Witness I accused of cover-up in attempted R286m drug theft

On 9 July 2021, the day a R286-million cocaine consignment was transported to Aeroton, Johannesburg, and intercepted by police, Witness I informed his commander that he was attending a child custody matter at the Johannesburg High Court.

However, evidence before the Madlanga Commission suggests he failed to disclose that he had also travelled to the scene of the drug bust, raising further questions about his movements and conduct on the day of the operation.

Those questions came under intense scrutiny on Wednesday, 10 June, when commissioners and evidence leaders pressed Witness I on why he failed to inform his commander that he had travelled to the Aeroton drug bust scene, now at the centre of a high-profile inquiry into one of South Africa’s (SA’s) largest cocaine seizures.

Witness I, a former member of the now-disbanded Scorpions and the South African Narcotics Enforcement Bureau, spent much of his career investigating organised crime and drug trafficking networks. Taking the stand at the Madlanga Commission on Tuesday, he testified that he knew alleged organised crime member Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala through police work and that Matlala was a police informant.

He is testifying anonymously due to security concerns.

During cross-examination on Wednesday, commissioner Sandile Khumalo put it to Witness I that his presence at the drug bust was aimed at legitimising an unlawful operation by law enforcement members to steal the drugs.

Read more

‘Cat Matlala was a police informant,’ witness claims at Madlanga Commission

June 9, 2026

The consignment of cocaine, concealed in Scania truck parts, was shipped to Durban before being transported to Aeroton, an industrial hub south of Johannesburg, where it was intercepted by law enforcement in July 2021.

The controversial drug bust has become a focal point at the commission, with commissioners seeking to piece together what transpired during the operation, identify potential failures in the investigation, and determine whether any officials or external actors were complicit in wrongdoing surrounding one of SA’s largest cocaine seizures.

Multiple law enforcement officers were arrested in relation to the drug bust, but charges were later dropped.

Read more

‘Mission impossible’ trafficking plus Transnet info leak linked to R286m cocaine — Hawks cop

June 8, 2026

Scene of the crime

Evidence leader advocate Thabang Pooe and the commissioners repeatedly pressed Witness I on the reasons for his presence at the Aeroton drug bust scene. Central to the questioning was his explanation that his involvement stemmed from an intelligence inquiry opened in 2020.

According to his testimony, the inquiry related to allegations that a group of Tanzanian nationals residing in SA were involved in heroin trafficking and were using legitimate businesses in Gauteng, Free State and KwaZulu-Natal as fronts for their criminal activities.

That investigation alleged that the group relied on various associates, including Uber drivers, to transport narcotics. It further alleged that the drugs originated in Pakistan, entered southern Africa through Mozambique and were smuggled into SA via several border posts, including those in KwaZulu-Natal, Beitbridge and Komatipoort.

Pooe pointed out that the modus operandi described in that intelligence file was markedly different from the circumstances surrounding the Aeroton bust. The Aeroton case involved a massive cocaine shipment that originated in Brazil, arrived in Durban by sea, and was subsequently transported to Johannesburg.

Movements on the day

Witness I’s movements on the day of the operation also raised questions. He testified that he had informed his supervisor that he would be attending to a child custody matter at the Johannesburg High Court. However, he told the commission that before leaving the court on the day of the drug bust, he had received information about events unfolding in Aeroton.

He visited the scene but failed to disclose his presence to his commander and omitted the visit from his statement.

Commissioner Sesi Baloyi SC challenged the witness directly, suggesting that his actions on the day of the drug bust were neither accidental nor innocuous, but rather deliberate and calculated.

“All that conduct is calculated conduct because you come knowing that you are coming to an operation to legitimise, as put by the evidence leader, an operation that is unaccounted for in the books, it is nowhere on the books at the time when you arrive,” she argued.

Commissioner Sandile Khumalo suggested that the Aeroton operation may have been unlawful from the outset and that Witness I’s presence was intended to provide it with a veneer of legitimacy after SAPS members responding to a 10111 complaint unexpectedly arrived at the scene.

“I want to suggest to you that the reason you went to the Aeroton scene was because there was an unlawful operation underway that had been interrupted by SAPS members responding to a 10111 call,” Khumalo said.

According to Khumalo, the reliance on the 2020 intelligence inquiry was merely a pretext designed to justify Witness I’s presence and retrospectively legitimise the operation.

“Your presence there and your reliance on the 2020 inquiry was to legitimise an unlawful operation to steal the drugs,” Khumalo suggested.

Matlala’s parental home

Proceedings were delayed for more than two hours to allow Witness I to prepare a supplementary statement dealing with a previously undisclosed aspect of his relationship with Matlala.

The development followed testimony on Tuesday in which Witness I denied having a direct relationship with Matlala, insisting that any communication with him had been facilitated through Captain Faleni Zungu.

What Witness I did not disclose at the time was that he had spent approximately two years living at Matlala’s parental home in Mamelodi.

In his supplementary statement, Witness I explained that the arrangement arose after an alleged attempt on his life in September 2023. He said he was at his Mamelodi home when he heard a loud bang outside. Armed with his state-issued firearm, he went to investigate and was allegedly attacked by four men.

According to Witness I, the assailants struck him on the head with a metal object, leaving him incapacitated. During the attack, his left arm and several fingers were broken and his state-issued firearm was stolen.

He was hospitalised for a week following the incident. The firearm was later recovered and he subsequently received information suggesting that a hit had been placed on him and that a group had been sent to kill him.

Fearing that his home had been compromised and that his family was no longer safe, Witness I said he sought alternative accommodation. It was at that point, he testified, that Captain Zungu intervened and arranged a place for him to stay.

“Captain Zungu took me to a house. At the time, I did not know who owned the property. It was only during the course of my stay that I learned it belonged to Matlala,” he said.

He maintained that the discovery did not concern him because he knew Matlala only as a businessman and not as a personal associate. Witness I further insisted that throughout his stay, he neither met nor communicated directly with Matlala, and that his first direct interaction with him occurred later in the presence of Captain Zungu and Brigadier Makwena.

Explaining why he had omitted the information from his original statement, Witness I said he did not consider it significant because he had no direct dealings with Matlala while living at the property.

However, he told the commission: “After completing my testimony on Tuesday, I received several phone calls warning me that senior figures were unhappy with my evidence.”

According to Witness I, one individual informed him that details of his stay at Matlala’s house were about to be disclosed in an effort to undermine his credibility.

But he considered the warning important and viewed it as an attempt to set him up and discredit him.

It was for that reason, Witness I explained, that he decided to place the matter before the commission and provide a full account of the circumstances under which he came to reside at Matlala’s parental home. DM