Madlanga Commission hearing record
Day 65 of the Madlanga Commission
Witness: Lieutenant-General Shadrack Sibiya
Returning after the weekend, Sibiya is questioned on inconsistencies between his evidence and the accounts of other witnesses, as the commission tests his credibility against the record of alleged criminal ties.
The day in brief
What you need to know
- Resuming on Monday, 23 February 2026, Sibiya was questioned by the commission on conflicting testimony, with his version set against other accounts on the record.
- The day pressed the alleged criminal ties raised earlier in the inquiry, including the evidence that alleged crime boss Vusimuzi 'Cat' Matlala made payments to senior officers.
- Building on his day-three concessions, the questioning sought to lock down where Sibiya's account could and could not be reconciled with the documents.
- Sibiya continued to defend his conduct while acknowledging the specific points he had already conceded.
- Tensions in the room rose as Sibiya clashed with advocates over the framing of questions and the reliability of rival witnesses.
- The commission later indicated Sibiya would not be recalled for further evidence after this stretch of testimony.
- Presumption of innocence stands; the questioning tested credibility and did not deliver a verdict.
Full coverage
The day, in depth
Tested on conflicting testimony
EWN reported that the commission questioned suspended top cop Shadrack Sibiya on conflicting testimony as he resumed on 23 February. The session focused on reconciling his account with the versions given by other witnesses, and on the alleged criminal ties that had featured throughout the inquiry.
Clashes in the room
Reporting on this phase of Sibiya's testimony described rising tension, with Sibiya clashing with advocates over how questions were put and how much weight to give the evidence of officers who had testified against him. He maintained his defence while standing by the concessions already made.
Our analysis
The bottom line
The Monday session showed the commission consolidating rather than opening new ground. Having secured admissions the previous week, the evidence leaders turned to credibility: where two accounts could not both be true, which did the documents support. That is a familiar and legitimate technique, and it put Sibiya in the position of defending not only his conduct but the consistency of his own testimony over successive days.
The friction between Sibiya and the advocates is worth reading soberly. Heated exchanges make for vivid reporting, but they are a normal feature of adversarial questioning and do not, by themselves, tell us who is right. What the day added to the record was a clearer map of the fault lines between Sibiya's version and the rest of the evidence, leaving the commission to weigh those conflicts in its own time. That he was later indicated not to be recalled suggests the commission felt it had extracted what it needed from him, not that any conclusion had been reached; under the presumption of innocence, the assessment of his conduct remains for the commission's findings, not for the day's headlines.
Analysis is the archive’s own comment on the public proceedings, grounded in the record above. It weighs the evidence and the process; questions of individual guilt are for the courts and the commission to decide. Everyone named is presumed innocent.
Follow the threads
Who Lieutenant-General Shadrack Sibiya connects to
Stuart James Scharnick
Crime Intelligence head Lieutenant-General Dumisani Khumalo told the commission in November 2025 that Scharnick acted as Sibiya's personal protector while not employed by the SAPS, and that Sibiya frequently used a vehicle Scharnick owned. Sibiya has said he did not know Scharnick had had run-ins with the law; Scharnick denies being a bodyguard and says he lent Sibiya an armoured vehicle after the police withdrew his protection. Untested; both presumed innocent.
View profile →Subject of his allegationsLieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi
Mkhwanazi named Sibiya among the senior officers he alleged interfered with investigations.
View profile →Co-named over the disbandmentSenzo Mchunu
Both were named in connection with the weakening of the political killings task team.
View profile →Distinct person, same surnameLieutenant Colonel Kwazikwakhe Sibiya
Not to be confused with Lieutenant-Colonel Kwazikwakhe Sibiya, a junior officer witness in the R200m cocaine matter - a different person.
View profile →Distinct person, similar surnameMajor-General Richard Shibiri
Often confused: Lt-Gen Shadrack Sibiya (suspended deputy national commissioner) is not Maj-Gen Richard Shibiri (dismissed Organised Crime head) - different people, different surnames.
View profile →Alleged gifts; Matlala refused to answerVusimuzi 'Cat' Matlala
Sergeant Fanie Nkosi testified in March 2026 that Sibiya raised no objection to gifts from Matlala, including 20 live impala said to have been delivered to Sibiya's farm in March 2024. Asked about the recording on Day 160, Matlala said 'I do not want to incriminate myself because I know that the recordings are under investigation'. Untested; Sibiya denies wrongdoing and is presumed innocent.
View profile →Zoom out
Related case files
Medicare24 SAPS tender
A R360 million police medical tender, about R228 million paid, a web of alleged funders - and a central accused who pleaded guilty, then withdrew the deal and now heads to trial.
Read the case file →Case file - Political interferenceKhan-Malema-Sayed network
A crime intelligence general, a cigarette businessman, and a political leader - the Nyatlo affidavit traces an alleged network of mutual protection spanning police contracts, parliamentary questions, and a private complainant's home address.
Read the case file →In the room & on the record