ActionSA Plans to Lay Charges Against Paul O’Sullivan Over R100k Payment, South Africans Debate
- ActionSA's Dereleen James plans to file criminal charges against Paul O’Sullivan following his Ad Hoc Committee testimony
- James questioned the forensic investigator about a R100,000 payment linked to Crime Intelligence
- South Africans weighed in on James' plans and O'Sullivan's answer, sharing mixed reactions to it
Source: Twitter
Byron Pillay, a Briefly News journalist, has dedicated a decade to reporting on the South African political landscape, crime, and social issues. He spent 10 years working for the Northern Natal Courier before transitioning to online journalism.
WESTERN CAPE – ActionSA intends to lay criminal charges against Paul O’Sullivan following his appearance before Parliament’s Ad Hoc Committee.
The forensic investigator testified before the Committee on 10 February 2026 and returned to answer questions from Members of Parliament on 11 February 2026. It was during these questions and answers that ActionSA’s Dereleen James alleged that O’Sullivan received R100,000 from the Crime Intelligence’s (CI) slush fund.
O’Sullivan had previously testified under oath that he didn’t receive money for the public interest work he did, something James accused him of lying about.
PAY ATTENTION: Briefly News is now on YouTube! Check out our interviews on Briefly TV Life now!
James produces proof of payment
After O'Sullivan testified that he didn’t receive any funds for the public interest work he did, James said that she had proof of payment of money paid to him.
The ActionSA member produced a copy of a bank statement, alleging that it was R100,000 for O'Sullivan from the slush fund. She said it was for the Radovan Krejčíř investigation.
James accused O’Sullivan of lying to the House under oath, and after the meeting, said she would be laying criminal charges against him.
O’Sullivan responds to the allegations
O'Sullivan was not happy with the statement, accusing James of peddling lies. He said that the money didn't come from the CI slush fund, but from the Scorpions. He said it was a refund for expenses he incurred, for additional security arrangements for a witness in relation to the Jackie Selebi investigation.
He claimed that he spent more than R500,000, but was only repaid R100,000. He then accused James of lying, saying she was wrong. The forensic investigator previously threatened to withdraw from the proceedings as he was unhappy with the process.
South Africans react to James’ evidence
Social media users weighed in on ActionSA’s plans to lay charges and James’ evidence, sharing mixed reactions to it.
@DinoGoodman said:
“Thanks to Ms James for the evidence.”
@Maqabaqaba added:
“The proof is there in black and white.”
@MsKMP2 pondered:
“Will Action SA back her intent? I wonder? Paul O'Sullivan (just like Sibiya) is the darling to some of these people.”
@TNtsebe stated:
“James thought she had a bomb, but unfortunately, it failed to ignite. She has got the source of the funds received by O’Sullivan wrong, and she presented that wrong information as a fact. By the way, why is she shouting? She needs to improve the quality of her argument instead of shouting.”
@sponge2023 added:
“This man long benefited from SAPS.”
@lifelikedrone noted:
“All of a sudden, his memory is impeccable, and he remembers minute details,”
@tafolaI8 stated:
“This guy is such a liar.”
O'Sullivan says three generals deserve to be in jail
Briefly News reported that O’Sullivan made allegations against three police generals before his Ad Hoc appearance.
The forensic investigator took issue with General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, General Dumisani Khumalo and General Fannie Masemola.
South Africans weighed in on O'Sullivans claims, questioning why he omitted one notable name from his list.
PAY ATTENTION: Follow Briefly News on Twitter and never miss the hottest topics! Find us at @brieflyza!
Source: Briefly News
