Brown Mogotsi, a North West businessman and ANC fixer, has been denied bail due to strong evidence suggesting he staged a shooting incident. (Photos: Gallo Images / Sharon Seretlo) The Johannesburg Magistrate’s Court has found that releasing North West businessman and ANC fixer Brown Mogotsi on bail would not be in the interests of justice, citing the strength of the State’s case and concerns that he could evade trial.
Mogotsi appeared briefly in court on Thursday, 4 June 2026, in connection with what the State alleges was a staged assassination attempt last year.
The bail judgment comes after ballistic evidence linked the firearm used in the incident to at least two other serious crimes, an armed robbery and a murder case.
At the time of the shooting, Mogotsi told police that unknown gunmen had followed and ambushed him while he was driving a red Chevrolet in Vosloorus, firing multiple shots at his vehicle. The police recovered 11 spent cartridge casings from the scene.
The State, however, rejected Mogotsi’s version of events. Last week, it introduced evidence suggesting the shooting had in fact been staged. The court also heard that ballistic evidence showed that “the vehicle was stationary when the vehicle was shot… There was no person inside at the time it was shot at.”
Delivering judgment on Thursday, Magistrate Annalise Tlhapi said: “This court will not dwell deeper into the merits of the case, since I’m not a trial court; however, one of the factors to be considered is the strength of the case...”
“Is it is apparent to this court that there is an overwhelming case against the applicant; moreover, that cartridges that were found at the scene of the crime in Vosloorus are linked to other serious cases, serious offences,” she said.
Five charges
The 47-year-old is facing five charges: unlawful possession of a firearm, unlawful possession of ammunition, discharging a firearm in a public place, defeating the ends of justice, and perjury.
Tlhapi said the court was required to weigh the interests of justice against Mogotsi’s right to personal liberty, while considering any prejudice he might suffer if detained. She said the court’s decision on whether to grant bail was guided by the factors set out in Section 60 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
“I have focused mainly on Section 60 subsection 4b, whether the applicant will evade his trial, whether the applicant is a flight risk, whether he will be traceable or not, and whether he will be able to stand his trial”, she said.
Tlhapi found that Mogotsi had failed to satisfy the court that he was not a flight risk. This is because the investigating officer in the matter had visited at least three addresses provided by Mogotsi, his wife, and landlord, which were found to be incorrect, with the owners of those addresses providing affidavits and lease agreements to prove they were the rightful owners.
“All three addresses don’t correspond. The applicant failed to prove he has a proper address. The court cannot accept that it is an error by the landlord to write the correct address in the lease agreement.”
Mogotsi’s legal team earlier described the discrepancies in the address as “human errors”; however, the magistrate disagreed.
“Therefore, the court found that there is no proper address for the applicant, and it will be difficult for the State to trace him, and there may be a likelihood that he will evade his trial; therefore, the interests of justice do not permit his release as there is no proper address.”
Plan to appeal
Speaking to journalists following the proceedings, Mogotsi’s lawyer, William Sekgatja, said he had received an instruction to appeal against the outcome.
“He’s obviously not satisfied with the decision of the magistrate; he does not take the decision very well, and he has actually directed that we should start the process of appealing this particular bail decision,” Sekgatja said.
Part of the State’s argument against bail was that Mogotsi did not cooperate with investigators and was difficult to reach when the investigating officer attempted to contact him. On one occasion, he agreed to a meeting with him, but never arrived. His legal team argued that this was because he didn’t trust that the person on the phone was a police officer.
The State argued that on another occasion, Mogotsi allegedly attempted to bribe the officer shortly after his arrest.
Providing details of the alleged bribery attempt, the prosecutor, advocate Thami Mpekana, read an affidavit by the investigating officer into the record.
“As I was about to leave the cells, the applicant approached me. He made a comment relating to bail. His words were: ‘Is there something I can do for you not to oppose my bail?’ I immediately took offence as it was said to me in a context that I understood to offer a bribe not to oppose his bail. I told him immediately that he must not even think of going that route with me,” Mpekana said.
Mogotsi was arrested on Friday, 15 May, shortly after appearing before the Madlanga Commission.
The commission is investigating accusations that a cartel has infiltrated SA’s criminal justice system, politics and private security. So far, he has been accused of acting as a middleman between sidelined Police Minister Senzo Mchunu and organised crime accused Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala.
Mogotsi claims that he was a Crime Intelligence informant.
The matter has been adjourned to 12 June 2026 for a trial date. DM