Hearing record
Day 116
Witness: Zelda Maphosho
Evidence led by Advocate Mahlape Sello SC
IPID assistant director Zelda Maphosho faced sustained cross-examination over how the police watchdog investigated the theft attempt at the Aeroton cocaine bust, conceding points as commissioners questioned why five recommended prosecutions had collapsed.
The day in brief
What you need to know
- Maphosho, an Assistant Director of Investigations at the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID), continued her testimony on 9 June 2026 about IPID's probe into the arrest of officers accused of trying to steal from the July 2021 Aeroton cocaine seizure.
- The commission heard that three of the first officials on the scene - Warrant Officers Marumo Magane and Steve Phakula and Gauteng traffic official Samuel Mashaba - allegedly did not handle evidence in line with SAPS national instructions, compromising the scene.
- Commissioners poked holes in IPID's investigation and Maphosho conceded several points under cross-examination, including questions over an alleged 'informer' relationship.
- IPID had recommended prosecuting five officials, but the National Prosecuting Authority twice declined, finding no reasonable prospects of success; roughly five years on, the R300m bust remains unsolved with no convictions.
- The archive records that the day also touched IPID's handling of separate corruption allegations within the Ekurhuleni Metro Police Department (EMPD), and that Colonel Sebola had complained IPID's report ignored the forensic evidence he gathered - claims that remain contested.
- The named officers are subjects of allegations that did not result in prosecution and are entitled to the presumption of innocence.
Full coverage
The day, in depth
The watchdog in the dock
SABC News and EWN reported that Maphosho returned to the stand to face further questions on IPID's 2021 drug-operation probe, with the focus shifting onto how the watchdog itself investigated. The reporting captured a role reversal familiar to the inquiry: the body meant to hold police to account was now explaining its own methods.
Why the case collapsed
Reporting noted IPID recommended charging five officials but the NPA twice declined for lack of reasonable prospects, leaving the R300m bust unresolved. Under cross-examination Maphosho conceded points about the strength of the evidence, sharpening the question of whether the failure lay with the investigation, the prosecution decision, or both.
The 'informer' question
IOL reported Maphosho faced questions over an 'informer' claim tied to the Gauteng drug-bust probe - a thread that would loom larger the next day when Mashaba's undisclosed relationships were examined. As reported, these were questions and concessions, not findings against any official.
Our analysis
The bottom line
Day 116 turned the lens onto the investigators, and that is uncomfortable but legitimate ground for a commission whose remit is the integrity of the criminal-justice system. Maphosho's concessions do not, on their own, mean IPID acted improperly - complex, five-year-old drug cases collapse for many reasons, and a twice-refused prosecution can reflect a genuinely weak evidentiary picture as much as a flawed probe. The fair reading is that the day exposed how thin the state's case had become, without yet establishing why.
The more consequential thread is the tension between IPID's findings and Sebola's complaint that its report ignored his forensic evidence. Those two accounts cannot both be complete, and the commission is right to test them against each other rather than accept either at face value. For the officials IPID once wanted charged, the salient fact remains that no court has convicted them and the NPA twice saw no prospect of success; they carry the presumption of innocence. What the inquiry can usefully pursue is the systemic question the day raised - whether good evidence was lost between investigation and prosecution, and if so, at which handoff.
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.
On the record
Who testified this day
In the room & on the record
Counsel, the panel and sources
Evidence led by
- Advocate Mahlape Sello SC
On the panel
- Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga (chairperson)
- Advocate Sesi Baloyi SC
- Advocate Sandile Khumalo SC