The Independent Directorate Against Corruption (Idac) investigated national police commissioner Fannie Masemola in the Medicare24 matter without the required Section 27 complaint referral, the Madlanga commission has heard.

Masemola was added as a co-accused with Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala and charged with flouting the public finance management act as the South African Police Service chief accounting officer.

Advocate Drushanta Ramsamy, an Idac prosecutor, testified on Tuesday about the investigation into the R360 million Medicare24 contract and attempts to link Masemola to the matter. Masemola cancelled the contract after an internal audit report found irregularities.

Ramsamy said former Idac head advocate Andrea Johnson started an investigation into Masemola's alleged involvement after a meeting with suspended police minister Senzo Mchunu on 22 January 2025.

Ramsamy said Johnson had flouted Idac processes by authorising an investigation into Masemola without a complainant.

“There was no Section 27 referral affidavit in existence at the time,” Ramsamy said.

She said Idac investigator Dylan Perumal had instructed advocate Tilas Chabalala to prepare an authorisation to investigate despite there being no complaint referral.

Ramsamy said she had taken notes during a meeting between Perumal and Johnson, during which SAPS chief risk and integrity officer Charity Matlou was discussed as the person who would had later provided a Section 27 referral affidavit against Masemola.

“This discussion is before a referral and [after] a 28(1) application [to investigate] has already been submitted,” Ramsamy said.

The authorisation had been submitted to deputy director of public prosecutions Paul Louw, who oversaw Chabalala, before being sent to Johnson for final approval.

When Ramsamy had asked about the missing Section 27 referral affidavit while finalising the Section 28(1) application, she said Johnson had told her the preliminary audit report, together with an email from Matlou, constituted the referral.

“I did not understand the urgency. If there was only a preliminary audit report dealing with the [Medicare24] matter, I did not understand why advocate Johnson needed to urgently authorise the investigators and even bypass the Section 28(13) process,” Ramsamy said.

“I can only speculate that General Matlou had informed advocate Johnson that General Masemola intended to cancel the Medicare24 contract and that he would do so very soon, which may undermine any allegations that he failed to act,” she said.

Ramsamy shared correspondence with the commission in which Johnson said Matlou had contacted her.

Chabalala told Ramsamy he had received Masemola's name as the suspect from Perumal. Perumal, however, had told Ramsamy he did not know where Chabalala had obtained the names.

In an email to Johnson, Ramsamy had written: “Adv Johnson, I have asked [Perumal] for the documents that [Chabalala] used as a basis for the application. He indicated he does not know what [Chabalala] used as a basis of identifying the suspect.”

The audit report at the centre of the investigation followed a 9 January 2025 request by the police minister Mchunu for an internal audit and risk investigation into alleged irregularities in Medicare24’s tender bids and people of interest.

Matlou was designated as part of the investigation team.

“How do we designate the complainant in an investigation?” Ramsamy asked.

She said there was no correspondence between Idac and the SAPS concerning Matlou’s reassignment of duties that would have allowed her to participate in the investigation while also acting as the complainant.

“I was told [Johnson] authorised it but it wasn’t politely put to me,” Ramsamy said.

Johnson has given a different account to parliament’s ad hoc committee investigating the allegations against Mchunu and other officials.

In her response to the committee, Johnson said Matlou had referred the matter to Idac as a Section 27 complaint and had deposed an affidavit.

“The head of their risk audit referred the matter to Idac in terms of a Section 27 referral, deposed to an affidavit, attached supporting documents and the matter came over to Idac,” Johnson said.

Johnson also told the committee that she had become involved only after investigators had conducted a preliminary investigation.

Ramsamy, however, told the commission that Johnson was the person who had sent her the encrypted audit report and password, which was to be used as the complaint affidavit.

She said Johnson had been involved in the build up of the case before it had arrived at her desk for approval.

“If we take notes of the email of advocate Johnson at the time on the 13th of May, it says, ‘I was contacted by General Matlou and I want to authorise’,” Ramsamy said.

Ramsamy, who was the lead prosecutor in the Masemola case, said she had seen Matlou’s complaint only when it was presented at the Madlanga commission during Johnson’s testimony.

The chronology of Matlou’s affidavit and the Section 27 referral is expected to be central to the commission’s consideration of whether Idac followed the required procedures in its investigation of Masemola.