| Location | Pretoria, South Africa |
|---|---|
| Also known as | Madlanga Commission |
| Participants | Mbuyiseli Madlanga (chairperson); Matthew Chaskalson (chief evidence leader) |
| Website | criminaljusticecommission |
The Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Criminality, Political Interference, and Corruption in the Criminal Justice System, better known as the Madlanga Commission, is a public inquiry announced in July 2025 by President Cyril Ramaphosa and headed by retired judge Mbuyiseli Madlanga to investigate allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Police Commissioner Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi of collusion and corruption between politicians, senior police, prosecutors, intelligence operatives and elements of the judiciary, in South Africa. [1] [2] [3]
It is chaired by retired Constitutional Court Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga. Hearings commenced on 17 September 2025 with Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi’s testimony, where he explained his allegations in full and presented evidence he had, in the form of documents, communications, and reports, among others, to establish the veracity of his allegations. [4] [5] [6]
Following Mkwanazi, it was the National Commissioner of the South African Police Service, General Fannie Masemola who gave evidence at the Madlanga Commission on 22 September 2025 in Pretoria. [7] [8]
On 29 September 2025, Crime Intelligence boss Dumisani Khumalo provided further information into a sophisticated organized criminal syndicate, labelled the “Big Five”. He mentioned the Cartel, which is based in Gauteng, is allegedly involved in various sectors of organized crime, including drug trafficking, hijackings, tender fraud, and contract killings. [9] [10]
On 6 July, KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi held a press briefing at the SAPS Provincial Headquarters in Durban. During the briefing, he accused then–Minister of Police Senzo Mchunu of interfering in ongoing investigations. Mkhwanazi subsequently registered a criminal complaint against Mchunu, alleging political interference in the work of the South African Police Service's Political Killings Task Team, which had been established to investigate politically motivated murders. [11]
The public hearings, which commenced in mid-September 2025, immediately began to reveal the contours of the alleged political interference and the infiltration of organised crime.
The initial phase of the hearings focused on the core allegations made by Lieutenant General Mkhwanazi. Mkhwanazi provided detailed evidence, outlining the political interference and questionable instructions he received from senior government officials regarding police operations. [12]
Following Mkhwanazi, National Commissioner of the South African Police Service, General Fannie Masemola, gave evidence on 22 September 2025 in Pretoria. Masemola’s testimony focused primarily on the operational and administrative decisions surrounding the alleged interference, including the executive decision to disband the KwaZulu-Natal Political Killings Task Team. [13] Crucially, Masemola’s submission largely corroborated Mkhwanazi's initial claims. This official validation from the head of the SAPS was a pivotal development, elevating Mkhwanazi’s concerns from a political disagreement to an accepted fact among senior police leadership, thus solidifying the factual basis for the inquiry. [14]
The trajectory of the inquiry shifted significantly on 29 September 2025, when Crime Intelligence boss Lieutenant General Dumisani Khumalo took the stand. [15] Khumalo’s testimony provided detailed information on the infiltration of the state apparatus by sophisticated organised criminal entities. [16]
Khumalo introduced evidence concerning a sophisticated syndicate labeled the “Big Five,” also referred to as the “Cartel,” which operates primarily out of Gauteng. [16] The alleged activities of this syndicate are wide-ranging, covering major sectors of organised crime, including drug trafficking, hijackings, tender fraud, and contract killings. Furthermore, Khumalo revealed specific financial and communication details, including WhatsApp messages that provided evidence of illicit transactions, notably details of payments made by Vusimuzi 'Cat' Matlala to Brown Mogotsi. [17]
This evidential disclosure fundamentally redefined the Commission’s focus, confirming the need for the specific terms of reference addressing the "facilitation of organised crime". The revelations confirmed that the state’s systemic failure was not limited to political corruption but involved state capture by violent criminal networks, directly impacting public safety and economic integrity. [18]
The commission's evidence leaders argue that closed sessions (closed to the public and media) are necessary to protect the safety of key witnesses who will implicate a criminal cartel, as well as to safeguard sensitive investigative techniques. Daily Maverick and News24 have launched a legal challenge against the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry's application to hold a week of its hearings "in camera". [19] The media houses oppose this, citing the constitutional principle of open justice and arguing that a compromise should allow decisions on closure to be made on a case-by-case basis. [20] [21]
The recent focus of the Madlanga Commission centered on WhatsApp chats alleging corruption between alleged drug cartel member Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala and senior government and police officials. [22] Testimony from "Witness X" revealed a beneficial relationship between Matlala and KwaZulu-Natal Hawks head Major-General Lesetja Senona, alleging Senona shared confidential police information with Matlala and discussed him facilitating a property deal for his son. [23] The chats further showed Matlala's influence, as he asked Ekurhuleni Metro Police Department Deputy Police Chief Julius Mkhwanazi to "assist" and "intervene" in a speeding arrest for Matlala's driver, which Mkhwanazi allegedly did. [23] Due to concerns about safety and technical issues that arose during remote testimony, the commission adjusted its proceedings to include both in-camera (closed) and remote, off-camera testimony for sensitive witnesses and ongoing investigations. [24]