Ex-defence minister’s multimillion renovation payments ‘typical of money laundering’ — witness

A chief financial investigator has told the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Pretoria that even if former defence minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula and her husband, Charles, had saved every cash withdrawal they made from their bank accounts over two years, they still would not have had enough money to pay for the extensive cash-funded renovations at their Bruma home.

Some of the renovations included a walk-in dressing room, a remodelled main bathroom, underfloor heating, R600,000 motorised curtains, a solar power system and gold-trimmed wardrobes. The entrance hall alone cost R500,000, while luxury furniture, including couches, display units and ornamental chairs, cost a further R375,000.

Wynand Wessels, the former chief financial investigator at the National Prosecuting Authority’s Investigating Directorate Against Corruption (Idac), took the witness stand on Thursday after analysing bank records, financial statements, WhatsApp messages and other documentary evidence in the police docket.

FOR CONTEXT

Ex-minister Mapisa-Nqakula paid in cash for R1.8m home renovation, court told

August 5, 2026

His investigation sought to determine whether the cash withdrawn from the Mapisa-Nqakulas’ bank accounts could account for the money allegedly paid to contractors who renovated the Bruma property, and whether those withdrawals matched communications and meetings between people linked to the investigation.

The evidence goes to the heart of the State’s money laundering case. The State alleges that about R2.1-million in corrupt payments received from defence contractor Nombasa Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu was used to fund renovations at the Johannesburg home, where contractors have testified they were paid almost entirely in cash.

Asked by the prosecutor, advocate Emile van der Merwe, of his opinion on the flow of money reflected in the evidence, Wessels said the pattern of repeated cash payments was consistent with money laundering.

Mapisa-Nqakula has pleaded not guilty to 12 counts of corruption and one count of money laundering. The State alleges that between 2016 and 2019, while serving as minister of defence, she solicited or received about R2.1-million from Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, whose company, Umkhombe Marine, secured contracts with the South African National Defence Force.

Defence attacks financial report

Wessels spent most of the afternoon on Thursday under cross-examination by the defence’s Siyabulela Mapoma SC, who challenged both his qualifications and the reliability of his 33-page financial investigation report.

During questioning, several amendments were made to the report after errors were identified, including the incorrect classification of a personal bank account as a business account and references stating that “money was handed over” instead of “money was allegedly handed over”.

Mapoma argued that the mistakes undermined Wessels’ credibility and demonstrated that his conclusions could not safely be relied on.

Mapoma further accused the investigator of expressing personal opinions instead of presenting objective financial evidence. He pointed out that although Wessels had completed several short courses in financial investigations, he was not registered with a recognised professional body, and that meant he was no expert.

The defence also argued that there was no direct evidence linking WhatsApp messages exchanged between Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu and Mapisa-Nqakula to the large sums of cash allegedly exchanged between them.

The defence counsel submitted that many of the transactions analysed in Wessels’ report were not directly connected to the specific charges before the court and questioned whether the report went beyond the available evidence.

Advocate Reg Willis also questioned Wessels’ impartiality, arguing that because he testified as a court witness rather than as a State witness, his report should have reflected greater neutrality.

Wessels accepted several corrections to his report, but maintained that they did not affect the substance of his findings.

He explained that his investigation focused on the period between 2018 and 2020 because that was when contractors carrying out the renovations were allegedly paid in cash. Looking at earlier years, he said, would have added little value because there were no allegations that contractors received cash payments before then.

Earlier testimony

Thursday’s financial evidence followed testimony from two of Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s family members, who the State called to support its version that cash was repeatedly taken to Mapisa-Nqakula’s Bruma residence.

On Wednesday, Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s visibly nervous daughter, Lilitha, testified that she recalled accompanying her mother to the property in July 2019.

She told the court the visit followed a newspaper article about Umkhombe Marine. According to Lilitha, her mother wanted legal advice on how to stop the article from being published.

Lilitha testified that her mother entered the house carrying two handbags, but left with only one after a private meeting with Mapisa-Nqakula.

Earlier evidence before the court suggested one of those handbags allegedly contained about R100,000 in cash.

The defence challenged Lilitha’s account, pointing out that Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu herself had never testified that she took two handbags to the meeting. Counsel also questioned why Lilitha had failed to mention that a police vehicle had been parked outside the property.

The court also heard from Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s sister, Andisa, who testified that her sister had previously told her Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu was uncomfortable about repeatedly giving money to Mapisa-Nqakula, although she never explained why she continued doing so.

Andisa further testified that in April 2019, after collecting her from OR Tambo International Airport, Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu showed her what she said was R400,000 inside an A4 envelope before they drove to Mapisa-Nqakula’s residence.

She said they were greeted by a domestic worker before Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu and Mapisa-Nqakula went into another room for a private meeting.

During cross-examination, however, the defence highlighted differences between Andisa’s evidence and Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu’s own testimony. According to the defence, Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu had earlier testified that the cash was inside an FNB bag kept in her handbag before she left to collect her sister from the airport, and had made no mention of an A4 envelope.

The trial continues. DM