Hearing record
Day 57
On a second day of Ekurhuleni testimony, Advocate Kemi Behari told the commission of being pressured to settle the cases of two suspended senior officials, and faced questions over allegations that Behari had misled the IPID and received a large salary increase.
The day in brief
What you need to know
- Advocate Kemi Behari continued testifying on Tuesday, 10 February 2026, a second day focused on alleged corruption within the City of Ekurhuleni.
- Behari told the commission of being pressured into settling the cases of two suspended Ekurhuleni senior officials, EWN reported.
- Behari faced allegations of having misled the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID).
- Xolani Nciza had claimed Behari and HR head Linda Gxasheka received R600,000 salary increases as 'loyalty bonuses' for allegedly blocking disciplinary action against suspended EMPD deputy chief Julius Mkhwanazi.
- Behari firmly denied that the increase was a payoff while acknowledging receiving a salary hike.
- The disciplinary matters, the salary increases and the IPID allegations remain untested; all named individuals are presumed innocent.
Full coverage
The day, in depth
Pressure to settle two officials' cases
EWN reported that on the second day Behari claimed to have been pressured into settling the cases of two suspended Ekurhuleni senior officials. The account extended the previous day's theme of a legal function being leaned on to reach particular outcomes. DFA carried the day as the second day of testimony for the suspended metro legal head.
The R600,000 salary increase and denials
IOL and related reporting noted a claim by Xolani Nciza that Behari and HR head Linda Gxasheka received R600,000 salary increases described as 'loyalty bonuses' for allegedly blocking disciplinary action against suspended EMPD deputy chief Julius Mkhwanazi. Behari firmly denied that the increase was any kind of payoff, while acknowledging that a salary increase had been received. The dispute turned on the reason for the increase rather than its existence.
Allegations of misleading IPID
EWN reported that Behari was accused of having misled the Independent Police Investigative Directorate. The allegation added a further dimension to the questions put to Behari, touching on dealings with an external oversight body. Behari's responses formed part of an increasingly contested second day on the stand.
Our analysis
The bottom line
The second day sharpened the commission's difficulty with Behari as a witness: much of the testimony was both an allegation of interference by others and a defence against allegations directed at Behari. The distinction between a salary increase that was legitimate and one that functioned as a reward for suppressing discipline is exactly the kind of factual question that cannot be settled by assertion, and the commission will need the paper trail behind the Mkhwanazi disciplinary process to resolve it.
The IPID allegation matters beyond Ekurhuleni, because misleading a statutory oversight body would go to a witness's reliability across the whole of the evidence. None of this is a finding, and Behari is presumed innocent, but it explains why the commission treated the day as contested rather than a straightforward account. The most durable takeaways will be those that later reporting and documents corroborate, not the competing characterisations offered from the stand.
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)