Gov’t sees no wrong in DIS hiring criminals
Spira Tlhankane | Monday November 2, 2026 06:00
Last year former Director General, Peter Magosi, admitted during a Public Accounts Committee (PAC) hearing that the organisation deliberately recruits thieves to complement its covert operations. The government's position re-emerged on Wednesday at the Ntlo Ya Dikgosi when one member asked the Minister for State President, Defence and Security to explain the rationale for hiring criminals. Bangwato Kgosikgolo, Ian Khama, had demanded answers over the recruitment of individuals with criminal records into an intelligence agency entrusted which is with protecting the country's national security interests.
However, rather than subjecting the agency's recruitment procedures to independent scrutiny, government maintained that it is satisfied with the existing vetting arrangements and had not identified any deficiencies warranting an external investigation. In a response, the Minister of International Relations, Phenyo Butale confirmed that individuals with criminal convictions are not automatically barred from joining the country's intelligence establishment. Butale maintained that the sensitive and unconventional nature of intelligence operations require recruitment considerations that differ from those applicable to ordinary public service institutions. 'Government has not considered commissioning an independent review of the Directorate’s recruitment and vetting practices,' Butale said on behalf of the Minister for State President, Defence and Security, 'This is because we are not aware of inefficiencies in the existing policies to warrant such.' The response effectively put on hold calls for independent scrutiny of an agency whose recruitment practices have previously raised eyebrows following Magosi's disclosures last year. Khama had specifically sought clarification on the legal and administrative framework governing the employment of people with previous criminal convictions within the DIS. The former president also wanted to establish whether government had undertaken any review of the agency's recruitment and vetting procedures.
He wanted to, more importantly, know whether an independent investigation would be commissioned to scrutinise the controversial practices. Khama's questions follow revelations by Magosi, who last year openly admitted before the PAC that the intelligence agency sometimes deliberately recruits criminals because their particular skills are useful in covert operations. Magosi, who recently left his DIS head post after serving for eight years, revealed that the agency's recruitment practices were unconventional and largely dictated by its operational requirements. He told the 61st PAC that the DIS could recruit an individual precisely because he or she was a thief, explaining that criminals sometimes possess specialised skills required for intelligence operations.
He argued that bringing individuals with criminal backgrounds into the organisation was necessary to build certain capabilities within the intelligence establishment. “It is now calling for me to get into the operational side, which I am very uncomfortable with,” Magosi told the committee when pressed to explain the recruitment criteria. His revelations sparked questions about the wisdom of entrusting individuals with criminal backgrounds with access to classified information, sensitive intelligence operations and the country's national security infrastructure. Asked whether the DIS was not concerned that thieves recruited into the agency could eventually steal from their employer, Magosi dismissed the fears. He explained that the intelligence organisation had historically relied on headhunting rather than conventional recruitment processes, identifying individuals based on the specialised skills required for particular operations.
According to Magosi, recruitment decisions were previously concentrated in the hands of just three senior officials, the Director General and his two deputies. “There were operational reasons why we did that,” he explained then. The former intelligence chief nevertheless acknowledged the need to reform the recruitment system, revealing that committees had been established to oversee various human resource functions, including recruitment and promotions. He further disclosed plans to introduce a database where prospective candidates could register their interest in joining the DIS, alongside a website where vacancies would be advertised. Against this background, Khama's latest intervention sought to establish whether government had taken meaningful steps to address the concerns arising from the agency's admission that criminality could sometimes be regarded as an advantage during recruitment.
'A previous criminal conviction does not automatically disqualify a person from employment. Each case is considered on its own merits, taking into account the nature of the offence, the requirements of the position and security considerations where applicable,' Butale clarified. He explained that public service recruitment generally involves background checks to establish the suitability of prospective employees. In the case of the DIS, additional security vetting is conducted to determine whether candidates meet the requirements associated with intelligence operations. Butale further said that that the agency's recruitment decisions are guided by established policies and procedures, alongside the unique operational demands of intelligence work. In another significant disclosure, the minister confirmed that the DIS had undertaken an internal review of its recruitment and vetting procedures within the past year.
'A review of the DIS' recruitment and vetting procedures was undertaken within the past year. 'The review focused on assessing and strengthening existing processes to ensure they remain effective and aligned with operational and security requirements,' Butale indicated. However, the minister did not disclose the specific findings of the review. Despite acknowledging that recruitment procedures had been reviewed, Butale stated that there was no compelling justification for commissioning an independent assessment.