Matlala demands investigator’s notes be struck from record

Enter your email below and we’ll send you a one-time pin to log in.

Sign in with Google Sign in with Apple Get Support DM Shop Support DM Maverick News

{JSON.stringify(article.attachments[0], null, 2)} –>Organised crime-accused Vusimuzi ‘Cat’ Matlala’s appearance before the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry was dominated by a tussle over whether evidence gathered by the commission’s investigator, Bongani Dlamini, could remain on the record.

10 Nov 2026 0 The second day of organised crime-accused Vusimuzi ‘Cat’ Matlala’s appearance before the Madlanga Commission was dominated by a bitter dispute over whether evidence gathered by the commission’s investigator, Bongani Dlamini, could remain on the record. (Photo: Lefty Shivambu / Gallo Images) Dive Deeper Speed Read Summary Listen Dive Deeper On his second day before the Madlanga Commission, Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala faced intense questioning over a March consultation detailing his dealings with former deputy police commissioner Shadrack Sibiya – a session his defence team now insists was off the record.

Matlala’s counsel, advocate Annelene van den Heever, argued on Tuesday, 10 November, that the meeting with a commission investigator and evidence leaders at Pretoria’s Kgosi Mampuru II Correctional Centre was confidential and inadmissible.

However, evidence leader advocate Mahlape Sello SC rejected the claim, stating the session was formally intended to secure a statement from Matlala. Evidence leader advocate Adila Hassim subsequently drew on investigator Bongani Dlamini’s account of the March meeting to challenge Matlala’s testimony.

The clash follows Monday’s testimony in which Matlala accused Investigative Directorate Against Corruption (Idac) chief investigator Dylan Perumal and senior investigator Brian Padayachee of coercing him into signing a plea-and-sentence agreement.

Dlamini’s account, however, tells a starkly different story regarding Matlala’s dealings with Sibiya. According to the investigator’s notes, Matlala claimed Sibiya assisted him in securing an SAPS health-services tender for Medicare24. Following the award, Matlala allegedly withdrew R500,000 from his companies Medicare24 and Lux Africa Brand, and delivered the cash to Sibiya at his home in Centurion’s Copperleaf Golf Estate.

Van den Heever said she would file an affidavit seeking to have Dlamini’s evidence excluded and expunged from the commission’s record.

Chairperson Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga directed her to submit an affidavit setting out her version and the relief she sought. The evidence leaders will then respond. Matlala was allowed to continue his testimony, but Madlanga instructed that if the commission accepted Van den Heever’s version, evidence relating to Dlamini’s disputed account would be expunged.

Matlala confirmed paying Sibiya R550,000. He said R500,000 was a contribution towards Sibiya’s son’s wedding in North West, while a further R50,000 covered travel expenses linked to the SAPS Excellence Awards in Durban.

Cross-examined by evidence leader advocate Thabang Pooe, Matlala confirmed that his Section 204 statement, recording the R500,000 wedding payment, was correct. It notes that he handed the money to Sibiya in the basement of the State Theatre in Pretoria.

Matlala could not recall the exact date, but said his companies’ bank statements would reflect large cash withdrawals made after the Medicare24 contract was awarded. He said this was his first payment to Sibiya.

However, his account differed from earlier disclosures. Pooe reminded Matlala that he had told Witness C, now in the witness protection programme, that Sibiya regularly asked him for money.

In a recorded interview, Matlala described requests for money for a wedding, a farm and other expenses. He also allegedly told Witness C that he delivered cash to Sibiya’s home, providing the senior officer’s contact numbers in December 2024 and again following his arrest in May 2025.

The commission also heard that Matlala had previously told investigators he gave Sibiya R400,000 for the wedding – R100,000 less than the amount he mentioned in his Section 204 statement.

Matlala maintained that he had only ever paid R550,000 to Sibiya, despite acknowledging that the general had made other requests for financial assistance.

Commissioner Sandile Khumalo SC challenged these conflicting versions, pointing to evidence from Witnesses A and B and Dlamini’s affidavit supporting allegations of other payments to Sibiya. He questioned why the commission should accept Matlala’s latest account when it differed from his earlier statements and disclosures.

The evidence also placed Matlala’s relationship with suspended police sergeant Fannie Nkosi under scrutiny, particularly Nkosi’s alleged role in his dealings with Sibiya.

Pooe confronted Matlala with claims from his disputed Section 204 statement alleging that Sibiya had praised Nkosi for burying complaints against Medicare24 and urged Matlala to arrange further payouts for the sergeant. Matlala rejected the claims, accusing Idac investigators of fabricating them.

The allegations are not new. On 26 August, Matlala told the commission he had never paid Sibiya directly, claiming instead that Nkosi collected cash from people in Gauteng on the general’s behalf.

Matlala has since acknowledged giving Nkosi his bank card on several occasions to make purchases. This differed from his earlier explanation to Parliament’s Ad Hoc Committee that he had left the card at the farm of the late taxi boss Jothan Msibi, where Nkosi found it and used it to buy a boat battery.

He also conceded that he allowed Nkosi to take 20 impalas from his Bela Bela farm. The animals were subsequently delivered to Sibiya, and Matlala said he only realised who the recipient was after Nkosi sent him the delivery address.

These latest admissions reveal Nkosi’s alleged access to Matlala’s finances and his middleman role in arrangements involving Sibiya. However, Matlala disputes the more serious allegations in his Section 204 statement, and the commission has yet to make any findings regarding Nkosi’s involvement in the Medicare24 contract.

Matlala’s payments to his former girlfriend, dismissed police brigadier Rachel Matjeng, also came under scrutiny on Tuesday. However, he dodged explaining the transactions by repeatedly invoking his right against self-incrimination.

Matjeng was found guilty in June of money laundering, dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the administration of the SAPS after accepting a R300,000 gratification from Matlala. She was among 12 senior police officers charged in connection with the Medicare24 tender – initially reported as worth R360-million, but later confirmed in court to be R228-million.

In his Section 204 statement, Matlala reportedly said Matjeng had asked him for R300,000 to repair her vehicle and settle a debt. He confirmed that he paid the money in three instalments of R100,000.

However, when Pooe questioned him about the payments, Matlala repeatedly refused to answer, saying he did not want to incriminate himself.

Pooe put Matjeng’s previous evidence to him, noting that funds were deposited into a business account belonging to Osizweni Butchery, owned by a reputed friend of the brigadier. Matjeng maintained she never personally received the money, testifying that Matlala transferred the funds to settle an outstanding debt owed to the butchery for meat supplied for family funerals.

Matlala refused to confirm whether he had requested the account details, made the three payments or sent Matjeng proof of payment. He said the matter formed part of criminal proceedings in which they were co-accused and that he wanted to reserve the evidence for his defence.

Pooe produced a schedule of payments from Matlala’s bank account, including transactions linked to Matjeng. The payments dated from 2019 to 2021, several years before the Medicare24 tender was awarded in 2024. Matlala again declined to comment, saying he intended to use the schedule in court.

Madlanga asked whether he feared incriminating himself or wanted to preserve the evidence for his defence. Matlala said both.

Commissioner Sesi Baloyi SC challenged his position, pointing out that the payments predated the tender and asking why he could not confirm whether the accounts and transactions were his.

She warned that the privilege against self-incrimination was not a blanket right to withhold information simply because a witness wanted to reserve it for another case. Without Matlala’s response, she said, the commission risked being left with Matjeng’s version.

The dispute deepened when Dlamini cited Matlala’s earlier consultation with investigators. According to Dlamini, Matlala identified Matjeng as the Medicare24 contract’s end-user, responsible for verifying work and tipping him off about internal complaints. Dlamini’s notes further linked the butchery money transfers directly to the former brigadier.

The conflicting accounts leave open whether the transfers were personal loans between former partners, a legitimate butchery debt, or gratification linked to Matjeng’s alleged role in the Medicare24 tender. Matlala declined to resolve the discrepancies.

Matlala’s testimony will resume on Wednesday, 11 November. DM

Maverick NewsMadlanga CommissionVincent CruywagenFannie NkosiRachel MatjengVusimuzi "Cat" MatlalaPolice corruptionComments Loading your account… Scroll down to load comments…