EFF wants Ad Hoc Committee report to show ‘collective’ decision not to call General Khan

The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) are making a strategic move to distance the party from allegations that they protected suspended Major General Feroz Khan. During a committee meeting on Thursday, 13 August 2026, the party demanded that the decision to skip Khan’s testimony be framed as a joint committee action.

The Ad Hoc Committee is currently refining an 800-page report investigating corruption and political meddling within South African law enforcement. This draft consolidates months of witness accounts and evidence regarding systemic criminality.

The Battle Over the Report

While the EFF wants the report to show a unified front, the uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP) is pushing for the exact opposite. The MKP has formally requested that their support for calling Khan to the stand be explicitly documented in the final draft.

MKP representatives argued that Khan should have been questioned due to his name appearing frequently in evidence. These mentions included his disciplinary record, internal police disputes, and an alleged incident involving narcotics.

Records show that the MKP attempted to have Khan summoned on four separate occasions between October and February. Each time, the motion failed to result in the General appearing before the parliamentary body.

Allegations of Political Shielding

The tension between the parties stems from serious allegations made by MKP member Vusi Shongwe. Shongwe previously claimed that EFF leader Julius Malema was personally ensuring Khan did not have to account for his actions.

The EFF has consistently dismissed these claims as baseless. However, the party's latest demand for 'collective' attribution suggests they are keen to avoid the narrative that they single-handedly blocked the General's testimony.

The controversy has also been fueled by testimony from the Madlanga Commission, which reportedly linked the EFF Commander-in-Chief to the General. As the committee nears the end of its investigation, the wording of the final report remains a critical battlefield for South African political optics.