The extortion case against Joe ‘Ferrari’ Sibanyoni was re-enrolled on Thursday, 28 May 2026. (Photo: Facebook) On Thursday, 28 May, Joe “Ferrari” Sibanyoni and his co-accused were released on bail of R70,000 each after their first appearance in the Delmas Magistrates’ Court, following the re-enrolment of their extortion and money laundering case.
Sibanyoni is allegedly linked to organised crime networks, and the case has raised questions over prosecutorial and magisterial misconduct, and intimidation attempts, after Sibanyoni was released when the matter first appeared in court.
On Wednesday, 27 May, the NPA announced that the matter would be re-enrolled at Delmas Magistrates’ Court, after it was struck off the roll on 18 May.
NPA spokesperson Kaizer Kganyago said the matter had been transferred from the Kwaggafontein Magistrates’ Court due to safety and security concerns. He said the NPA had put precautionary measures in place to ensure the safety of the court officials involved in the matter.
The NPA granted the defence three months to submit representations to the director of public prosecutions (DPP) in Mpumalanga, after which the submissions would be considered and the outcome communicated to the accused’s legal team.
The case has been postponed to 1 September 2026. As part of their bail conditions, the accused are ordered to attend all court proceedings until the matter is finalised, refrain from interfering with witnesses, report to their nearest police station every alternate week, and not commit any offences while out on bail.
The re-enrolment of the case follows Chief Magistrate Tuletu Tonjeni’s striking the matter off the roll, after State prosecutor Mkhuseli Ntaba failed to appear at the bail application hearing of the accused in Kwaggafontein Magistrates’ court last week. In response, Tonjeni held him in contempt of court and issued a warrant for his arrest.
Ntaba was suspended by the NPA shortly thereafter. Kganyago told the SABC that the move was not punitive, but rather a procedural step taken to safeguard the integrity of the investigation. He said the aim was to remove Ntaba from the process until the investigation had been concluded.
Urgent interdict
Sibanyoni and his co-accused filed an urgent application to interdict the re-enrolment of the extortion case, seeking an order interdicting the police from executing a J50 warrant of arrest against them. The application was filed at the Mpumalanga high court on Wednesday, 27 May.
The defence attorneys have argued that the NPA should have issued a J175 rather than a J50, contending that the accused did not attempt to evade the authorities.
In Thursday’s appearance, Sibanyoni’s defence lawyer Shaun Abrahams said that the warrant was unlawful, unconstitutional and an abuse of process. The application is set to be heard on 2 June.
The application to interdict does not stop the matter from being re-enrolled. The matters can run concurrently. The interdict is an argument over whether the suspects needed to be arrested.
Dr Suhayfa Bhamjee, senior lecturer in criminal law at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, told Daily Maverick that the J50 and J175 were both viable options and argued that she believed the J50 was the most appropriate warrant for the case.
“The purpose of arrest, summons, warrants, and warnings is to ensure that an accused person comes to court on the set date. They are different options meant to lead to the same result. Some are more drastic than others,” said Bhamjee, who added that legal measures varied based on the severity of the offence.
“Arrest guarantees that those in custody will appear in court, and we usually see this in high-profile cases like those of taxi bosses”.
Alleged crimes
It is alleged that between 2022 and 2025, Sibanyoni and his co-accused unlawfully demanded more than R2.2-million in protection fees from mining businessman Thengane Thomas Ntuli.
The accused allegedly threatened to shut down Ntuli’s business if he failed to comply with the demands. It is further alleged that the complainant made payments to Sibanyoni, after which the funds were channelled through and allegedly laundered via M&J Sons, an entity owned by Sibanyoni.
Sibanyoni has denied the allegations and maintains that he and Ntuli share a legitimate business relationship.
Sibanyoni is a prominent taxi boss who earned the nickname “Ferrari” for his love of luxurious cars. He has held influential leadership positions in the taxi industry at provincial and national levels.
Claims of “taxi mafias” and criminal business forums have repeatedly emerged across industries, including construction, mining, and informal trade, with businesses allegedly pressured to pay protection fees or a share of their profits to continue operating.
/file/attachments/orphans/6c856debc47747cba561547d12d9a8eb_511632.jpeg "Joe Sibanyoni and his co-accused, Mvimbi Masilela, Philemon Msiza and Bafana Sindane, during their appearance before the Kwaggafontein Magistrates’ Court. (Photo: X)")
Sibanyoni’s name has also surfaced multiple times at the Madlanga Commission, which is investigating allegations of criminal influence within policing, political and judicial structures. He has also been linked to alleged members of the so-called “Big Five” cartel and survived an apparent assassination attempt in 2022.
Bafana Sindane, also known in taxi circles as “King of the Sky”, is Sibanyoni’s close associate who faces the same charges of extortion and money laundering. Relatively little is publicly known about co-accused Mvimbi Daniel Masilela and Philemon Makhaya Msiza.
Magistrate’s conduct, prosecutor’s absence
Questions have been raised about the magistrate’s conduct, particularly about her decision to strike the matter off the roll.
Following the suspects’ first appearance, the then presiding magistrate, David Erasmus, received a phone call from Tonjeni, who informed him that he would no longer be presiding over the matter and that she would take over.
Irrespective of the steps taken against the prosecutor, it’s understood that Tonjeni could still have postponed the matter, stood it down, or pursued other procedural avenues rather than striking it off the roll entirely.
On Tuesday, 26 May, the DPP filed a formal complaint to the Magistrates Commission against Tonjeni’s decision to strike the matter off the roll. The NPA has also moved to challenge the ruling by filing an application for leave to appeal against both the contempt of court order and the warrant of arrest issued against Ntaba.
“The NPA holds the firm view that the conduct reflected in the proceedings raises serious institutional concerns relating to judicial decorum, procedural fairness and the proper administration of justice”, read the statement.
It has been alleged that Ntaba failed to appear after receiving threats to his life.
“All we know for now, while the internal investigation is going on, is the fact that he was told that he would be eliminated if he went to the court on that day”, Kganyago told the SABC. DM