National Director of Public Prosecutions Shamila Batohi halted her testimony at the inquiry into South Gauteng Director of Public Prosecutions Andrew Chauke’s fitness to hold office, stating she needed proper legal counsel.
What happened
After lunch on Monday, evidence leader David Mohlamomyane SC informed the panel, chaired by Justice Bess Nkabinde, that Batohi, still on the premises in Pretoria, wished to be excused to obtain legal advice. She had earlier been questioned about a conversation with potential witness Elaine Harrison, despite warnings not to discuss the case while under oath.
When asked to return to the chamber, Batohi said she would not come back until she secured counsel, describing the decision as a matter of personal integrity. She refused to seek the panel’s permission, insisting she was acting independently.
Panel member Elizabeth Baloyi‑Mere SC reminded her that, even though the inquiry is not a formal court, a witness under oath cannot simply walk out. Counsel for Chauke, Tembeka Ngcukaitobi SC, warned that Batohi had not applied for a postponement and was abandoning participation, referencing former President Jacob Zuma’s 2020 departure from the state‑capture commission as a precedent for serious consequences.
Justice Nkabinde concluded that Batohi was “acting without permission” and adjourned the proceedings to 26 January 2026.
Why it matters
The inquiry was initiated at Batohi’s own request and is mandated by an act of parliament. Her refusal to continue under oath raises questions about the enforceability of witness obligations in quasi‑judicial settings and could set a precedent for future participants.
Legal counsel for the accused, Chauke, indicated that Batohi’s abandonment may be interpreted as a waiver of her right to testify, potentially affecting the evidentiary balance of the inquiry.
Possible next steps
Analysts suggest that the panel may seek a court order to compel Batohi’s return or to formalise the waiver of her testimony. If a waiver is confirmed, the inquiry could proceed without her evidence, which may weaken the case against Chauke.
Alternatively, Batohi might obtain counsel and request a formal postponement, allowing her to resume testimony at a later date. Should the panel grant such a request, the timeline of the inquiry would extend further beyond the January 2026 adjournment.
There is also a possibility that the panel could impose sanctions for non‑compliance, drawing on the Zuma precedent cited by counsel, which could include fines or contempt findings.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did Shamila Batohi stop testifying?
Batohi said she needed to obtain proper legal counsel before continuing, citing concerns for her integrity and the pressure of the questioning.
Can a witness simply leave an inquiry while under oath?
Panel member Elizabeth Baloyi‑Mere SC warned that, even though the inquiry is not a formal court, a witness cannot walk out while under oath without the panel’s permission.
What decision did the panel make after Batohi left?
Justice Nkabinde concluded Batohi was acting without permission and adjourned the proceedings to 26 January 2026.
What do you think could happen if Batohi returns with legal advice?
