The chairperson advised the former Hawks national head challenge the police's refusal.
Retired Judge Mbuyiseli Madlanga has told Godfrey Lebeya, the former national head of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI), commonly known as the Hawks, that there is little the commission of inquiry can do after his request for state-funded legal representation was rejected.
Lebeya appeared before the commission at the Bridgette Mabandla Justice College in Pretoria on Thursday, 27 August 2026, to respond to a number of allegations, including claims that he sent Hawks officers to interfere with the arrest of murder accused businessman Katiso “KT” Molefe.
Molefe was arrested on 6 December 2024 in connection with the murder of engineer Armand Swart.
Before Lebeya began his testimony, his legal representative, Eric Nwedo, told the commission that his client was appearing at his own expense after his request for legal funding was declined by the South African Police Service (Saps).
“On 12th November 2025, Dr Lebeya made a formal application within the Saps for legal representation.
“However, that was denied or declined, and this happened through a formal notification dated 6 January 2026,” he said.
Nwedo alleged that Deputy National Police Commissioner Tebello Mosikili was responsible for the decision to decline Lebeya’s funding request.
He argued that Mosikili was conflicted because she had previously worked under Lebeya and was involved in matters on which the former Hawks head was expected to testify.
“What is evident with the communication that has come through chairperson and commissioners is basically that the decision maker in that particular application happens to be one General Mosikili, who used to work under him when he was still the head of the DPCI or the Hawks as we know it and is one person that he had tasked to investigate the issues relating to one of the streams that my learned colleague is going to traverse, the Port Shepstone [drug theft] matter,” Nwedo told the commission.
Nwedo argued that Mosikili should not have adjudicated Lebeya’s application and should have recused herself because of the alleged conflict of interest.
“That didn’t happen as we know it now, and it’s on the record, and we submit that the reasons that have been provided by the Saps for declining that particular application are really frivolous, to say the least.
“One of the issues they raise in the letter is that they, amongst others, are not actually inclined to provide legal representation because his version differs with the version of other Saps witnesses.
“That is problematic, chairperson. If one actually reads that are they implying that there should have been alignment of versions from Dr Lebeya with the other Saps witnesses that are appearing before this commission? That is problematic.”
Nwedo also told the commission that Lebeya had cooperated with its work since October last year.
“Up until today, with all the postponements that has occasioned, which we don’t blame it on the commission, he has remained patient to come here and assist this commission in reaching its objectives, but above all else as well, to clear his name in the manner in which aspersions has been cast on him.”
He revealed that Lebeya, who retired in May 2025, had previously received legal funding when he testified before the Khampepe Commission of Inquiry investigating alleged attempts to prevent the investigation and prosecution of apartheid-era crimes.
According to Nwedo, that funding was eventually granted after an initial application had been rejected.
Madlanga, the commission’s chairperson, acknowledged Lebeya’s predicament, but stressed that the commission did not have the power to direct Saps to reconsider its decision on legal funding.
“I do not think we can come to the doctor’s assistance,” Madlanga said.
He suggested that Lebeya challenge or review the police’s decision instead.
Lebeya on Thursday denied knowing Molefe and rejected allegations that he dispatched Hawks members to disrupt a “legitimate” police operation at the businessman’s Sandhurst residence.
Previous testimony before the commission indicated that members of the Hawks’ Tactical Operations Management Section (TOMS) unexpectedly arrived, claiming they had received reports of fake police officers operating in the area when the Political Killings Task Team (PKTT) moved in to arrest Molefe.
Several witnesses have also told the commission that a Gauteng Traffic Police (GTP) helicopter was hovering over Molefe’s residence during the operation.
The presence of the helicopter and other law enforcement units was interpreted by witnesses as an attempt to interfere with the arrest.
Molefe has allegedly been linked to a criminal network known as the Big Five cartel and was said to have law enforcement “fixers” on his payroll.
Lebeya acknowledged that he instructed senior officers to check what was happening at the scene after receiving a call from a Johannesburg businessman known as Malcolm X.
Katiso ‘KT’ Molefe appears in the Alexandra Magistrate’s Court in Johannesburg on 6 August 2025. Picture: Nigel Sibanda /The Citizen
However, he maintained that the presence of multiple law enforcement agencies at Molefe’s home pointed to “a significant failure in the planning and coordination of the operation”.
“This situation reflects poorly on the effectiveness of the preparatory processes, as it suggests a lack of unified command and insufficient communication among the involved parties.
“Responsibility for such a lapse belongs to the overall leader of the operation.
“It is the duty of the operational leader to ensure that all the affected state agencies are adequately briefed and that their roles are clearly defined to avoid overlap, confusion or unintended consequences.
“The inability to synchronise the actions of the various law enforcement units undermined the integrity of the operation and exposed serious shortcomings in leadership and operational oversight,” he testified.
Lebeya said the situation could have been avoided had Crime Intelligence divisional commissioner Dumisani Khumalo, who oversees the PKTT, informed him about the planned operation.
“Had he checked with me, the situation would not have occurred. It is unfortunate that he cited the issue of trust.”
