Hearing record
Day 95
Day 95, 22 April 2026. The commission turned to Gauteng's Sedibeng district, hearing from Brigadier Mbangwa Abraham Nkhwashu, the acting Sedibeng SAPS district commissioner, over allegations that he sought to interfere in a murder investigation implicating his brother-in-law, businessman Katiso 'KT' Molefe.
The day in brief
What you need to know
- Brigadier Mbangwa Nkhwashu, the acting Sedibeng district police commissioner, testified as the inquiry examined alleged political and criminal interference in the justice system in Sedibeng, Gauteng.
- Nkhwashu told the commission that murder accused Katiso 'KT' Molefe is his brother-in-law, a family link at the centre of the allegations against him.
- He is accused of attempting to interfere in a murder investigation in which Molefe is implicated, specifically by requesting the docket in that matter.
- The murder in question is that of Vereeniging engineer Armand Swart, who was killed in April 2024 and whose case has been tied to a wider syndicate narrative before the commission.
- Nkhwashu's account was that he was acting under instruction when he requested the Swart docket, framing his conduct as procedural rather than protective of a relative.
- His testimony formed part of the commission's Sedibeng thread on how dockets and investigations may be steered from within the police; all allegations are untested and Nkhwashu denies wrongdoing.
- Coverage placed Nkhwashu on a growing list of serving and suspended officers whose evidence the commission is using to map alleged interference across multiple districts.
Full coverage
The day, in depth
A family link at the centre
The core of the day was Nkhwashu's acknowledged relationship to murder accused Katiso 'KT' Molefe, whom he described as his brother-in-law. That relationship frames the allegation that he improperly sought the docket in a case implicating Molefe. Nkhwashu maintained he had not acted to shield a relative.
The Swart murder docket
Molefe is accused in connection with the April 2024 killing of Vereeniging engineer Armand Swart. Nkhwashu's requesting of that docket is the specific act the commission examined, with his defence being that he was acting under instruction. The commission tested whether that explanation was consistent with police procedure.
Sedibeng in focus
SABC News and Inside Politic reported that Nkhwashu is one of a widening set of officers whose evidence is helping the commission build a picture of alleged interference in Gauteng. The Sedibeng thread concerns how investigations may be influenced from inside SAPS. Nkhwashu concluded his testimony during this sitting.
Our analysis
The bottom line
Day 95 puts a familiar dilemma to the commission: a police officer's family tie to an accused person is not, by itself, misconduct. The allegation only bites if the docket request was made to protect Molefe rather than to discharge a lawful instruction, and on the evidence aired that motive is asserted by the commission and denied by Nkhwashu. That gap is precisely what the inquiry exists to probe, and it should not be pre-judged.
The strength of Nkhwashu's own defence - that he acted under instruction - is also its vulnerability. If a lawful order to obtain the docket can be produced, the interference narrative weakens; if no such instruction is substantiated, the family link becomes harder to explain innocently. Either way the burden here is evidentiary, and the commission's value lies in testing the documentary chain rather than in the optics of the relationship.
For readers, the fair reading of Day 95 is that a serious allegation has been placed on the record alongside a specific rebuttal, with the Swart murder prosecution proceeding separately in the courts. Nkhwashu is presumed innocent, Molefe's guilt is a matter for his own trial, and nothing said before the commission substitutes for either.
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)
- Advocate Sesi Baloyi SC
- Advocate Sandile Khumalo SC