At the Madlanga Commission, crime intelligence administrator Serunye disputes testimony given by former superior Andrea Johnson regarding two crime intelligence-related cases. On Tuesday, Serunye says Johnson’s account is contradicted by emails Serunye received or says he sent, in which Johnson questions the value of the investigations and urges that specific concerns be addressed before prosecutions proceed. Serunye presents the correspondence as evidence that Johnson had reservations about the investigations’ merits and about how issues tied to both cases were handled. The challenge centres on whether Johnson’s testimony aligns with earlier communications. The hearing focuses on the handling of crime intelligence matters and the information and advice that different officials provided during the period leading up to prosecution decisions. The commission’s proceedings continue as testimony is examined and cross-checking of statements and supporting documents is expected to play a central role.