To Att. Patrick: Afterthought on my criminal law (consulting) question. I omitted to say that 1) I had such a shock when MC told me they are investigating my business/me that I actually asked a PI to find out for me what the charges were and by whom. He came back to me and lied to me by saying that they are NOT investigating me (whilst MC told me it WAS me, and I know he would not lie on that), and then the PI asked me a very suspicious question, that made me think he is in cahoots with the IO. The consulting business I had dealt with emigration, and he told me he had a client from Sweden who is  illegally in ZA and whether I perhaps have any contact in Home Affairs. I said no (I really don't). But that remark by him was very suspicious and it made me think that he is in cahoots with the IO. I hope that my appointing a PI would not add fuel to the fire as it were prompting the IO to investigate MORE?   2) MC was very scared when the IO called him in and when he came back told me that the IO said that he (MC) are not allowed to talk to me "since it is an ongoing investigation"  But I suppose that is just SAPS intimidation tactics?

3) Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I'm also worried that SAPS would hack into my emails/FB etc? I'm not hiding anything but feel strongly about privacy.

There is really no issue in getting the PI to ask questions and to report back to you. I don't think that this will necessarily fuel the IO into digging deeper. But you should no longer use the PI. Let sleeping dogs lie.

I don't know what to think about the whole contact in Home Affairs thing. Perhaps say nothing more about it, to anyone. 

SAPS will always tell a potential witness not to talk to anyone. SAPS will (to a certain degree) put the fear of God into a potential witness to keep quiet, otherwise the witness might get scared and change their story. What you explain is quite normal. 

I think that you might be a little paranoid, especially talking about SAPS hacking into your email/social media accounts.