In a powerful and rare glimpse into the personal sacrifices demanded by high-stakes anti-corruption work, the head of the Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (Idac), Advocate Andrea Johnson, has revealed a strict ‘no shop talk’ rule in her marriage. The reason? “Pillow talk gets people killed.”
Johnson made the striking declaration while testifying before a parliamentary ad hoc committee investigating allegations of corruption within the criminal justice system. The committee is scrutinizing claims made by KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner, Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.
A House Divided by Duty
The ethical tightrope Johnson walks is exceptionally narrow. Her husband, identified only as “Mr Johnson” for security reasons, is a member of the South African Police Service’s Crime Intelligence unita unit whose own boss, Lieutenant General Dumisani Khumalo, was arrested by Johnson’s Idac team in June.
This created a glaring potential conflict of interest, a fact not lost on the committee. Evidence leader Advocate Norman Arendse directly asked Johnson if her husband shared any sensitive information from his job to aid her investigations.
Her response was an immediate and unequivocal, “Absolutely not.”
A Deliberate Wall of Separation
Johnson explained that when she was appointed to lead Idac in 2019, the potential for conflict became immediately apparent, as her directorate was already investigating corruption allegations within the SAPS.
“We had a conversation about it,” she stated, describing a deliberate and mutual agreement with her husband to erect a firewall between their professional lives. “Do what you need to do,” was the understanding they reached.
She emphasized that this was a long-standing principle in their more than 20-year marriage, not a new rule. “I don’t need information from Mr Johnson, as he doesn’t have information to give. I wouldn’t ask him for information,” she told the committee.
To underscore the completeness of this separation, Johnson revealed a telling detail: “I don’t know where his office is.” She acknowledged that her answer might sound glib to some, but insisted it was the simple truth born of a disciplined professional ethic.
In the shadowy world of corruption probes and crime intelligence, where information is power and leaks can be fatal, Johnson’s testimony was a bold statement of principle. It was a declaration that in her house, the line between marital trust and professional duty is not just understoodit is a matter of life and death.
