Illustrative image, from left: EPWP workers. | Businessman Collen Mashawana, founder and chairman of the Collen Mashawana Foundation. (Photo: Collen Mashawana Facebook page) | Tebogo Malaka, suspended Independent Development Trust CEO. (Photo: IDT) 
If Pieter-Louis Myburgh is allowed to discuss his recent investigative work at Daily Maverick’s The Gathering conference, it will amount to a “public shaming” of Collen Mashawana.
This is one of the claims made in urgent papers filed by Mashawana’s lawyers in the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Johannesburg on 21 August 2025.
A subsequent affidavit charges that Myburgh and Daily Maverick have “elected to pursue a monetised and sensationalised public campaign, including the planned event of 28 August 2025, aimed at maximising reputational damage” to Mashawana.
Mashawana seeks an interim interdict to silence further reporting and discussion by Daily Maverick and Myburgh on a near year-long probe into allegations of corruption, misuse of public funds and exploitation of vulnerable workers.
Myburgh’s reporting has reverberated around the country
The story has dominated the public square since 11 August 2025: Myburgh’s reporting detailed payments from Mashawana toward a luxury house linked to suspended Independent Development Trust (IDT) CEO Tebogo Malaka, alongside an Expanded Public Works Programme contract worth tens of millions for the Collen Mashawana Foundation (CMF) and a trail of unpaid workers.
Mashawana’s 98-page founding affidavit targets two Daily Maverick articles published on 11 August 2025, and a Q&A session held by Myburgh on 15 August.
The documents allege that the reporting defamed Mashawana by linking him to payments totalling R200,000 towards a property being built for Malaka. These payments, made in July 2024 and April 2025, coincided with the evaluation period for a R60-million Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) contract awarded to Mashawana’s CMF foundation just three weeks later.
In his affidavit, Mashawana denies that he made any payments towards Malaka’s property. It also denies the allegation that, despite the IDT transferring at least R23-million to CMF, hundreds of EPWP workers were left unpaid.
The legal action comes as Mashawana, who also heads the Afribiz group involved in Gauteng’s infrastructure projects, seeks to quash what he calls damaging falsehoods. His affidavit argues that Daily Maverick’s coverage has irreparably harmed his reputation, and demands that it retract its reports and cease further publication on the topic.
‘Classic gag attempt’
In an answering affidavit on behalf of Daily Maverick, Myburgh characterises the application as a classic gag attempt designed to block scrutiny of the use of public funds and the treatment of some of South Africa’s most vulnerable workers.
“It is in the clear public interest for allegations of criminality, corruption and the abuse of public funds for private benefit to be ventilated,” he writes, outlining a meticulous investigation that began in July 2024 after a whistleblower flagged irregularities in the EPWP tender process.
Myburgh says Daily Maverick will not be muzzled for doing the work the Constitution requires; powerful figures should not be permitted to weaponise urgent litigation to stifle accountability journalism.
Daily Maverick’s affidavit records how Myburgh sent 19 detailed questions to Mashawana and others before publication. The article quoted Mashawana’s response almost verbatim.
Myburgh’s reporting, the affidavit states, was at all times supported by documents, sources and a timeline tied to money flows.
Mashawana’s denials that he made payments towards Malaka’s property is contradicted by evidence the journalist obtained in his investigations.
Myburgh says that Mashawana has had multiple opportunities to put up countervailing evidence – including in his court filings – and has failed to do so.
The responding affidavit says the relief demanded is sweeping and vague, engineered to block “the publications dated 11 and 15 August 2025” without clear boundaries on what else may be interdicted.
Myburgh writes that Mashawana waited days after publication to launch the case, and then insisted on a timetable that made a meaningful reply impossible.
‘Urgency’ contrived
According to Myburgh, hard copies of the legal papers reached Daily Maverick’s Cape Town office mid-afternoon on 21 August, while service by email to the only two people capable of responding – Myburgh and Daily Maverick editor-in-chief Jillian Green – landed just before close of business.
This meant that the respondents’ notice of intention to oppose was, on Mashawana’s own timetable, due essentially in an hour. The answering affidavit, reflecting serious constitutional stakes, would have been due less than a day later.
The supposed urgency of Mashawana’s application is contrived for another reason, Daily Maverick contends. The application is pegged to Daily Maverick’s The Gathering event scheduled for 28 August.
“If this Court does not grant the relief… before 28 August, any eventual vindication will be a Pyrrhic victory,” Mashawana argues, claiming the event will amplify his “public shaming” for commercial gain because Myburgh is listed as one of the event’s speakers.
Myburgh notes, however, that the allegations against the businessman first surfaced publicly on 10 August 2025, when IOL and Sunday World published an article based on questions Myburgh had sent to Mashawana – questions probably leaked by Mashawana or his associates.
Subsequent reports by eNCA on 11 August, the Sunday Times on 12 August, and SABC News on 16 August further disseminated the claims.
“Dr Mashawana has not sought to interdict any of these outlets, which further suggests that his urgency is selectively directed at the Daily Maverick,” Myburgh states, highlighting a pattern of targeted action.
In Mashawana’s second affidavit, he explains his targeting of Daily Maverick in a highly complimentary manner, writing: “The Daily Maverick’s influence and reach give their platform a weight and authority that heightens the threat to the applicant’s reputation far beyond that of other outlets.”
Critical reporting protected by the Constitution
On the law, Daily Maverick’s stance is anchored in Section 16 of the Constitution, which protects freedom of expression and the media’s right to report on matters of public interest.
The respondents argue the application fails the test for an interim interdict. To gag a publication, an applicant must show a prima facie right, a reasonable apprehension of irreparable harm, and a lack of any alternative remedy.
Myburgh argues that Mashawana falls at each hurdle, given that the allegations are already in the public domain.
There is a final sting in the tail: Daily Maverick seeks punitive costs.
Awarding attorney-and-client costs, Daily Maverick says, would send a message that urgent courts are not a stage for suppressing public-interest journalism. DM