|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Some interesting developments which came up at the Madlanga commission last week, as well as the testimony of anonymous witnesses whose identities were protected through innovative measures, ensured another gripping series of hearings.
On 13 October the Daily Maverick and News24 challenged the commission’s decision to hold the week’s hearings in camera (Latin, literally ‘in chambers’ but also meaning ‘in private’) to protect the identity of witnesses who were scheduled to appear, and because the testimony was of a sensitive nature.
The media challenge caused another delay in proceedings. At the resumption on the morning of 14 October, evidence leader Matthew Chaskalson said the commission had striven for a compromise that would maximise public access to the hearing, in a way that preserves the safety of witnesses. He then explained the details of the agreement that had been reached between the media houses and the commission, and further revealed there would be five secret witnesses overall.
Handing down the commission’s ruling, its chairperson Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga said:
- “1. By agreement between the parties, the evidence of the in camera witness to be called today, that is Tuesday 14 October 2025 and Wednesday 15 October 2025, will be heard as follows.
- A. The witness will testify remotely and off camera.
- B. The answers of the witness to questions posed by the evidence leaders will be repeated publicly through an intermediary whose voice will be broadcast live as he or she repeats the witness’s words.
- C. The witness’s anonymised statement with exhibits will be displayed live on screen as the witness testifies.
- D. A transcript of the witness’s testimony will be made publicly available after the witness has finished testifying.”
The ruling further instructed the parties to speedily settle their dispute regarding the secret witness who was due to testify later in the week. Madlanga would hand down this particular ruling on Thursday, 16 October 2025, before proceedings got under way.
He added: “Apart from the witnesses to which this ruling refers, the evidence leaders will not seek to lead any other witnesses in camera without making a new application to the commission and making the fact of that application publicly known at least 72 hours before the witness is called to testify.”
Witness X takes the stand
Evidence leader Adila Hassim took over at that point, questioning Witness X with Adv. Thabang Pooe relaying their responses. The testimony focused on the WhatsApp chats on which, said Witness X, crime intelligence head Dumisani Khumalo was due to testify before he fell ill. In his short stint in the witness chair, Khumalo shared evidence of communication exchanged between suspected syndicate boss and attempted murder-accused Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala and notorious North West businessman, Brown Mogotsi. These WhatsApp chats were retrieved from Matlala’s phone when he was arrested in May this year for the attempted killing of his former girlfriend, actor Tebogo Thobejane.
Khumalo also shared information on exchanges between Mogotsi and other individuals, one of whom is saved on Mogotsi’s phone as “Senzo Mchunu” and “Senzo Mchunu chief.” The analysis done by his investigations team, said Khumalo, and the context in which the contents of the texts was framed, indicated that the communication was with Police Minister Senzo Mchunu and his chief of staff, Cedrick Nkabinde.
Khumalo was also to testify on five separate WhatsApp threads of communication between Matlala and others, including KwaZulu-Natal Hawks head Major-General Lesetja Senona and his son, shuttle service director Thato Senona, acting Ekurhuleni police chief Julius Mkhwanazi, academic and commentator Calvin Rafadi, and businessman Suleiman Kareem. This, he said, would show how wide Matlala’s influence extended over the police, business, and academic spheres.
The remaining chats have now fallen to Witness X to present. They said the WhatsApp chats show Gen. Senona has “a close and beneficial relationship” with Matlala, with whom he shared confidential information and protected from scrutiny. X mentioned a further close relationship between Matlala and Thato Senona, apparently involving the purchase of a property.
During X’s testimony, the chats and other supporting material were simultaneously projected onto a screen for all to see.
At this point, the commission experienced technical difficulties that posed a threat to X’s safety, leading to another delay. After consultation, the hearing resumed with Madlanga saying: “Transparency cannot be at the risk of endangering the safety of witness X. Thus, we must adopt a different format on how witness X’s evidence must be tendered.”
He handed down a short ruling:
- “The evidence of witness X will be tendered in a different format.
- The evidence leader that was leading Witness X will read Witness X’s statement into the record.”
Hassim continued to read X’s statement, with the simultaneous projection of relevant WhatsApp chats. One alarming piece of information was that on 2 January, Senona forwarded Matlala the letter in which Mchunu announced the PKTT’s disbandment – information a private citizen should not have had access to. X explained an apparent perception that the PKTT was investigating Matlala.
X’s statement also addressed messages between Matlala and Julius Mkhwanazi, and later, Matlala’s communication with Suleiman Kareem and Calvin Rafadi, the latter appearing to have been “performing a media and propaganda function for Mr Matlala,” according to the witness.
In camera witness
The commission resumed on Thursday 16 October with Chaskalson announcing that News24 and Daily Maverick had accepted the need for the day’s hearings to be in camera and did not opposing the ruling. “The witness today is going to testify about matters that are the subject of active ongoing police investigations. So it’s the subject matter of the evidence, not the identity of the witness that requires the evidence to be in camera.”
When the police are at an advanced stage of investigations, he added, “one can’t ventilate the content of those investigations publicly without running a risk of compromising those investigations. And that’s the unfortunate situation that we find ourselves in at the moment, because this commission is of necessity investigating matters that are the subject of parallel police investigations that are at an advanced stage”.
Chaskalson said that when the need for secrecy has passed – and it was the hope that this stage would be reached long before the commission wraps up its work – the testimony would be made public.
He added that the media platforms had also sought an opportunity to intervene in relation to scheduled in camera proceedings the following week, but having understood the commission’s ruling handed down earlier in the week and having discussed it with evidence leaders, they were satisfied with the ruling and were no longer opposing it.
