PRETORIA, Gauteng — The recent Feroz Khan shooting has prompted former SAPS detectives head Jeremy Veary to demand an immediate extension of the Madlanga Commission, citing glaring security failures surrounding high-profile witnesses. The attack on the Crime Intelligence deputy head has exposed severe vulnerabilities, leading Veary to question whether adequate protective measures are being enforced for those testifying about deeply entrenched criminal elements.
The push to lengthen the inquiry is heavily tied to the sensitive nature of the digital evidence at play. Veary explained that a vast amount of the information Khan will be forced to address was recovered from his seized electronic devices. Because of this digital paper trail, Veary noted there is widespread panic among various factions who are terrified of being implicated by the data Khan is scheduled to present to the commission.
Veary expressed deep concern over what he views as a massive lapse in standard witness protection protocols. He argued that once the scope of a witness’s testimony is understood, a rigorous threat assessment must be conducted immediately. The commission, he insisted, needs to guarantee that these risk evaluations were properly executed and that robust protection was offered to the witness, a process that could be facilitated through the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). If these foundational safety measures were ignored in Khan’s case, Veary labeled it a critical oversight that the public must aggressively question.
Highlighting that the violence was entirely foreseeable, Veary pointed to a series of ignored red flags. He specifically recalled a chilling warning issued by Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi following the aborted arrest of General Kumalo. Mkhwanazi had previously cautioned that urgent intervention was necessary to prevent “blood on the streets,” a prediction Veary notes is now tragically materializing due to inaction.
Beyond the physical security breaches, Veary also cast doubt on the integrity of the probe into the attack itself. He openly questioned the decision to involve the PKTT in the investigation. To maintain absolute impartiality and eliminate any potential conflicts of interest, Veary argued that the case should have been assigned to an entirely independent unit that did not require the PKTT’s involvement at this critical stage.