The Madlanga Commission of Inquiry heard on Tuesday that a group including a taxi boss and a South African Police Service (SAPS) sergeant discussed acquiring cellphone‑interception devices, commonly called grabbers, and presenting them as a law‑enforcement demonstration to a Czech supplier while intending to sell the equipment to the Kingdom of eSwatini.
WhatsApp exchanges reviewed by commission
Evidence leader Matthew Chaskalson told the commission that WhatsApp messages shown in court suggested Jotham “King Mswazi” Msibi, Sergeant Fannie Nkosi, Katiso “KT” Molefe and Steven Motsumi were involved in planning to obtain the surveillance technology through a front that purported to represent the SAPS.
“What will emerge is that Mr Msibi, Sergeant Nkosi and quite possibly Mr Motsumi and Mr Molefe … have a plan to sell grabber technology to the Kingdom of eSwatini,”
Chaskalson said the Czech company supplying the devices had been led to believe the acquisition was for the SAPS, while the alleged intention was to export the equipment to eSwatini. The commission was shown correspondence tied to the proposed transaction, some documents of which bore SAPS stamps.
Alleged use of official stamps and a staged demonstration
According to the evidence leader, one of the WhatsApp threads from January 2023 referenced a supplier saved in Sergeant Nkosi’s phone as “Sean Jacobs — phone expert”, who enquired whether the “Swazi deal” remained active. Nkosi forwarded the message to Msibi, who replied:
“It’s on the table but they have to display. We don’t want to become fools.”
Chaskalson characterised the placement of a SAPS stamp on a procurement document as potentially fraudulent conduct intended to persuade the Czech supplier the purchase was legitimate police business. The commission also saw messages between Msibi and Kyle Phillips, a director of tobacco company Carnilinx, which were entered into the record.
What the evidence suggests and immediate implications
The material presented indicates three overlapping risks:
- Abuse of official credentials: Use of SAPS stamps on procurement paperwork could have misrepresented the buyer’s identity and purpose.
- Transfer of interception technology: The devices in question are capable of intercepting calls and extracting data from mobile devices, raising concerns about unlawful surveillance.
- Cross‑border sales: The alleged commercial target was eSwatini, implying potential regional implications for privacy and security.
The commission considered evidence of a planned demonstration involving a person described as a phone expert — an event Chaskalson said would have been used to showcase the equipment to the Czech supplier under the guise of a SAPS demonstration.
| Person | Role (as presented in evidence) |
|---|---|
| Jotham “King Mswazi” Msibi | Taxi boss; alleged participant in procurement plan |
| Sergeant Fannie Nkosi | SAPS sergeant; alleged to have used SAPS stamp and contacts |
| Katiso “KT” Molefe | Alleged associate involved in plan |
| Steven Motsumi | Alleged associate involved in plan |
Chaskalson told the commission that the Czech supplier had been given a different account of the transaction’s purpose than the one suggested by the WhatsApp exchanges and documents shown to the inquiry. He described the conduct around the procurement documentation as fraudulent.
Questions that remain
The hearings to date establish the existence of messages and documents implying a scheme. They do not, however, by themselves determine criminal liability or whether the devices ultimately changed hands. The commission’s ongoing work will consider how these communications fit into a wider pattern of conduct and whether other state processes were implicated.
For ordinary South Africans, the case underscores two practical concerns: the ease with which sophisticated surveillance technology can be traded across borders, and the risk that official emblems or paperwork may be misused to cloak private deals as legitimate state business. As the commission continues to hear evidence, its findings may prompt changes to procurement oversight and tighter controls on the sale and export of interception equipment.
The inquiry has not yet announced any further hearings or the next steps in relation to these particular allegations.
