Second criminal complaint registered against top cop Sitole over Ipid probe

This time National Commissioner Khehla Sitole is accused of failing to cooperate with an investigation into suspected fraud and corruption involving SAPS management and a private company known as Brainware.

FILE: Former National Police Commissioner General Khehla Sitole. Picture: Christa Eybers/Eyewitness News

JOHANNESBURG - Eyewitness News has reliably learned that there is another criminal complaint registered with the police against National Commissioner Khehla Sitole over his failure to cooperate with Independent Police Investigative Directorate (Ipid) investigations, this time regarding fraud and corruption at the police service.

The matter has also been escalated to Police Minister Bheki Cele to alert him about Sitole's breach of his duty to assist with the 2017 probe.

On Thursday, Eyewitness News revealed that a criminal complaint was laid against the top cop for failing to assist with the probe into the 2020 assassination of organised crime detective, Charl Kinnear.

ALSO READ:

Top cop Sitole urged to address unanswered questions on Charl Kinnear's murder

Ipid: Top cop Sitole duty-bound to cooperate with investigations
Ipid registers criminal case against top cop Sitole over Kinnear murder probe

Sitole has been reported to his boss, Minister Cele, for a second time this week for blocking Ipid investigations.

This time he's accused of failing to cooperate with an investigation into suspected fraud and corruption involving SAPS management and a private company known as Brainware.

Brainware is an American software firm that was known for marketing data-capture and extraction products.

It is alleged that police Crime Intelligence had earmarked R45 million that it wanted to spend on surveillance devices to influence the African National Congress (ANC)'s 2017 national conference.

However, the payment didn't go ahead after questions were raised.

As the head of the police, Sitole did not provide the documents requested by Ipid and instead claimed that the documents were classified.

A subpoena was obtained and despite Sitole's attempts to review and set aside the decision to compel him to provide the documents, a higher court ordered him to immediately make them available.

Despite this, Ipid said that Sitole had still not cooperated with the court order and that he was in direct contravention of the law.