Former Police Special Task Force Member Returns to Court in Madlanga Commission Witness Murder Case

Court Proceedings Resume for Ex-Task Force Member

Matipandile Sotheni, a former Special Task Force member of the South African Police Service (SAPS), is set to return to the Brakpan Magistrate’s Court on charges related to the murder of Marius Van der Merwe, known as “Witness D” in the Madlanga Commission hearings. The court appearance comes as the State continues to analyse cellphone data believed to be central to the ongoing investigation.

Focus on Cellphone Evidence as Investigation Progresses

The latest court date arrives after prosecutors previously requested a delay to finalise a complex analysis of cellphone evidence. Sotheni has been linked to one of three cellphones found in a restricted area, known as the catwalk, at the Kgosi Mampuru II Correctional Centre in Pretoria where he is detained. Although his prison cell did not yield any devices, the discovery of phones in the vicinity triggered further investigation into his alleged communications outside the facility.

Investigators are focusing on what was discussed in those communications, with early findings suggesting the content may relate directly to the murder case.

The State is currently mapping Sotheni’s cellphone records and cross-referencing them with vehicle tracking information regarding the murder. In addition to Sotheni’s records, the examination includes the cellphone data of the late police informant Wiandre Pretorius and his fiancée, Juan-Maré Eksteen, herself a former SAPS sergeant.

Defence Pushes Back on Delays

Sotheni’s legal team has challenged the repeated postponements, arguing that the prosecution has been granted adequate time to wrap up its investigations. The defence contends that continued delays risk turning the case into an extended and open-ended process.

Despite these objections, Magistrate Tlakale Sathekge granted the State further time, setting the next court date for November 2 to allow analysts to complete the data mapping and related forensic work.

Background: A Key Witness and a High-Profile Inquiry

Marius Van der Merwe, known as Witness D, played a vital role in the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry, implicating high-ranking law enforcement officials. In November 2025, he gave testimony naming former Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Police Department (EMPD) deputy chief Brigadier Julius Mkhwanazi in connection to the murder of Emmanuel Mbhense. Mbhense was found dead at Duduza Dam in April 2022 following alleged torture.

Tragically, on December 5, 2025, Van der Merwe was shot and killed outside his Brakpan home in front of his family. His high-profile status as a key witness places the case under significant public and legal scrutiny.

Arrests, Charges, and Related Events

Sotheni was arrested on March 14, 2026, and faces a total of 16 serious charges. These include murder, conspiracy to commit murder, attempted murder, unlawful possession of a firearm, ammunition-related offences, and theft. The prosecution alleges he conspired with Wiandre Pretorius to kill Van der Merwe.

Pretorius, who survived a prior shooting that left his vehicle riddled with bullets, was later found dead by suicide at a Brakpan petrol station. The involvement of multiple law enforcement personnel, both active and former, has raised complex questions around criminal collusion and witness protection in sensitive state investigations.

Why This Case Matters

The murder of a commission witnessespecially one who testified against senior police officialshighlights the pressing challenges facing those who come forward in high-stakes inquiries. The ongoing investigation and legal proceedings underscore the importance of thorough forensic work, including the analysis of electronic communications, in major criminal cases.

While investigators work to piece together the digital and physical evidence, the case continues to draw attention to the risks faced by witnesses and the critical need for robust protection measures. The outcome of Sotheni’s trial, and the insight provided by the State’s cellphone analysis, may have broader implications for accountability and safety within South Africa’s justice system.