence of classified material and sensitive intelligence data.
He argues that, given his senior position within the DPCI, there was no certainty that the officers handling the device had the appropriate clearance to access the information stored on it.
Case Postponed but Legal Battle Continues
Although the matter was initially placed on the urgent court roll, it was withdrawn on the eve of the hearing to allow the commission time to respond.
However, the case is expected to return to court on a new urgent date.
Kadwa’s legal representatives have confirmed that he intends to proceed with the application, insisting that the relief sought—return of the device—remains valid despite its transfer to the commission.
The court has yet to hear the matter, leaving the dispute over state secrecy, investigative authority, and digital evidence unresolved.
