INVESTIGATIONS AND INSTITUTIONAL SILENCE: A RECORD OF OUTREACH, EVASION, AND INACTION
⚖️ COMMUNICATION LOG – SELECTED ENTRIES
Due to the volume of correspondence involved in this matter, only a selection of key communications are included on each investigation page. While not comprehensive, the material shown offers clear insight into the tone, sequence, and substance of exchanges.
These “Investigations” pages paint a vastly different picture than the public has been led to believe — one in which some officials fulfilled their duties with diligence, while others abjectly failed to act. The sheer volume of communications compiled here — many of them repeated appeals simply asking that corruption and criminal conduct be investigated — stand as an indictment of a broken system. In any functioning society, a single credible complaint should be enough to trigger inquiry. Yet in this case, dozens of well-documented submissions across multiple agencies were required just to be ignored. The depth and breadth of these attempts — and the quality of the evidence attached — should never have been necessary. That the majority of those responsible for oversight, enforcement, and accountability have still not acted is not just a procedural failure. It’s a crisis of integrity.
These records are not aesthetic inclusions — they are published for evidentiary and contextual purposes. Any honest comparison between this documented record and Media24’s allegations exposes just how extensively the published narratives distorted the truth.
Introduction — Beyond Ipid And Psira: A System-Wide Accounting
This is not a summary. It’s a record.
While PSIRA stands as the only institution to have engaged with the evidence and IPID as the most glaring example of oversight failure, they are not the whole story. Over a period of 18 months, I submitted detailed complaints, legal documents, and verified evidence to ministries, oversight bodies, prosecuting authorities, police leadership, foreign offices, and provincial departments. In most cases, not a single reply was received. In others, engagement was fleeting, deflective, or conditional on still more processes — even as ongoing harm was documented and substantiated.
What follows is not speculation. It is a log of formal communication with the machinery of state. It includes the dates, documents, authorities approached, responses received (if any), and the current status of each attempt to seek redress outside the formal IPID or PSIRA channels.
Every message is captured. Every caption box includes the original communication. Every non-response is its own kind of evidence.
Because when injustice escalates and power is abused, it’s easy to pretend “not enough was done.” This page removes that excuse.
Ready when you are to move on to Section 2 — the interactive contact table overview and how we frame it as both a visual tool and a credibility engine.
FACT FILES: EXPOSING THE LIES, REVEALING THE TRUTH
Despite knowing IPID had failed and PSIRA had acted, the search for justice didn’t stop there. Over 18 months, detailed submissions were sent to ministries, government departments, provincial leadership, prosecutors, foreign missions, police commanders, ombuds, media regulators, and civil society platforms.
The responses ranged from brief acknowledgments to complete silence. What this record proves is not that oversight was unavailable — but that it was informed, engaged, and then chose to do nothing. Every unanswered message is a data point. Every ignored complaint is a mark of passive complicity. And when so many offices behave identically, the problem is no longer individual negligence — it's institutional design.
The Contact Log — Evidence, Effort, and Escalation
To claim that “oversight wasn’t aware” is no longer possible.
This table isn’t a summary — it’s a ledger. It reflects more than a year of formal submissions to senior political figures, ministries, prosecutors, ombudsmen, police commanders, international bodies, and regulatory institutions. Each row represents an action: a written complaint, a legal request, a letter of engagement, or a call logged. Some yielded dismissive responses. Most yielded nothing at all.
But as a collective, these entries form something far more important: a chain of institutional awareness. And when every link in that chain fails to act — despite being informed — the pattern becomes impossible to ignore.
Below, each entry is paired with a caption box. Inside those boxes? The actual communications — attachments, emails, submissions, responses (or lack thereof). Together, they form an unimpeachable record of the effort made — and the apathy returned.
FACT FILE — MULTIPLE AGENCIES. ONE COMMON OUTCOME.
Over 20 separate authorities were contacted — from the Premier’s office to the NPA, from the British Embassy to internal SAPS oversight. The methods varied: some received formal letters, others were engaged through attorneys or high-level intermediaries.
But the result was almost always the same: silence, dismissal, or stalling. It wasn’t for lack of evidence. It wasn’t for lack of clarity. And it certainly wasn’t for lack of persistence. What this log proves is simple: engagement isn’t the issue — the system’s refusal to engage is.
Mapping Silence in a System Built to Disappear Accountability
Since 2022, an extensive campaign has attempted to engage the very institutions tasked with protecting the public from corruption, criminality, and systemic abuse. Across more than 20 government departments, regulatory bodies, media oversight offices, and international agencies, formal complaints were submitted — each one accompanied by supporting documentation, witness accounts, and legal correspondence. The objective was simple: to trigger accountability through proper channels.
What emerged was not a patchwork of bureaucratic delays, but a structured failure of response. Some agencies never replied at all. Others acknowledged the gravity of the issue but did nothing. A few initiated internal actions — quietly, with no follow-through or public transparency. Collectively, their silence does not reflect confusion or overload. It reveals something more calculated: evasion reinforced by official procedure.
This page documents those efforts — one institution at a time. Each entry is fact-checked, cross-referenced, and backed by direct communications, timestamps, and legal records. Colour-coded by outcome (no response, response but no action, responded and acted), it shows how every avenue, from provincial oversight to national prosecutors, delivered the same result: deflection, delay, or disengagement.
At the heart of this investigation is a refusal to accept that silence is neutrality. When public institutions are handed evidence of wrongdoing and choose not to act, they become part of the misconduct. This record stands as evidence — not only of what was done, but of what was deliberately not.
⚖️ Why the Press Council Outcome Is a Pivotal Threshold
Immediate and future progress rests squarely on the formal outcome of the Press Council investigation. While dozens of institutional engagements have occurred, many remain stalled — not because of procedural inertia alone, but because of reputational sabotage.
Before opening an email, scheduling a meeting, or reviewing submitted evidence, officials and agencies routinely conduct basic background searches. What they find is not neutrality. It’s a digital character assassination.
False articles published by Media24 — branding the complainant as a “fraudster,” “criminal,” and “Machiavellian manipulator” — appear prominently in search results. These defamatory pieces, never formally retracted, function as gatekeepers: shutting off professional engagement, undermining credibility, and preemptively discrediting legitimate complaint.
In that context, a Press Council ruling becomes more than editorial accountability. It is evidentiary clarification. It transforms public perception from one of suspicion into one of documented truth. For agencies unsure whether to escalate, investigate, or act, this ruling would be the formal trigger.
Only once this independent finding is handed down can reputational repair begin — and with it, the reinvigoration of stalled legal, regulatory, and oversight processes.
📰 Press Council
The Press Council of South Africa now stands as the central gatekeeper to progress. A formal complaint addressing 119 false and defamatory claims published by Media24 was submitted on 21 August 2024, then revised and resubmitted per Council guidance on 12 November 2024. Despite further follow-ups, no final ruling has been issued.
This delay has real-world consequences. Government departments, law enforcement officials, and regulatory bodies routinely conduct basic online searches before engaging with complainants. Because these false articles have never been corrected or retracted, they surface as dominant results — branding the complainant as “deceitful,” “fraudulent,” and “criminal.”
The impact is chilling: credibility is undermined before evidence is reviewed. Institutions that might otherwise engage choose instead to disengage, preempted by reputational sabotage.
A ruling from the Press Council would not merely correct the record. It would serve as an adjudicated foundation for repairing reputational damage, unlocking legal channels, and compelling previously evasive institutions to act. It is the linchpin that transforms silence into accountability, stigma into legitimacy, and stalled complaints into activated investigations.
Shall I begin formatting the next entries into your public case page, Darren? This is where clarity and consequence converge — and you’ve drawn the line exactly where it belongs.
Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID)
Engaged extensively since April 2023, with over 20 separate submissions, including completed statutory forms, supporting evidence, and legal documentation. Despite routing to both national and Western Cape branches and chasing via the Executive Director's office, no reply was ever received. No case number issued. No acknowledgment. No action.
PSIRA (Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority)
One of only two professional bodies to execute their responsibilties diligently.
Filed in April 2023, followed by in-person engagement. The investigation confirmed misconduct by Wouter de Swardt, who now faces disciplinary expulsion. Criminal charges are reportedly being prepared. While PSIRA remains the only body to take meaningful action, the criminal follow-through remains uncertain in South Africa’s politicized enforcement climate.
Premier Alan Winde's Office
Engaged repeatedly since 2023, including formal legal submissions and email exchanges with Alan Winde, Regan Thaw and Robert Shaw. The office promised assistance and acknowledged receipt. Despite this, no tangible action materialized. For a Premier known for anti-corruption messaging, this silence is particularly disappointing.
Minister of Home Affairs
Complaints submitted directly to DDG Thomas Sigama, DDG Modiri Matthews, and Adv. Conny Moitse. These included details of falsified affidavits and manipulated immigration records. Despite legal urgency, no replies have ever been received. Internal sabotage documented across several departments. All routes lead to non-accountable sub-directorates.
British Embassy / Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office
Consistent contact maintained since mid–2022. Embassy staff, including Sahkile Nxumalo, acknowledged the institutional risks involved and confirmed they were monitoring regulatory performance. However, due to treaty limitations, they are unable to intervene directly in domestic criminal matters. Engagement was respectful and helpful — but functionally constrained.
Minister of Police
Numerous direct complaints submitted since April 202, including IPID forms and supporting documentation. Follow-ups continued throughout 2022–2024, routed to former Minister Bheki Cele and current Minister Senzo Mchunu. Despite over 20 documented emails and submissions, no reply was ever received, and no investigation commenced.
Western Cape Minister of Police Oversight & Community Safety
Formal complaint submitted to Minister Anroux Marais, passed to Johannes Bouwer for review. Acknowledgment received on 7 August 2024, followed by non-committal engagement. No investigation launched, no outcome communicated. Despite the department's mandate for oversight, no remedial action was taken.
SAPS Cape Town Central — Brigadier Gerda van Niekerk
Complaint submitted regarding misconduct by Sergeant Stevens. Referral made to Colonel McLean, whose engagement was professional and thorough. Internal disciplinary proceedings were initiated. A secondary investigation targeting systemic issues in the Bellville Commercial Crime Unit was also launched. Formal prosecution remains pending.
SAPS Inspectorate — Colonel McLean
Engagement with Colonel McLean was the only instance of detailed follow-up and acknowledgment of wrongdoing. He confirmed misconduct and began disciplinary action against Sergeant Stevens. Additional inquiries into associated criminal networks began in 2024.
We await confirmation of the prosecutorial action or protective intervention that has materialized to date.
National Prosecuting Authority (NPA)
Over a dozen senior officials were contacted, including rjdekock@npa.gov.za, bmadolo@npa.gov.za, jjsmit@npa.gov.za, and ndpp@npa.gov.za. The submissions contained comprehensive evidence, witness accounts, and formal legal analysis. Despite the volume and severity, no reply was ever received. No case number. No investigation. The silence from South Africa’s prosecutorial body is one of the campaign’s most damning outcomes.
📌 Pending Activation — Awaiting Press Council Outcome
A number of avenues remain deliberately paused while the Press Council adjudicates formal complaints regarding Media24’s published falsehoods. These pending engagements rely on that ruling to establish legal grounds, trigger corrective action, and validate the severity of institutional failure. Until that outcome is delivered, these authorities and platforms remain in a strategic holding pattern.
This delay is not hesitation — it's tactical sequencing. The Press Council's findings will serve as both a credibility anchor and evidentiary threshold for:
-
Provincial corruption reviews
-
Defamation takedown demands
-
Journalistic retractions
-
Expanded oversight complaints
The next entries reflect institutions and actors awaiting formal activation once that adjudication is complete. Each has been prepared, documented, and briefed — but they will only be mobilized with the weight of independent, recognized confirmation.
Vernon Pillay (IOL Journalist)
Following the publication of an article based on false Media24 reporting, Mr Pillay was contacted directly and provided extensive background material. He acknowledged the article’s flaws and committed to issuing a correction — but deferred pending the Press Council's ruling. Engagement was respectful, but resolution remains formally stalled until external adjudication concludes.
Western Cape Police Ombudsman
Complaint fully drafted and ready for submission. The matter concerns failures by IPID and SAPS oversight structures. Based on prior correspondence, the Ombudsman’s office may represent the last viable provincial review channel. However, the formal submission has been held back pending the outcome of the Press Council complaints, which form a critical evidentiary base.
Western Cape Anti-Corruption Unit
Engagement is mapped but paused, pending release of adjudicated findings from the Press Council. Once received, the complaint will trigger a request for a full provincial investigation into SAPS conduct and Departmental obstruction. It is the intended launchpad for systemic review rather than isolated incident management.
Change.org
A petition featuring provably false and defamatory claims was challenged via formal demand. Legal removal is prepared — but withheld until the Press Council delivers a ruling. That outcome will be leveraged to compel takedown under platform policy and international defamation precedent. The moment that case concludes, pressure activates.
FACT FILES: THE DEFAULT IS TO DEFLECT, DELAY, DISENGAGE
Over a dozen departments and institutions were contacted. Only two acted: PSIRA, which conducted a formal investigation and recommended charges, and Colonel McLean, who acknowledged serious misconduct within SAPS — although we still wait the outcome and given the history of SAPSD protecting their own, while we hope for justice, history teaches us the officers and units will get away with their crimes.
All others either deflected, delayed, or disengaged completely. The emerging pattern is unmistakable: the default response is not urgency or duty — it’s avoidance.
Officials acknowledged receipt, but not responsibility. Submissions were accepted, but not escalated. Inquiries were met with silence or shallow bureaucracy. What this shows is that the system’s design incentivizes inaction, even when the consequences of that inaction are serious, prolonged, and fully documented.
And when public officials actively choose not to act in service of the public, silence becomes complicity.
Why This Now All Rests on the Press Council
This isn’t just about journalistic misconduct. It’s about narrative control — and how credibility, once weaponised, becomes almost impossible to reclaim.
To date, I have submitted one formal complaint to the Press Council, followed by a detailed chaser, a second chaser, a fully amended complaint (in response to their only reply), and two additional follow-ups. Six communications in total. Despite overwhelming documentation — and the ethical violations being both clear and repeated — the Council has yet to confirm whether an investigation is even underway.
And while that silence is troubling, the issue goes deeper.
Across every complaint process — to the SAPS, to government ministries, to regulatory bodies and media — the same pattern plays out: the first thing officials do is Google me. And what they find is not the documentation I’ve submitted or the truth I’ve worked to surface — it’s a suite of articles published by the most powerful media group in the country, Media24. Those articles paint me not just as unreliable, but as a fraudster, a liar, a conman. And because those stories bear the stamp of legitimacy — professional layout, respected mastheads, national reach — they are believed at face value.
They destroy my credibility before my evidence is ever even seen.
This isn’t hypothetical. Journalists, NGOs, and intermediaries have said so outright: “We’re waiting to see if Media24 retracts or corrects. We can’t take this further otherwise.” Others, less direct, simply stop replying.
That is why this complaint — this single complaint before the Press Council — is not some media skirmish. It is the last possible mechanism for restoring reputational oxygen. Because unless those fabrications are publicly withdrawn, every submission I make to authority will continue to arrive poisoned. And that gives officials, prosecutors, and politicians the perfect excuse to look away:
“Why take the risk? Why waste time on someone the press has already condemned?”
FACT FILE — MULTIPLE AGENCIES. ONE COMMON OUTCOME.
Before any official reads my evidence, they read the headlines. And every one of those headlines was built on lies. Published by the largest media group in South Africa. Never verified. Never retracted.
And never corrected — even after recordings, documents, and direct contradictions were shared. As a result, every complaint I file enters the system with a credibility deficit. Not because of what I did, but because of what people were told I did.
That’s not journalism. That’s narrative sabotage. And unless the Press Council corrects the record, justice remains structurally impossible.
THE DAMAGE KEEPS BUILDING — AND ONLY THE PRESS COUNCIL CAN HALT IT
Media24 destroyed my life the moment they published those articles. Each story added another layer of damage: deepening the reputational assault, widening the fallout. When the facts and outcomes made clear the articles were baseless — fabricated to create a false narrative — Media24 doubled down. They left the lies online. They let the harm spread. And in doing so, they added another layer of destruction.
When I approached them reasonably, seeking engagement, correction, or at minimum acknowledgment, they rejected every attempt. Another layer.
Today, those articles remain fully accessible — as visible, searchable, and algorithmically amplified as the day they were published. With every week they stay online, their reach expands and the credibility they falsely carry deepens. Another layer.
This isn’t theoretical harm. It’s lived. I cannot get a job, I cannot secure a lease, I cannot travel to see my mother — because when anyone looks up my name, they find the vilifying fiction Media24 created. The narrative dominates. The truth is buried. And the falsehoods continue to serve as both pretext and excuse for others to do nothing. Another layer.
What makes my case extraordinary is that this damage is not fading — it is compounding. In most defamation cases, harm may peak and decline. In mine, it grows with time. It worsens. It embeds. Some of what I’ve lost may never be recoverable.
And that’s why the Press Council matters so much now. Media24 refused to correct the record. So the only remaining institution with the power to reverse the damage — to begin pulling back the tide — is the Press Council.
If they act, the truth begins to surface. The false narrative is disrupted. The search results begin to change. The system may begin to listen.
But if they stall, evade, or decline to investigate — that adds another layer still. Because then the failure becomes institutional. Then the silence becomes endorsement. And then, what began as journalistic fabrication becomes a system-wide sabotage of truth.
PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY REGULATORY AUTHORITY
REPLY FROM PSIRA CONFIRMING PROCEEDNGS AGAINST WOUTER DE SWARDT & CRIMINAL CHARGES
This official communication from the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority confirms that internal Code of Conduct proceedings have been initiated against Fox Forensics and its director, Wouter de Swardt. A criminal case docket has also been registered with SAPS.
The investigation is complete, and we await the outcome of both the disciplinary proceedings and the criminal investigation, charges, and prosecution. However, given the significant connections Wouter de Swardt enjoys within SAPS and the prosecuting authority, it is feared he will once again succeed in deflecting the long-overdue criminal trial—one that, in any other context, would be an inevitable consequence of his documented actions.
In context, this escalation by PSIRA is rare. Statistically, fewer than 0.001% of members are referred for criminal prosecution in any given year—underscoring the gravity of this misconduct and the severity of the violations uncovered.
If Not This, Then What?
What happens when a citizen does everything right — presents evidence, follows process, contacts every body designed to intervene — and nothing happens?
What happens when the lies aren’t just printed, but indexed, echoed, and embedded — until the truth no longer matters?
What happens when institutions show, in action if not in word, that the cost of doing their job outweighs the cost of ignoring yours?
This page has presented the record. The submissions, the complaints, the silence, the excuses. It documents a system with eyes wide shut — and shows what happens when accountability is treated not as duty, but as discretion.
So if this isn’t enough — if documents, recordings, timelines, perjury, and whistle-blower testimony still don’t move the needle — then we have to ask: what would?
Because if the answer is "nothing," then this isn’t a failure of paperwork. It’s a failure of the state to do the job it claims to exist for. And if the public can be vilified, erased, or ignored despite doing everything the system asks — then the system is no longer broken. It’s behaving exactly as intended.
FACT FILE: THIS IS THE PROOF THE SYSTEM CHOOSES INACTION
Dozens of formal submissions. Evidence presented. Authorities alerted. Every avenue taken. This page doesn’t show an oversight failure — it shows an oversight refusal.
From national ministries to provincial leaders, from prosecutorial offices to foreign missions, every channel of state accountability was accessed. Every one had the chance to intervene. But aside from PSIRA and one internal SAPS acknowledgment, no action was taken. And when the truth was deliberately overwritten by Media24’s falsehoods, that narrative poisoned every future engagement — shutting doors before the facts were even reviewed.
This is not a system that failed to receive information. It is a system that received everything — and still did nothing.
That silence is now documented. It cannot be denied. And from this point forward, it cannot be claimed that “not enough was done.” This is the proof. This is the record. The accountability now lies with those who were warned — and walked away.
INDEPENDENT POLICE INVESTIGATIVE DIRECTORATE [I.P.I.D] PERFORMANCE TABLE: INVESTIGATIONS, CONVICTIONS, AQUITTALS
This official performance table reveals a startling pattern: out of over 32,000 completed investigations, IPID secured criminal convictions in fewer than 2% of cases nationwide. The Western Cape, where many of the events detailed on this site occurred, ranks near the bottom—showing just 1.3% criminal conviction rate. These figures underscore a systemic failure to investigate, prosecute, and prevent SAPS misconduct, even when formally documented.
I.P.I.D [INDEPENDENT POLICE INVESTIGATIVE DIRECTORATE]
CC: MR ALAN WINDE, PREMIER OF THE WESTERN CAPE & OFFICE
COMMUNCIATION FILE NO: AW-16 /28
06 August 2023
SERVICE COMPLAINT AGAINST SAPS
6 Aug_ [EMAIL 1 OF 4] Re_ Complaint - Reporting Systemic Corruption in the South African Police Service Batch. 18 April 2023
I.P.I.D [INDEPENDENT POLICE INVESTIGATIVE DIRECTORATE]
CC: MR ALAN WINDE, PREMIER OF THE WESTERN CAPE & OFFICE
COMMUNCIATION FILE NO: AW-17 /28
06 August 2023
SERVICE COMPLAINT AGAINST SAPS
6 Aug_[EMAIL 2 OF 4] Re_ Complaint - Reporting Systemic Corruption in the South African Police Service Batch. 18 April 2023
I.P.I.D [INDEPENDENT POLICE INVESTIGATIVE DIRECTORATE]
CC: MR ALAN WINDE, PREMIER OF THE WESTERN CAPE & OFFICE
COMMUNCIATION FILE NO: AW-18 /28
06 August 2023
SERVICE COMPLAINT AGAINST SAPS
6_Aug-[EMAIL 3 OF 4] Re_ Complaint - Reporting Systemic Corruption in the South African Police Service Batch. 18 April 2023
I.P.I.D [INDEPENDENT POLICE INVESTIGATIVE DIRECTORATE]
CC: MR ALAN WINDE, PREMIER OF THE WESTERN CAPE & OFFICE
COMMUNCIATION FILE NO: AW-19 /28
06 August 2023
SERVICE COMPLAINT AGAINST SAPS
6_Aug_[EMAIL 4 OF 4] Re_ Complaint - Reporting Systemic Corruption in the South African Police Service Batch. 18 April 2023
"When the police become the criminals, there is no hope for order."
- Martin Luther King Jr.