THE former head of Crime Intelligence in the Western Cape has been sacked twice in less than six months by SAPS amid misconduct claims.
According to a Daily Voice source, Major-General Mzwandile Tiyo was given marching orders this week just two months after he was reinstated amid an appeal against the original decision to sack him.
Tiyo was first dismissed by SAPS in August last year following a Section 34 inquiry to establish his fitness to hold office.
This after allegations that he “lost” a laptop and a firearm then used crime intelligence resources to find the thieves before assaulting them.
The theft happened in 2022 while he was at a tavern and the belongings were in a car parked outside the establishment.
However, in November he was reinstated and reportedly encouraged to instead apply for early retirement as SAPS said they would not comment on the reasons.
Chairperson of the Police Portfolio Committee, Ian Cameron, confirms he was informed of the latest decision by SAPS.
Speaking to the Daily Voice, he said he welcomed the decision to dismiss Tiyo, describing his reinstatement as a blunder.
He says: “The revoking of the dismissal was a blunder.
“I lost it because how on earth can you sack someone after a Section 34 enquiry which is extremely serious and then reinstate him.
“I welcome the decision but believe all the senseless fights and politics in Crime Intelligence is hampering progress.
“While there are rampant shootings in Lentegeur where children have been hurt, we have a police unit embroiled in internal fights.”
Ian Levitt Attorneys, who spoke on behalf of Tiyo, confirmed the dismissal, but indicated he would be challenging the decision.
The firm says: “Our client has faced more than half a dozen irregularities committed by the SAPS.
“If the SAPS genuinely believed that they had a case against General Tiyo then the correct legal processes should have been followed to hold him accountable.
“General Tiyo has challenged these irregularities, through his appeal, which was already successful, and will be further challenging his unfair dismissal again.”