Quick Read
- North West businessman Brown Mogotsi is demanding Parliament fund his private security for seven days to testify before the Ad Hoc Committee.
- Mogotsi refused to provide his ID number, hindering parliamentary arrangements for his flights and accommodation.
- Committee Secretary Vhonani Ramaano reported Mogotsi rejected Parliament’s offered escort, preferring his own security.
- MPs, including Sibonelo Nomvalo and Leigh-Ann Mathys, are calling for Mogotsi to be subpoenaed immediately.
- A parallel case involves forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan, who also refuses to testify in person, citing threats.
CAPE TOWN (Azat TV) – North West businessman Brown Mogotsi is making what parliamentary officials describe as ‘ridiculous’ security demands, including that Parliament fund his private security detail for seven days, before he will appear to give testimony before the Ad Hoc Committee this week. His refusal to provide an ID number for travel arrangements has further complicated matters, raising questions about his willingness to cooperate and prompting calls from Members of Parliament (MPs) for a subpoena.
The situation emerged during a committee meeting on Wednesday, January 28, 2026, when Committee Secretary Vhonani Ramaano briefed members on the logistical challenges. Mogotsi, who was scheduled to testify on Thursday and Friday, demanded that Parliament provide protection through his ‘own people,’ rejecting an offer from Parliament Protection Services for an escort upon his arrival in Cape Town. Ramaano stated that Mogotsi explicitly said he does not want to be protected by individuals he does not know and is requesting Parliament to cover the costs of his preferred security for a week.
Parliamentary Impasse Over Witness Demands
According to Ramaano, Mogotsi also withheld his identification number, essential for arranging his flights and accommodation, stating he would not provide it ‘unless the security detail he wants is in place.’ This has left evidence leaders uncertain about his arrival, as he never indicated whether he had purchased his own tickets.
Ad Hoc Committee Chairperson, Soviet Lekganyane, echoed the sentiment of frustration, noting the uncertainty surrounding Mogotsi’s appearance. Lekganyane emphasized that Parliament cannot fund private security and that the committee would need to decide whether to reschedule Thursday’s proceedings, potentially opening them up for public participation by civil society organizations.
Calls for Subpoena Intensify
The businessman’s stance has ignited strong reactions from MPs. Sibonelo Nomvalo, an MP from the MK Party, interpreted Mogotsi’s demands as a clear sign of refusal to appear. He insisted that the legal team should immediately subpoena Mogotsi, arguing that the committee’s terms of reference were clear on how to handle such instances and that further discussion was unnecessary. ‘He must be subpoenaed today, not tomorrow,’ Nomvalo stressed, warning against a ‘stigma’ at the end of the committee’s work due to a failure to compel witnesses.
EFF MP Leigh-Ann Mathys supported the call for a summons, suggesting Mogotsi should have been subpoenaed ‘a long time ago.’
Parallel Concerns with Forensic Investigator Paul O’Sullivan
The committee is grappling with another high-profile witness issue involving forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan, who has also refused to testify in person. O’Sullivan cited threats to his life and offered to provide evidence virtually. He was scheduled to appear on Tuesday and Wednesday, but his non-attendance led the committee to hear presentations from the public and civil society groups instead.
Parliamentary Legal Advisor Andile Tetyana informed the committee that National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza is responsible for authorizing summons for witnesses and is currently considering O’Sullivan’s matter. Tetyana said he was ‘reliably informed’ that the Speaker would communicate her decision within the next day or two.
MK Party MP Vusi Shongwe expressed concern over the perceived inconsistency in handling witnesses, questioning why the committee would decide to subpoena Mogotsi while awaiting Didiza’s decision on O’Sullivan. Shongwe argued that if Mogotsi is to be subpoenaed, O’Sullivan should face the same action, especially given his explicit refusal to appear. Mathys further criticized Parliament’s inaction regarding O’Sullivan, noting that the committee had been ‘undermined’ by him for two months and that he allegedly threatened a witness, Cedric Nkabinde, chief of staff to suspended Police Minister Senzo Mchunu, during earlier testimony.
As these issues unfold, the Ad Hoc Committee is proceeding with public submissions and is expected to continue with them on Thursday, January 29, amidst the uncertainty surrounding its key witnesses.
The persistent challenges in compelling high-profile witnesses to appear before parliamentary committees, as highlighted by the cases of Mogotsi and O’Sullivan, underscore a broader institutional vulnerability in ensuring accountability and transparency, potentially eroding public trust in legislative oversight processes.