Johannesburg prosecutions boss Andrew Chauke has firmly rejected the charges levelled against him at a presidential inquiry examining his fitness to remain in office. The inquiry, established by President Cyril Ramaphosa, is scrutinising a series of prosecutorial decisions made during his tenure, including those involving former Crime Intelligence head Richard Mdluli and the former KwaZulu-Natal Hawks boss Johan Booysen.
The charges relate to decisions taken by Chauke in two high-profile matters. In Mdluli’s case, questions were raised regarding delays and the handling of allegations that spanned several years. In the matter concerning Booysen, racketeering charges authorised against him were later withdrawn, prompting further scrutiny of Chauke’s judgment. Critics have argued that the decisions pointed to inconsistency, while supporters maintain that the National Prosecuting Authority’s legal frameworks give senior prosecutors broad discretion.
Representing Chauke, Advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi opened proceedings with a strong defence. He described the charges as “vague and embarrassing,” arguing that they stem from a fundamental misunderstanding of prosecutorial discretion. According to Ngcukaitobi, the allegations mischaracterise the work of senior prosecutors, who must routinely make complex judgments based on evolving evidence and legal standards.
He emphasised that Chauke is not accused of corruption, dishonesty, or improper motives. Instead, the inquiry is being asked to test whether the decisions he took, decisions that fall within the ambit of his statutory powers, can be regarded as misconduct. Ngcukaitobi warned that lowering the threshold for such findings could create a dangerous precedent, making prosecutors wary of exercising independent judgment.
Andrew Chauke maintains that his decisions were lawful and grounded in the evidence available at the time. He argues that the inquiry risks undermining prosecutorial independence by framing legitimate professional decisions as misconduct. The proceedings are expected to continue over the coming weeks, with testimony from legal experts, investigators and members of the National Prosecuting Authority.
As the inquiry unfolds, its findings may carry significant implications for prosecutorial governance and for Andrew Chauke, whose future in public office now depends on the outcome.
