Mchunu uses ‘dangerous man’ crime accused Matlala’s affidavit to defend himself

Organised crime accused Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala deposed an affidavit in jail and it has been used to try to reiterate sidelined Police Minister Senzo Mchunu’s stance that the two of them do not know each other.

But Mchunu’s reference to the affidavit backfired somewhat during Parliament’s ad hoc committee proceedings on Tuesday, 21 October 2025.

The committee is investigating allegations that criminals have infiltrated South Africa’s law enforcement, politics and private businesses.

Part of this scandal involves Mchunu facing accusations that he was in cahoots with individuals linked to Matlala, who was alleged to be financially supporting Mchunu’s political ambitions and who has been accused of being part of the Big Five members of a drug cartel.

Mchunu started testifying at Parliament’s ad hoc committee last week and resumed on Tuesday when MPs also had a chance to question him.

Matlala’s affidavit from C-Max

EFF leader Julis Malema grilled Mchunu about his use of Matlala’s affidavit, which was date-stamped September 2025 and said Matlala did not know Mchunu.

The affidavit was signed in C-Max prison because Matlala is being detained on criminal charges of attempted murder and money laundering.

Mchunu referenced the affidavit during the parliamentary hearing while insisting he had never met Matlala.

Malema appeared taken aback by this.

“Why would you want to associate with such a character?” Malema asked Mchunu, referencing his use of Matlala’s affidavit.

Malema described Matlala as “a dangerous man”.

“You still wanted to have something to do with this person, worse, on official legal documents,” Malema pressed on.

Earlier, Mchunu told the ad hoc committee that he got Matlala’s affidavit from his lawyers.

Malema said that Mchunu had later said that he had instructed his lawyers to get the affidavit. (Mchunu had said he “did express a wish” to his lawyers about this.)

This, Malema said, suggested Mchunu had contradicted himself.

Mchunu replied, in part: “My lawyers spoke to his lawyers.”

Parallel hearings

Parliament’s ad hoc committee is running parallel to the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry, which is investigating the same accusations of criminal infiltration into law enforcement.

Both sets of hearings are in response to an explosive press conference that KwaZulu-Natal’s Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi held a few months ago in July.

During the press conference, he had made a range of high-level accusations against, among others, Mchunu.

Those accusations, which have since been elaborated on, include that:

• Matlala was financially backing Mchunu, as well as an ANC-aligned businessman who Mchunu knows, Brown Mogotsi;
• Mogotsi was something of a middleman between Mchunu and Matlala; and
• Mchunu was influenced to issue a directive to disband KwaZulu-Natal’s Police Killings Task Team (PKTT) at the end of last year because certain crime suspects believed this would impair investigations against them.

Mchunu’s chief of staff, Cedric Nkabinde, has also cropped up in this scandal as someone who may have leaked sensitive policing information.

Earlier during Tuesday’s parliamentary proceedings, Mchunu referred to a conversation Nkabinde apparently once had with Mkhwanazi in which Mkhwanazi had expressed anger over the PKTT disbandment directive.

‘Threat’ stance and wrong evidence

The MK party’s David Skosana asked if Mkhwanazi had threatened Mchunu.

Mchunu replied: “Now, I felt that he was threatening me if the conversation between him and Mr Nkabinde is true … [Mkhwanazi] was angry…

“I felt that he was actually issuing threats. Whether I got threatened … is a different matter.”

Read more: Police descend on Brown Mogotsi’s business as Mchunu tells Parliament about PKTT decision

Last week, Mchunu had asked that an audio recording – the conversation in which Mkhwanazi allegedly came across as threatening – be played during the ad hoc proceedings.

A part of a recording was played and Skosana, referencing it on Tuesday, put it to Mchunu that “when we listened to the recording, there’s no way General Mkhwanazi threatened you”.

Mchunu said that the audio that was played did not contain “the threat”.

He added: “It happened before the recording.”

After MPs expressed concerns about this issue, Mchunu said he believed he made “an honest mistake” with the recording.

But he would not retract his testimony that he had felt threatened by Mkhwanazi, based on what Nkabinde apparently told him.

Mogotsi, Mchunu and messages

Throughout Tuesday’s proceedings, Mchunu’s dealings with Mogotsi were also a point of focus.

Mchunu acknowledged that he had known Mogotsi since 2017 as a “comrade” – a fellow ANC-aligned individual.

But he insisted their dealings were not deep.

Read more: Mkhwanazi twisted what I said about comrade Brown Mogotsi, Mchunu tells Parliament

He told MPs he had Mogotsi’s cell number saved on his phone, and they exchanged messages on apps including WhatsApp and Signal (which is considered more secure).

Mchunu said they spoke about “ANC matters” and Mogotsi had often brought up other issues which Mchunu did not respond to.

During Tuesday’s Parliamentary ad hoc proceedings, Mchunu’s controversial decision to disband the PKTT was also referenced several times.

‘I acted constitutionally’

Mchunu had last week told MPs that he ordered the PKTT’s disbandment because of the tight police budget and because he did not want to double certain crimefighting operations.

On Tuesday, he again insisted he had acted constitutionally.

Some MPs were not convinced though.

Skosana asked Mchunu what he thought about the professionalism of Major General Petronella van Rooyen, the SAPS governance, legislation and policy head at its Legal Services Division.

Van Rooyen previously testified at the Madlanga Commission that Mchunu did not have the authority to disband the PKTT and this equated to the “usurping” of National Police Commissioner Fannie Masemola’s powers.

Read more: Mchunu ‘unlawfully’ usurped Masemola’s power in political killings saga, Madlanga Commission hears

“The minister unlawfully strayed into the constitutional competence of the national commissioner,” Van Rooyen had testified.

Skosana on Tuesday, during the ad hoc hearing in Parliament, asked Mchunu if he disagreed with her.

Mchunu replied: “I disagree with her upfront.”

Another MK party MP, Sibonelo Nomvalo, put it to Mchunu that the powers to disband the PKTT did “not fall within the power of the minister”.

Mchunu responded that if it was being suggested he acted outside of the Constitution, “I didn’t”.

‘I’m on leave’

The DA’s Glynnis Breytenbach pushed Mchunu, prone to giving long-winded responses, to give concise answers and avoid discussion-like replies during Tuesday’s proceedings.

She wanted to know why nothing had yet been done to improve the South African Police Service when it was widely known that corruption was rife in the police force.

Mchunu said maybe it was time for a necessary agreement for the country to rectify wrongs. 

Read more: Ramaphosa’s cop ‘corruption’ response — Mchunu on leave and judicial inquiry into spies and law enforcers

Breytenbach also asked if the accusations being exchanged in the police service were part of a factional battle, to which Mchunu said that Mkhwanazi indeed appeared to have taken things “personally rather than a police officer who would engage openly”.

Asked what Mchunu was going to do about the scandal, Mchunu replied: “Well, I’m on leave.”

He was referring to being placed on special leave after Mkhwanazi’s initial accusations against him in July.

The parliamentary hearings continue and former police minister Bheki Cele is expected to testify on Thursday. DM