The Commission had received a complaint from Mr Thabiso Zulu, on 11 November 2019 through its Kwa-Zulu Natal Provincial Office, over threats to his life after he became a whistleblower in various tender irregularities cases in Kwa- Zulu Natal. Prior to the Commission receiving Mr. Zulu’s complaint, the Office of the Public Protector had issued a report on the imminent threat to Mr Zulu’s life and recommended that the Minister of the South African Police Services (SAPS) provide protection to him. This recommendation was however not complied with by the Minister. Further, the UN Special Rapporteur drafted a report that commented on the whistleblower’s threat to life.

Recognizing the urgency of the threat to Mr. Zulu’s life, the SAHRC wrote to the Minister of Police, on an urgent basis, requesting that Mr. Zulu be provided with State-sponsored protection. The Commission’s written correspondence and other communication remained unanswered by the South African Police Service (SAPS), up until the Commission received a response on the 20th January 2020, requesting an extension up until the 27th January 2020.

As Mr. Zulu remained under imminent threat of his life being taken by those who were threatening to and had made attempts to kill him, the Commission demanded to be furnished with reasons why the Police needed an extension of time before providing protection for Mr Zulu. The Commission received no such explanation and hence it launched an urgent application to obtain an order instructing the Minister of Police to provide protection to Mr Zulu.
On the 3 March 2020, the Commission launched its urgent application on behalf of Mr. Zulu, citing the Minister of Police, the National Commissioner of SAPS, the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and the President of the Republic of South Africa as the first to fourth respondents, respectively. The matter was heard in the High Court on an urgent basis on Thursday, 26 March 2020 before Judge Kollapen.

Following arguments, the Court gave the above-mentioned order in the following terms:
The Court agreed that the matter was urgent. The Third Respondent – being the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services - was ordered to give witness protection to Mr Zulu in terms of section 8 of the Witness Protection Act, pending an application being made in terms of section 7 of the said Act and an assessment within 14 days. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.

This matter highlights the urgency and gravity of the right to life. The Commission has taken Mr Zulu’s matter as the threat to his life is a threat to a fundamental and most sacrosanct right. The Court in ordering that measures be taken to provide Mr Zulu’s with protection, despite not being a senior member of the Executive, or being formerly granted witness protection, illustrates that the  right to life is sacrosanct and a fundamental right for all.

The Commission regrets that it had to go to Court regarding this matter instead of getting the cooperation of government to sort the matter out through discussion and negotiation. Chapter 3 of the Constitution obliges all spheres of government and all organs of state to cooperate with one another in mutual trust and good faith.

Ends

Issued by The South African Human Rights Commission