When the music plays, the guilty tremble: Those implicated in Magaqa's assassination may face the law
The testimony of Sibusiso Ncengwa (37) opens the door for the masterminds, coordinators, and hitmen implicated in the brutal murder of Sindiso Magaqa, former Secretary General of the ANC Youth League in September 2017, to face the full force of the law.
In his formal plea statement submitted in terms of Section 220, Ncengwa revealed the painful truth that Magaqa was murdered because of his commitment to fighting crime and corruption within the Umzimkhulu Local Municipality, under the Harry Gwala District.
His investigative efforts and steadfast opposition to corruption placed him in grave danger after uncovering patronage schemes that undermined fair procurement processes, and alleged embezzlement of funds earmarked for public infrastructure.
According to Ncengwa, the plot to assassinate Sindiso Magaqa was initiated by Mluleki Ndobe, the then-mayor of the Harry Gwala District Municipality, who later shot himself at his home in November 2020, and Zweliphansi Sikhosana, the then-manager of the Umzimkhulu Local Municipality.
These senior figures, Ncengwa claims, were aided by Mdu Ncalane, executive communications official at eThekwini Municipality and a known ANC provincial leader in KwaZulu-Natal.
Ncengwa further stated that Mdu Ncalane played a pivotal role in linking Ndobe and Sikhosana to the hitmen, including Ncengwa himself, Mbulelo Mpofana, Sibonelo Myeza, and Mlungisi Ncalane.
Ncengwa reported that Mdu Ncalane oversaw the delivery of the initial payment, approximately R120,000, which was divided among the perpetrators.
These allegations underscore the reach of the justice system in addressing organised crime, particularly where a gunman, a plot originator, and an intermediary are involved.
This is supported by provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997, whose application surges with the fury of the uThukela in flood, when brought to bear against orchestrated acts of violence.
Under the legal doctrines of common purpose and collaborative criminal intent, soliciting, facilitating, or aiding a murder is legally tantamount to drawing the bow and firing the arrow yourself.
This establishes that all who played a role must face equivalent charges. Beyond the Criminal Law Amendment Act, South African courts are bound to uphold the principle of legal precedent, where past decisions of superior courts provide binding guidance in similar cases.
Rulings such as S v Mgedezi & Others (1989), S v Pule (1995), S v Masilela & Another (2001), and S v Thebus & Another (2003) establish that individuals who plan, facilitate, or materially support a murder, such as by paying for it or supplying weapons, can be held equally liable as the perpetrator, provided they shared the intent and associated themselves with the criminal act.
According to this doctrine, a person who did not physically carry out the murder but who facilitated or supported the plan may face the same murder charges as the actual perpetrator.
If sufficient evidence is established, Mdu Ncalane and Zweliphansi Sikhosana, named by Ncengwa as coordinators and masterminds, could face equivalent charges for premeditated murder under the classification of "principal in the first degree."
This affirms the legal view that justice is not concerned with who fired the gun, but with who ordered it to be fired.
The public must attentively watch Ncengwa's sentencing, scheduled for today, which follows his plea of guilty to premeditated murder, confirming that the evidence against him has already been tested by a competent court with authority to establish precedent.
This creates a solid legal foundation that such evidence, once accepted for conviction, cannot later be disregarded or diminished when introduced by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) as leading evidence against the remaining accused, including Mdu Ncalane and Sikhosana.Legally, a court cannot contradict or discard evidence it has previously deemed sufficient to convict.
Therefore, if the NPA opts to leverage Ncengwa's testimony to pursue others, the court must treat them consistently, without bias or dilution of evidentiary weight.
Accordingly, Ncengwa's sentencing must not be viewed merely as the end of a chapter in this case.
It may mark the beginning of a broader challenge to government institutions, particularly the judiciary, to follow evidence with integrity, ensuring that justice proceeds unimpeded by political agendas or leadership with ulterior motives.
*The opinions expressed in this article does not necessarily reflect the views of the newspaper.
DAILY NEWS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
SowetanLIVE
2 hours ago
- SowetanLIVE
SAHRC calls for a commission of inquiry after Mkhwanazi's revelations
The South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) is calling for a commission of inquiry after allegations of corruption and political interference made by KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Lt-Gen Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi against police minister Senzo Mchunu and deputy national commissioner for crime detection Lt-Gen Shadrack Sibiya. The commission said it had written to President Cyril Ramaphosa, calling for the establishment of a commission of inquiry to thoroughly investigate the allegations. On Sunday, Mkhwanazi made damning allegations against Mchunu, accusing the minister of interfering with police investigations and also being an associate of people of questionable character. The commission said it viewed the allegations as a significant challenge for the police service, which plays a vital role in maintaining public order, ensuring the safety of citizens and securing constitutional democracy. 'Given the ongoing issues of unresolved cases involving whistle-blower assassinations, corruption, abductions and gender-based violence (GBV), as well as high crime rates, it is essential for the police to regain the public's trust. The SAPS must use all available resources to resolve cases involving the killing of whistle-blowers, as well as those related to corruption and abduction. It is crucial for SAPS to regain public confidence in its ability to fulfil its mandate effectively,' said the commission. Meanwhile, the South African Council of Churches (SACC) said the allegations were serious and disconcerting to the council. Spokesperson Khuthalani Khumalo said the allegations not only undermine the nation's fight against crime but also cause serious reputational harm to the police service, a key national instrument for keeping the nation safe. 'It is troubling to entertain the thought that someone with all the power and instruments bestowed on him by our constitution and state is possibly using this to facilitate criminality instead of fighting crime. It is a scary thought for our nation. These shocking and distressing allegations reveal a seeming collapse of trust between the ministry and the SAPS itself,' said Khumalo. Khumalo said the allegations have left the South African public uncertain about where the loyalties of the leadership of the national and the provincial police services lie, giving way to the question, 'Who can be trusted when it comes to the fight against crime in South Africa?' As an essential first step in the search for the truth, the SACC is calling on Ramaphosa to establish an impartial investigation into all allegations, regardless of who is implicated and to temporarily suspend all parties implicated pending outcomes of the investigation to protect the integrity of the process. The council also wants the strengthening of oversight mechanisms to prevent future compromises of law enforcement agencies and the protection of whistle-blowers who courageously expose wrongdoing within the system. It called on those implicated, including the minister, to search their conscience and put the country first, by fully and comprehensively co-operating with all investigations. 'This requires that they recuse themselves from state responsibilities as they help society regain confidence in their abilities to lead their respective offices,' said Khumalo. TimesLIVE
Daily Maverick
3 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
There are just and compassionate alternative solutions to corporal punishment in prisons
Minister for Correctional Services Pieter Groenewald has thrown a hornet's nest at us. Last week he suggested we reintroduce whipping and beating for some offenders, or even alleged offenders, to spare sending them to our overcrowded and often dangerous prisons (corporal punishment). Minister Groenewald seemed to have in mind inmates convicted or suspected of minor offences who cannot afford low amounts of bail. They may often spend long periods in prison awaiting trial and then serving their sentences. For the last nearly six years, I've headed the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (Jics), South Africa's Mandela-era prisons' oversight body. The minister's concerns are real. Our prisons are grossly overcrowded. With bedspace for only 107,000, we jam into them almost 164,000 inmates, – a staggering 53% overcrowding rate. This has devastating consequences for those in detention, for their safety and security, and for running effective rehabilitation programmes. Remand detainees (those not yet convicted) make up a bigger and bigger chunk of the prison population. Over 59,000 people are awaiting trial inside prison. More than 4,000 have been awaiting trial for longer than two years. And, more disturbingly even, some 2,500 are in prison simply because they cannot afford bail amounts of less than R1,000. So the minister is right to jolt us into controversy. His call for alternatives to prison, for both awaiting trial and sentenced inmates, is timely. He cited the example of a man arrested for stealing bread. Often on prisons inspections, I meet inmates imprisoned for petty offences, or for non-violent crimes, like shoplifting, or for possessing small amounts of drugs for personal use. These inmates are not a danger to society. They do not have to be confined and isolated. Crushing them into our overcrowded and often unsanitary prisons, rather than confronting the factors that drove them to crime in the first place, or effectively rehabilitating them, risks exposing them to drugs, gangs and violence. Many of our remand centres function as training sites to recruit youngsters into gangs – or to turn them into practised criminals. So we badly need effective alternatives. But is corporal punishment the answer? The Constitutional Court answered this in 1995. Before it was the startling practice of 'juvenile whipping'. In S v Williams, Justice Pius Langa, a deeply humane man and diffident lawyer, later Chief Justice, led the Court in finding that corporal punishment violates human dignity – and is cruel, inhuman and degrading. 'Corporal punishment involves the intentional infliction of physical pain on a human being by another human being at the instigation of the State… The objective must be to penetrate the levels of tolerance to pain; the result must be a cringing fear, a terror of expectation before the whipping and acute distress which often draws involuntary screams during the infliction. There is no dignity in the act itself; the recipient might struggle against himself to maintain a semblance of dignified suffering or even unconcern; there is no dignity even in the person delivering the punishment.' He concluded powerfully, ' It is a practice which debases everyone involved in it'. Expert evidence convinced the Court that corporal punishment is not an effective deterrent: 'its effect is likely to be coarsening and degrading rather than rehabilitative.' And even deterrence could not justify so humiliating and painful a punishment. The Court dismissed the State's argument that corporal punishment is a necessary alternative because of resource and infrastructure constraints. The Court pointed to other creative, more humane, alternatives to imprisonment – like community service, linked to suspended or postponed sentences, and victim-offender mediation. Counsel for the accused in the Williams case, then-advocate Lee Bozalek, pointed the Court to disturbing class and race implications. Given the huge inequality in our country, most of those likely to experience the State-sanctioned brutality of whipping would be poor black men. So the question whether corporal punishment can be consistent with the society we aspire for – based on human dignity, equality and freedom – has been conclusively answered. It is not. But this does not address the minister's legitimate concerns. Don't long periods in overcrowded, unsanitary prison cells also violate inmates' dignity and endanger them? Yes. They do. Of course. So what is the alternative? Long pre-trial detention is the product of overburdened police, prosecutors, Legal Aid attorneys and courts, all services hollowed out by austerity, inefficiency and corruption. These are systemic problems that corporal punishment will not fix. Instead, we must invest in energising every element of our criminal justice system, so that crime is swiftly and effectively investigated and tried. There is no quick way, no shortcut, no 'magic bullet' to do this. But we can do it. With energy and leadership and determination. We have the talented people. We need to energise and lead them. And there are alternatives to unaffordable cash bail. Jics is setting up a bail fund for low-risk inmates granted small bail amounts they cannot afford. At the same time, Jics supports the SA Law Reform Commission's review of the entire bail system, which we hope will lead to much-needed systemic improvements. And there is more we can do. Some crimes – like sex work, drug use and possession, and many petty offences – should not be crimes at all. For other minor offences, our law already enables non-custodial sentences. These include correctional supervision, community service, fines and restorative justice programmes. Our overworked courts and prosecutors should embrace these alternatives. S v Williams warned that when the State administers violence, it fosters violence and indignity. Quoting a US judge, the Court noted that, 'Our Government is the potent, the omni-present teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example.' Our country's history warns us away from more violence, more state-sanctioned brutality. What powerful lessons the State could teach us when, rather than violence or incarceration, it prioritises quick, effective, and – yes – compassionate justice. DM
Eyewitness News
4 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
Mbenenge apologises to SA for his 'clandestine chats' with Mengo becoming 'a public spectacle'
JOHANNESBURG - Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge has tendered an apology to South Africans following the exposure of his interactions with high court secretary, Andiswa Mengo, on messaging service, WhatsApp. The judge president said he was embarrassed that exchanges that were meant to be private had now become the subject of public scrutiny. He is testifying before the Judicial Conduct Tribunal sitting in Sandton, Johannesburg, as the misconduct probe against him continues. ALSO READ: • Mbenenge rejects assertion that peeled banana emoji he sent to Mengo was meant to be his penis • Mbenenge tells tribunal Mengo used endearing terms towards him • Mbenenge denies sending pornographic material to Mengo The senior judge is accused of making unwanted sexual advances towards Mengo between 2021 and 2022. However, the judge denied this vehemently and said that he had a mutually flirtatious relationship with the complainant. This Mbenenge does not apologise for but said he owed it to the citizens of the nation to tender an apology. "It is embarrassing to me. I regret that it happened and I can only apologise to South African citizens insofar as they have become privy to embarrassing chats. It's got nothing to do with saying I am sorry that I had chats. I am simply saying that I am embarrassed that clandestine chats have become a public spectacle. They are embarrassing to South Africans and I owe it to them to say I'm sorry that these things have found their way into the public domain."
