The parliamentary ad hoc committee, convened to probe the gaping wounds in South Africa’s criminal justice system, has become accustomed to explosive testimony. But on Thursday, February 19, 2026, suspended Deputy National Police Commissioner Lieutenant-General Shadrack Sibiya ensured the hearings would not fade quietly into the archives. In a dramatic session, Sibiya alleged that he had flagged the issue of suspicious overtime payments within the police service years ago—and that he had done so to the very body meant to police the police.
Sibiya, already at the centre of a storm following his earlier testimony about cosmetic surgery funded by alleged criminals, turned his attention to a more systemic issue: the looting of the SAPS budget through inflated, irregular, and often completely fictitious overtime claims. His claim was as simple as it was damning: he had reported these irregularities to the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) back in 2021, but nothing substantial was done.
“I raised this issue formally,” Sibiya told the committee, his voice steady but laced with the frustration of a man who feels his warnings were ignored. “I provided information regarding suspicious overtime payments that were bleeding the organisation dry. I expected IPID to investigate. I expected action. Instead, the problem festered, and here we are today, still talking about it.”
The Overtime Scandal: A R27 Billion Leak
To understand the significance of Sibiya’s claim, one must understand the scale of the overtime problem in the SAPS. For years, the police service has been plagued by allegations of “ghost workers,” supervisors signing off on hours never worked, and collusion between officials and commanders to milk the overtime budget. In some stations, reports emerged of officers claiming overtime for 24-hour shifts that were physically impossible, or for being on duty while simultaneously being on leave.
The financial cost has been staggering. Internal audits have suggested that the SAPS loses billions of rand annually to irregular overtime payments—money that should be going towards resources, equipment, and boots on the ground. In a country battling one of the highest crime rates in the world, the idea that the crime-fighting budget is being siphoned off by greedy individuals within the service is a source of constant public outrage.
Sibiya’s testimony suggests that this was not a secret. He claims that as early as 2021, while serving in a senior capacity, he identified the rot and took what he considered the appropriate step: he referred the matter to IPID, the independent body mandated to investigate misconduct and corruption within the SAPS.
The IPID Question: Dropped Ball or Blocked Probe?
The accusation now turns the spotlight squarely onto IPID. If Sibiya’s claims are true—and he asserts he has documentation to prove the referral—then the directorate faces serious questions about its effectiveness and independence.
Why was no significant action taken in 2021? Was the investigation blocked by powerful forces within the SAPS? Was it under-resourced and unable to handle the complexity of the case? Or, in the most damaging scenario, was it complicit in a cover-up?
IPID has had a troubled history. Often underfunded and overburdened, it has struggled to live up to its mandate. It investigates hundreds of cases a year, from police brutality to corruption, but securing convictions has always been a challenge. If it is true that a senior official flagged a systemic problem five years ago, and that problem remains unaddressed, it suggests a catastrophic failure of oversight.
The current leadership of IPID, watching Sibiya’s testimony unfold, will undoubtedly be preparing a robust response. They are likely to argue that they received the referral but lacked the resources to pursue it, or that the evidence provided was insufficient. They may even question Sibiya’s motives, pointing out that he is a suspended officer fighting for his own survival and career.
A Pattern of Whistleblowing or a Defence Strategy?
Sibiya’s testimony must be viewed through a political and legal lens. He is not a neutral observer. He is a man under suspension, facing his own allegations of misconduct and links to criminal elements. His appearance before the committee is, in part, an opportunity to shape the narrative and portray himself as a reformer who tried to clean house but was silenced.
By claiming he reported the overtime scandal, Sibiya is attempting to reposition himself. He is saying: “I was the one trying to fix things. I was the whistleblower. And look where it got me—suspended, while the real crooks remain in office.” It is a classic defence strategy, and a potentially effective one, both in the court of public opinion and in any future legal proceedings.
However, even if his motives are self-serving, his testimony does not necessarily have to be false. It is entirely possible that Sibiya did flag the issue in 2021, and that his warnings were ignored. In fact, given the scale of the overtime problem that has since been exposed by other media investigations, it would be surprising if no senior official had raised concerns.
The Committee’s Next Moves
The ad hoc committee, chaired by a seasoned MP, now has a clear line of inquiry. It must summon IPID officials to testify about the 2021 referral. It must demand to see records of the complaint and any investigation that followed. It must ask the difficult questions: Who received the report? What did they do with it? Who, if anyone, tried to kill it?
The committee also has the power to refer its findings to the National Prosecuting Authority. If it concludes that IPID failed in its duty, or that SAPS officials actively obstructed an investigation, criminal charges could follow.
For the public, Sibiya’s testimony adds another layer to a deeply depressing picture. It suggests a criminal justice system that is not only compromised by criminals on the outside, but hollowed out by corruption on the inside. It suggests that even when a senior officer tries to do the right thing—to report a problem—the system is so broken that the report vanishes into a bureaucratic black hole.
The Bigger Picture: Who Polices the Police?
At its core, the Sibiya testimony raises the fundamental question of accountability. South Africa has a police service tasked with fighting crime, and an independent directorate tasked with policing the police. But if both institutions are failing, if reports are ignored and investigations are shelved, then who protects the public from the protectors?
As the committee adjourned for the day, the political analyst benches were buzzing. Sibiya had successfully shifted the focus from his own alleged sins to the systemic failures of the oversight mechanisms. Whether he is a genuine whistleblower or a skilled manipulator remains to be seen. But one thing is certain: the question of what happened to his 2021 report will not go away. And for IPID, the spotlight has just become unbearably bright.
About The Author
