Connect with us

Courts & Legal

Hawks boss Senona denies favour claims at Madlanga Commission

Published

on

Madlanga Commission hearing, Hawks boss Lesetja Senona, Cat Matlala tender controversy, SAPS healthcare contract, Hawks leadership testimony, Joburg ETC

The Madlanga Commission took a tense turn this week as KwaZulu-Natal Hawks head Major General Lesetja Senona firmly rejected allegations that his personal relationships crossed into abuse of power. Sitting before the commission, Senona presented himself as a senior officer unfairly caught between professional duty and personal association in a country where the line between the two is under constant public scrutiny.

At the centre of the storm is Vusimuzi Cat Matlala, the alleged tender tycoon whose name has become shorthand for everything South Africans distrust about state contracts. Senona is accused of using his position as provincial head of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation to shield Matlala and help secure lucrative government deals. He says those claims simply do not hold up.

Drawing the line between friendship and influence

Senona told the commission that his relationship with Matlala was social and personal, not operational. He acknowledged knowing Matlala and described the bond as brotherly but insisted it never touched his official responsibilities at the Hawks.

According to his testimony, the two met in 2019 during Senona’s traditional wedding, with Matlala later attending another family ceremony. In a country where weddings often cement lifelong relationships, Senona argued that cultural closeness should not automatically be treated as corruption.

He was adamant that at no point did he use his office to advance Matlala’s business interests, including a R360 million SAPS healthcare contract awarded to Matlala’s company, Medicare24. He denied any financial interest in Matlala’s companies, either directly or through third parties.

The question of his son’s business dealings

Much of the commission’s attention has focused on Senona’s son, Thato Senona, and an alleged property venture involving Matlala. Senona pushed back hard against the idea that a parent should be held responsible for an adult child’s business decisions.

“My son is not an extension of me,” Senona told the commission, stressing that the 33-year-old is an independent adult, a family man, and entitled to conduct lawful business like any other South African.

Senona said he only became aware of contact between his son and Matlala in late 2024, after Matlala mentioned that Thato had approached him with a property proposal. He confirmed the information with his son but maintained that he did not facilitate or influence the relationship in any way.

Screenshots, emojis, and suspicion

One of the more curious moments of testimony involved screenshots sent to Senona in February 2025 relating to a proposed property purchase in Pretoria. His response, an emoji accompanied by a brief message of thanks, was presented as evidence of deeper involvement.

Senona dismissed that interpretation, saying the response reflected nothing more than parental interest. He added that the property deal ultimately fell through and produced no benefit for anyone involved.

Public reaction and the bigger picture

Online reaction to Senona’s testimony has been sharply divided. Some social media users argue that senior law enforcement figures should avoid close relationships with controversial business figures altogether. Others see the accusations as another example of guilt by association in a political climate where trust in institutions is already fragile.

The Madlanga Commission forms part of a broader reckoning with state capture era relationships and the lingering question of how power, proximity, and privilege intersect in South Africa. Even when no money changes hands, the perception of influence can be just as damaging as proof of it.

What happens next

Senona is expected to continue his testimony when the commission resumes. For now, his defence rests on a simple argument. Knowing someone, even closely, is not the same as abusing state power. Whether the commission agrees will be watched closely, not just by those in the room, but by a public deeply invested in accountability at the highest levels of law enforcement.

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, TwitterTikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com

Source: IOL

Featured Image: Eyewitness News