Please see English and Afrikaans soundbites by Lisa Schickerling MP.
The DA reiterates our call for regular, credible and comprehensive lifestyle audits across the South African Police Service (SAPS), particularly among senior management, with stronger consequence management where legitimate concerns are identified.
This follows the latest Parliamentary Question response on financial disclosures and lifestyle reviews within SAPS.
The response shows that 122 discrepancies were identified among 737 senior SAPS managers between 1 April 2026 and the date of the response. These included undeclared vehicles and properties, company directorships, questionable personal loan patterns and assets that appeared out of step with known income.
During the 2025/26 financial year alone, 72 cases were referred for lifestyle investigations. Six were referred for further investigation, while 30 were still in progress at the time of the response. The members concerned ranged from Brigadier up to General.
And yet, despite these red flags, SAPS says not a single member was subjected to disciplinary action and not a single case was referred to another law-enforcement or oversight body as a result of these processes.
That raises a simple question. How can a system designed to identify unexplained wealth, conflicts of interest and potential misconduct find no cases serious enough to warrant disciplinary action or referral?
The DA is not suggesting that every discrepancy is evidence of wrongdoing. There may be legitimate explanations, and SAPS says many matters were resolved through verification and clarification.
But given what is now emerging at the Madlanga Commission, we have to ask whether these processes are working as they should. Strong safeguards against corruption within the criminal justice system matter.
Lifestyle audits cannot become a box-ticking exercise. Where serious concerns remain after verification, they must be properly investigated and, where necessary, escalated.
South Africans deserve a police service they can trust. That trust will only be restored when those responsible for fighting crime are themselves subjected to meaningful scrutiny and held accountable when they fail to meet the required standards.