Helen Suzman Foundation affirms its independence, rejects claim of funding by Paul O’Sullivan

The Helen Suzman Foundation (HSF) has sought to reaffirm its independence following claims that forensic investigator Paul O’Sullivan financed its legal work in support of former IPID head Robert McBride.

In a recent interview, O’Sullivan said he had “funded” HSF’s litigation efforts, suggesting he contributed directly to McBride’s legal defence. However, the foundation has dismissed this as a misunderstanding, saying O’Sullivan’s once-off donation in 2019 was general in nature and unrelated to any particular case.

HSF executive director Nicole Fritz said the foundation had always acted autonomously and pro bono in cases involving McBride. “Our participation was guided by the need to defend the independence of oversight bodies and the rule of law, not by private funding,” she said.

The foundation explained that its involvement in McBride’s legal challenges, including his 2015 High Court case and subsequent Constitutional Court appeal, was carried out through its legal partners at Webber Wentzel, who provided services at no cost.

While O’Sullivan’s contribution was acknowledged, the foundation stressed that it was made without conditions or influence. “The donation did not finance litigation or determine our choice of cases. Our independence is central to our credibility,” Fritz added.

Observers note that such clarifications are important to protect the reputation of public interest organisations, which rely on impartiality when litigating against powerful state actors. Misunderstandings around funding, they argue, can easily cast doubt on motives and weaken public confidence in constitutional advocacy.

HSF’s intervention in the McBride cases focused on protecting institutional autonomy and accountability in law enforcement oversight. The foundation maintains that these principles remain essential in a democracy where governance integrity often comes under pressure.