Democratic Alliance Lawmakers Exit Parliamentary Corruption Inquiry Over Legal Risks to Witness Kishene Chetty

DA MPs Glynnis Breytenbach and Dianne Kohler Barnard walk out of corruption inquiry, citing self-incrimination risks for witness Kishene Chetty.

By: AXL Media

Published: Mar 12, 2026, 8:19 AM EDT

Source: The information in this article was sourced from TimesLIVE

Procedural Breakdown During Criminal Justice Corruption Probe

The parliamentary ad hoc committee investigating systemic corruption within South Africa’s criminal justice system faced a significant procedural crisis on Thursday morning. Proceedings were disrupted when Democratic Alliance (DA) representatives abruptly exited the chamber, citing deep ethical and legal reservations regarding the testimony of businessman Kishene Chetty. The walkout occurred almost immediately after the committee began its examination of Chetty’s revised affidavit, which alleges widespread unethical interference and abuse of power within the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and the South African Police Service.

Legal Jeopardy for Witness Without Representation

The primary catalyst for the DA’s departure was the realization that Chetty was attempting to provide evidence without the presence of legal counsel. DA MP Glynnis Breytenbach raised the alarm, noting that the witness is currently an accused party in several serious matters already on the court roll. According to Breytenbach, allowing a witness to testify on matters directly related to active criminal trials creates an untenable risk of the individual damaging their own defense. She urged the witness not to proceed, asserting that the committee was on the verge of doing "serious damage" to the legal principles of a fair trial.

Conflict Over Parliamentary Privilege and Immunity

Despite the objections from the opposition, Committee Chairperson Soviet Lekganyane insisted that the session continue, relying on the protections afforded by parliamentary privilege. Lekganyane argued that the oath administered within the committee dictates that evidence presented cannot be used against a witness in external criminal proceedings, except in cases of perjury. However, this interpretation was met with skepticism by dissenting members who argued that the complexity of Chetty’s pending cases made such "blanket" protection practically difficult to enforce once the testimony entered the public record.