Hearing record
Day 56
The commission turned to local government, as Advocate Khemraj 'Kemi' Behari, the suspended Head of Legal and Risk Services for the City of Ekurhuleni, described pressure, closed files and a silenced disciplinary case that Behari attributed to political interference in the metro.
The day in brief
What you need to know
- Advocate Khemraj 'Kemi' Behari, suspended Head of Legal and Risk Services for the City of Ekurhuleni, took the stand on Monday, 9 February 2026.
- Behari alleged that political interference derailed a disciplinary case against former chief operations officer Lesiba Mojapelo.
- The Mojapelo matter was linked to more than R100 million in Grants-in-Aid funding, according to Sowetan.
- Behari alleged that Thembinkosi 'TK' Nciza pushed for the closure of the Mojapelo case.
- The testimony opened a new front for the commission in the affairs of a major metropolitan municipality, distinct from the SAPS strands heard earlier in the week.
- The allegations name living individuals and are untested; all persons named are presumed innocent.
Full coverage
The day, in depth
Pressure, closed files and a 'silenced' case
IOL reported that Behari lifted the lid on what Behari framed as political interference inside the City of Ekurhuleni, describing pressure, closed files and a disciplinary case that was effectively silenced. The central example was a matter against former chief operations officer Lesiba Mojapelo. Behari's account portrayed a legal office pushed to stand down from action it believed was warranted.
The Mojapelo case and Grants-in-Aid funding
Sowetan reported that the Mojapelo disciplinary matter was linked to more than R100 million in Grants-in-Aid funding. Behari alleged that Thembinkosi 'TK' Nciza pushed for the closure of that case. The evidence tied the commission's corruption inquiry to the handling of substantial public grant money at municipal level.
Our analysis
The bottom line
Behari's testimony widened the commission's lens from policing to municipal governance, suggesting that the patterns it was set up to examine, interference, the shutting down of accountability processes, may not be confined to the criminal justice system. The account of a legal office pressured to drop a disciplinary case is serious because such offices are meant to be an internal check. As always, it is one witness's version, and the individuals Behari named are entitled to respond and are presumed innocent.
There is an important complicating thread the commission will have to hold in view: Behari was appearing as a witness while also, per later reporting, facing scrutiny and eventual charges within Ekurhuleni. That does not diminish the specific allegations made on this day, but it means the commission must test Behari's evidence with the same rigour it applies to those Behari accused. The value of the testimony lies in what can be corroborated against records of the Mojapelo matter and the grant funding, not in the assertions alone.
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.
In the room & on the record
Counsel, the panel and sources
On the panel
- Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga (chairperson)