Madlanga CommissionLatest day

Hearing record

Day 69

Gxasheka continued her evidence after the commission directed her to return. Her lawyers reportedly sought a postponement, and she maintained she did not block the investigation into Julius Mkhwanazi while arguing the inquiry's scope was too narrow to reach Ekurhuleni's wider problems.

Official transcript (PDF) ↗All hearing days
Still from Day 69 of the Madlanga Commission

The day in brief

What you need to know

  • Gxasheka returned to the stand on Day 69, the commission having directed her to continue her testimony.
  • According to EWN, her lawyers requested a postponement of her testimony; the commission pressed on with her evidence.
  • She maintained that she did not block or stop the disciplinary investigation into suspended EMPD deputy chief Julius Mkhwanazi.
  • As reported by The Mercury, she argued that the commission's scope was too limited to address the scale of corruption and maladministration she said afflicts the municipality.
  • IOL reported her defence that she did not block Julius Mkhwanazi's probe.
  • Her evidence closed out the week's Ekurhuleni strand; the allegations remain untested and she is presumed innocent.

Full coverage

The day, in depth

Ordered to continue

SABC News reported that Gxasheka continued her testimony after the commission's orders, while EWN reported that her lawyers had requested a postponement. The commission proceeded with her evidence rather than adjourning.

I did not block the probe

IOL reported Gxasheka's defence that she did not block the investigation into Julius Mkhwanazi. She reiterated her denial of any role in shielding the suspended metro police deputy chief.

Questioning the commission's reach

The Mercury reported that Gxasheka argued the commission's current scope was too narrow to address the broader corruption and maladministration she described in Ekurhuleni, an argument that doubles as a critique of the inquiry's terms of reference.

Our analysis

The bottom line

The second day sharpened a tension the first only implied: a witness accused of protecting a compromised official turning the argument around to say the real problem is larger than the commission is equipped to examine. That is a rhetorically effective move, and it may also be sincere, since municipal corruption plainly exceeds any single inquiry's remit. Readers should weigh it as advocacy from a person defending herself, not as an agreed finding about the commission's limits.

The postponement request and the order to continue show the commission managing a reluctant-witness dynamic similar to Day 67's, but resolving it by proceeding rather than adjourning. On the substance, Gxasheka's position is consistent across both days: a denial of blocking the Mkhwanazi matter. Consistency is not proof, but it is what the record shows, and the archive leaves the testing of it to the commission and any competent court.

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)

Sources

← Earlier in timeDay 6826 February 2026More recent →Day 7002 March 2026