Joe “Ferrari” Sibanyoni has delivered dramatic testimony before the Madlanga Commission, alleging that the appearance of Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala and Katiso Molefe around the late Mr Msibi intensified his fears that an attack against him was being prepared. The Commission repeatedly pressed Sibanyoni to explain the evidence behind his conclusions.

PRETORIA — “The game is up.”

Those were the chilling words Joe “Ferrari” Sibanyoni used as he described the moment he believed the danger surrounding him had dramatically escalated.

Testifying before the Madlanga Commission, Sibanyoni brought two prominent names into his account: Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala and Katiso Molefe.

According to Sibanyoni, his relationship with the late Mr Msibi had deteriorated significantly by 2020.

Sibanyoni testified that he had begun deliberately distancing himself, reducing meetings and eventually going into hiding because he feared for his safety.

Then, according to his version, the situation became even more frightening.

SIBANYONI: “IT WAS A PROPER PLAN TO ATTACK ME”

Sibanyoni alleged that after their relationship deteriorated, Msibi strengthened what Sibanyoni described as his personal security apparatus.

He claimed Msibi surrounded himself with individuals associated in the taxi industry with the criminal meaning of “izinkabi”, a term commonly used in that context for hired killers.

Among the names Sibanyoni brought into this account were Cat Matlala and Katiso Molefe.

Asked what their involvement meant to him at the time, Sibanyoni gave an explosive answer.

“From what I read, through circumstances, it was just a proper plan to attack me at that stage,” he testified.

Sibanyoni said information was reaching him from people who visited the farm and were concerned about what they were seeing.

According to his testimony, people would warn him about individuals who were appearing around the property.

Sibanyoni said those warnings convinced him the threat was growing.

These are allegations made by Sibanyoni under oath and have not been established as findings by the Commission.

WHY CAT MATLALA ALARMED HIM

Commissioners did not simply accept Sibanyoni’s interpretation.

They repeatedly pushed him to explain exactly what he knew about Matlala and Molefe at the time and why their alleged association with Msibi caused him to believe he was in danger.

Sibanyoni linked his fears concerning Matlala to information and reports he said were circulating about violence in Mamelodi.

He told the Commission that people were dying in Mamelodi and Matlala’s name was being discussed.

For Sibanyoni, Matlala allegedly becoming associated with the people around Msibi changed his assessment of the danger he faced.

“The game is up,” Sibanyoni said.

But commissioners pressed him further.

They wanted to know what specifically connected Molefe to his fears.

“SOWETO WAS ON FIRE”

Sibanyoni responded by turning to violence in Soweto.

“At the same time Soweto was on fire,” he told the Commission.

He said numerous people were being killed and that Molefe was from Soweto.

When asked whether Molefe’s name had come up in relation to incidents of violence that Sibanyoni had become aware of, Sibanyoni answered that it had.

His reasoning, according to his evidence, was based on information reaching him at the time and the connections he believed he could draw between the individuals around Msibi and violence occurring elsewhere.

But the Commission continued testing those conclusions.

COMMISSION CHALLENGES SIBANYONI’S THEORY

One of the most important moments came when Sibanyoni was challenged with an alternative explanation.

What if, commissioners asked, Msibi had surrounded himself with armed security because he feared Sibanyoni rather than because he intended to attack him?

Sibanyoni rejected that interpretation.

He said he had gone into hiding and maintained that he did not have people around him preparing an attack.

Sibanyoni told the Commission that friends in the taxi industry would contact him and warn him that people were arriving to assist Msibi in Gauteng.

Others, he claimed, would return from the farm and tell him his name had been mentioned.

“Take care of yourself,” Sibanyoni recalled being warned.

SECOND ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT ENTERS THE EVIDENCE

The testimony then reached another critical point.

The Commission turned to the second assassination attempt against Sibanyoni.

The hearing confirmed that there is a criminal case connected to that attack and that Sibanyoni is expected to testify as a prosecution witness.

Because the criminal matter remains pending, the Commission deliberately avoided going deeply into evidence that could interfere with those proceedings.

The hearing instead moved to other allegations surrounding the farm.

EXPLOSIVE DRUG ALLEGATION COMES UNDER PRESSURE

Sibanyoni’s prepared statement contained another serious allegation.

It alleged that around 2021 into 2022, Molefe had relocated what Sibanyoni described as criminal operations, specifically drug-related activities, to the farm owned by Msibi.

But commissioners immediately wanted to know how Sibanyoni knew this.

His answer became crucial.

Sibanyoni acknowledged that he was not physically present at the farm during the relevant period.

He said he relied on information from other people and what he described as intelligence.

He also acknowledged the danger of relying on second-hand or third-hand information, saying such information could become distorted.

“DID ANYONE SPECIFICALLY TELL YOU?”

The Commission pushed even harder.

Sibanyoni was directly asked whether anyone had specifically told him that Molefe was running drug trafficking operations from the farm.

“No, not at all,” he initially responded.

He similarly acknowledged that he had not received direct information that Cat Matlala was running a drug-related business.

That prompted commissioners to confront Sibanyoni with the wording of his own statement.

His statement presented the allegation as though it were something he personally knew.

The Commission wanted clarity: did Sibanyoni know it personally, or had somebody told him?

Sibanyoni eventually clarified that the information had come from somebody else.

He identified the source only by relationship, saying the man had been a chairman at one of his associations, a close confidant and had recently died of natural causes.

That distinction could become significant as the Commission assesses the weight that should be attached to Sibanyoni’s allegations.

FROM FRIENDSHIP TO FEAR

Sibanyoni’s latest testimony also provides a deeper picture of how he says his relationship with Msibi collapsed.

He described a period when the two men had worked closely together.

But Sibanyoni said things began changing after discussions about retirement.

He testified that Msibi had previously indicated that he would retire, only to later tell Sibanyoni that he was no longer leaving the industry.

Sibanyoni said the conversation frightened him and brought memories of the earlier 2006/07 violence rushing back.

He told the Commission that he began reducing contact, avoiding regular meetings and trying to protect himself.

COVID-19 then provided an unexpected buffer.

Sibanyoni testified that lockdown restrictions gave him a reason not to visit Msibi.

Behind that explanation, however, Sibanyoni said was something much more serious.

Fear.

“THE GAME IS TOO UP”

What makes Sibanyoni’s latest evidence significant is not simply the famous names entering the story.

It is the picture he is asking the Madlanga Commission to consider.

He says he had already survived violence.

He says his relationship with a powerful taxi figure deteriorated.

He says warnings started reaching him.

He says new people appeared around the man he feared.

And among the names he identified were Cat Matlala and Katiso Molefe.

For Sibanyoni, that combination meant one thing.

“The game is too up.”

But the Commission has made equally clear that allegations, suspicions and information obtained from others must be tested.

Sibanyoni’s conclusions are not Commission findings.

And some of his most serious allegations were based on information he acknowledged was not within his direct personal knowledge.

That tension now sits at the heart of his explosive evidence: the terrifying story of what Sibanyoni says he believed was unfolding around him, and the Commission’s determination to establish exactly how much of it can be supported by evidence.

Visit MDNtv YouTube Channel for our video content