9 October 2026 · Reporting verified against the dated sources below.
A protective order with strict limits
The Madlanga Commission of Inquiry has ordered that a witness identified only as Witness S give evidence in camera, with the date to be determined by commission chairperson Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga. The decision was issued on Thursday, 8 October 2026, according to a report published by The Citizen early on Friday.
The order prohibits publication of the witness’s name, occupation or any other identifying details. Material arising from the closed hearing — including transcripts and recordings — must remain confidential unless the chairperson authorises disclosure. Attendance is restricted to commissioners, evidence leaders, designated legal representatives and selected officials.
Why closed evidence matters
The inquiry is investigating allegations of criminal infiltration, political interference and corruption in South Africa’s criminal justice system. Closed proceedings can allow evidence to be heard while reducing the risk that a witness’s identity or sensitive information becomes public. The decision does not itself establish the truth of any allegation, nor does it mean that any person has been found guilty.
The commission’s ruling also condoned the evidence leaders’ late application for the protective measures. Witness S had been expected to appear earlier in the week, according to the published account.
An inquiry already dealing with security concerns
The ruling comes during a difficult stretch for the inquiry. Earlier in the week, the commission postponed testimony from Crime Intelligence official Feroz Khan after the fatal shooting of his uncle-in-law, Preggy Padayachee, on the R21 near Ekurhuleni. The killing is under investigation; any connection to testimony must not be presumed without evidence.
Public interest in the commission is substantial, but so are the responsibilities attached to witness protection. The restriction on identifying Witness S is explicit. CREATIVE KONG will not publish speculative identities, occupations, leaked recordings or material that could undermine the order.
What happens next
The chairperson will determine when Witness S gives evidence. Any subsequent public summary, procedural ruling or officially released evidence will need to be assessed on its own terms. For now, the confirmed development is a confidentiality order, not a new substantive finding about the people or institutions under investigation.
