Hearing record

Day 73

Witness: Suleiman Carrim

North West businessman Suleiman Carrim was grilled over multimillion-rand payments linking him to alleged crime figure Vusimuzi 'Cat' Matlala and alleged Tembisa tender kingpin Hangwani 'Morgan' Maumela, telling the commission he complied out of fear.

Awaiting portrait

The day in brief

What you need to know

  • Businessman Suleiman Carrim faced sustained questioning over financial dealings connecting him to Vusimuzi 'Cat' Matlala and Hangwani 'Morgan' Maumela.
  • Carrim testified that he funded Matlala's Medicare24 company with about R10 million and described a mining deal involving Maumela.
  • He said he paid Luthagha Trading Enterprise, allegedly linked to Maumela's sister, more than R42 million between December 2023 and November 2024 through his company Ziggy Investment, and over R3 million through his company Tameez between August 2024 and March 2025.
  • Asked by Justice Madlanga why Matlala did not simply pay Maumela directly, Carrim said he had queried this repeatedly but that Matlala insisted the payments run through him.
  • Carrim conceded he was scared of both Matlala and Maumela and said he complied with their requests under pressure; his account of coercion is his evidence and not a proven fact.
  • The commission ruled that Carrim's evidence must be heard in public; his testimony was later adjourned to a subsequent sitting for continued grilling.
  • Matlala, Maumela and all others named are entitled to the presumption of innocence; the transactions described are allegations under examination, not findings of guilt.

Full coverage

The day, in depth

A web of payments laid out

Carrim described multimillion-rand transactions flowing to Maumela and Matlala, saying he was pressured into making certain payments. He put roughly R10 million into Matlala's Medicare24 and detailed tens of millions paid to Luthagha Trading Enterprise, said to be linked to Maumela's sister. The scale and routing of the money became the day's central puzzle.

Why route it through Carrim

Justice Madlanga pressed Carrim on why Matlala did not pay Maumela directly. Carrim replied that he had raised the same question himself, but that Matlala insisted the funds pass through Carrim's companies. He said he complied because he feared both men, framing himself as a conduit rather than an architect.

Evidence leaders puzzled

EWN reported that the commission's evidence leaders were left puzzled by aspects of Carrim's account, and coverage cast the testimony as exposing an alleged money-laundering web involving the three men. The commission insisted the evidence be heard publicly and continued questioning at a later date. Carrim's explanations, and his claim of coercion, remain his version to be tested.

Our analysis

The bottom line

Carrim's day put a rare set of numbers on the table - R10 million into Medicare24, more than R42 million to a trading entity - and numbers of that size force a question the commission clearly wants answered: was this a businessman caught in a coercive web, or a willing intermediary in a laundering chain. His own framing was the former, and his fear of Matlala and Maumela was offered as the reason the money moved the way it did. Whether that framing holds will depend on documents, not adjectives.

The most telling exchange was the chairperson's simple why - why not pay Maumela directly. That the money allegedly had to detour through Carrim's companies is the kind of structural oddity that investigators read as a signal rather than an accident, but a signal is not yet a finding. Carrim is entitled to have his coercion account weighed seriously, and Matlala and Maumela to the presumption of innocence. What Day 73 established is not guilt but a paper trail the commission now has to follow to its source.

For our archive the day matters because it ties threads together: Matlala's Medicare24, the Maumela tender allegations and the North West business world are shown, on Carrim's evidence, moving money in the same circuit. That convergence is why the commission fought to keep the testimony public.

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.