The Madlanga Commission of Inquiry is expected to deliver a written judgment on Monday regarding a request by ANC member and North West businessman Suleiman Carrim to testify in camera.
Carrim’s application has sparked a major controversy ahead of his scheduled testimony before the Commission.
His legal team argues that appearing in a public hearing could place his life at risk. They maintain that Carrim and his family have been subjected to threats, forcing him to spend significant amounts of money on private security.
However, the Commission has disputed claims that Carrim was left without protection.
During proceedings, evidence leader Advocate Adila Hassim told the Commission that Carrim had previously been offered protection services but declined them.
Hassim raised the issue in response to Carrim’s claim that he has had to cover the costs of private security himself due to safety concerns.
Carrim’s lawyer, Advocate Kameel Premhid, argued that the request for in-camera proceedings is based on ongoing threats against Carrim and his family. According to Premhid, these threats include warnings that Carrim’s businesses could be burned down and that his family could be tracked even if they relocate.
The legal team told the Commission that the threats have created a serious risk to Carrim’s safety should his testimony take place in a public hearing.
Carrim is not new to controversy and has been linked to several allegations connected to a cancelled R360 million South African Police Service (SAPS) tender.
He is accused of receiving R1.5 million from controversial businessman Vusimuzi Matlala, who has been linked to the tender scandal.
Carrim has also been associated with suspended Police Minister Senzo Mchunu, with reports of WhatsApp messages exchanged between Mchunu, Matlala and Carrim emerging during the course of investigations.
Carrim’s legal team had previously challenged the subpoena issued by the Commission in court but lost the case. They later secured a postponement of his appearance from an earlier date to 9 and 10 March, citing the need for additional preparation time.
On Friday, Carrim’s lawyers filed an interlocutory application requesting that his testimony be heard privately.
During the hearing, Commission chairperson Justice Mbuyiseni Madlanga expressed concern about the wording used in Carrim’s affidavit. Madlanga said the language appeared to suggest that the Commission had been responsible for the deaths of witnesses.
The Commissioner described this suggestion as serious and inappropriate, especially given the sensitive context of previous witness deaths linked to investigations, including Witness D and Wiandre Pretorius.
Madlanga also noted that previous applications for in-camera testimony had been dealt with openly and questioned what made Carrim’s situation different enough to justify secrecy.
He indicated that the Commission would need to carefully consider whether the application meets the legal threshold for private proceedings.
Evidence leader Sesi Baloyi also opposed Carrim’s request, arguing that he had not provided sufficient grounds to justify testifying behind closed doors.
Baloyi further argued that keeping the alleged threats confidential could prevent full public disclosure and undermine transparency in the Commission’s work.
She added that the application may have already been compromised by information that has entered the public domain.
The Commission is expected to release its written ruling on Monday, which will determine whether Carrim will testify in a public hearing or behind closed doors when he appears before the Madlanga Commission.