Madlanga Commission | SAPS brigadier details romantic relationship with Matlala

SAPS Head of Quality Management and Forensic Services, Rachel Matjeng, has told the Madlanga Commission that she has been in a romantic relationship with alleged underworld figure Vusimuzi ‘Cat’ Matlala, which began before his arrest.

Matjeng testified before the commission on Thursday, in relation to her relationship with Matlala and his Medicare24 contract with the South African Police Service (SAPS).

The section head for Quality Management in Criminal Record and Crime Scene Management at the SAPS Forensic Services Division in Pretoria told the inquiry that Matlala was a romantic partner who frequently showered her with gifts, including money.

Matjeng said the relationship, which began in 2017, was known within her social circle and described it as an “open secret”. She added that the relationship was on and off, at times going as long as a year without contact.

She confirmed that she was aware Matlala owned several businesses, including Cat VIP Security Services and Medicare24, but denied influencing the awarding of any SAPS contracts in his favour.

“I have never borrowed money from Mr. Matlala. The money and gifts received from 2017 were gifts from a boyfriend. Non of the money and gifts received from him were related to me having an influence to the awarding of the tender or the execution thereof as I started receiving gifts from 2017 while being in our on and of relationship,” Matjeng said.

Matjeng further testified that she knew Matlala was married and said that when he sent her money, he sometimes asked that it be deposited into an account not registered in her name to avoid detection by his wife, who she said knew her only as a friend.

She added that Matlala did not want the payments to appear as though they were made in exchange for favours at SAPS.

She admitted using a friend’s business account to receive money from Matlala, explaining that she provided him with the bank details of Osizweni Butchery, owned by her friend Modiegi.

Matjeng told the commission that in September 2023 she requested financial assistance from Matlala to pay attorneys who, she said, were pressuring her over outstanding debt. According to her testimony, Matlala deposited R100,000 into the Osizweni Butchery account, but her friend refused to release the money, claiming Matlala owed the business.

When questioned by the evidence leader on whether she informed Matlala that the money had not reached her, Matjeng confirmed that she had done so, despite the communication not appearing in text messages presented to the commission.

Matjeng further testified that Matlala had a direct business relationship with her friend’s butchery, regularly purchasing meat worth hundreds of thousands of rand. She claimed that Matlala made multiple deposits intended for her through the business account — including two deposits of R100,000 and one of R300,000 — but insisted that she did not receive any of the money.

Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, however expressed skepticism about Matjeng’s version of events, suggesting that the payments may have amounted gratification in exchange for assistance related to Matlala’s SAPS contract.

Matjeng denied this, maintaining that she played no role in the processing of invoices linked to Matlala at SAPS.

She told the commission that Matlala often complained to her about challenges with SAPS, including delayed payments that affected his ability to pay service providers. The commission played a video showing SAPS officials reprimanding Matlala for failing to deliver services required under his contract.

Matjeng said the video had been sent to her by Matlala to show that he was “in trouble”, adding that he had also been penalised for failing to deliver the required services.

She admitted that she contacted a service provider to assist Matlala with Certificate of Fitness (COF) documents required for his business operations to resume.

When questioned by Advocate Sesi Baloyi on whether the call was intended to assist Matlala, Matjeng said she was “partially accepting”, adding that she believed she was assisting both Matlala and the organisation.

Matjeng insisted that once Matlala’s contractual issues with SAPS were resolved, she did not ask for anything in return.

The commission also played a voice note in which Matjeng asked Matlala to assist with repairs to her car. She attempted to explain the message, saying it was an expression of frustration rather than a request for a favour.

“I was just saying why is he ignoring me. The car which they are fixing, they could not fix it because now the mechanic is telling me about valves and other stuff which I know nothing about,” Matjeng elaborated.

Matjeng maintained that the voice note was coincidental and denied that she was seeking a benefit in exchange for any assistance.

Written by: Odirile Rabalao