Vusimuzi ‘Cat’ Matlala bail appeal judgment reserved

By Thapelo Molefe

Advocate Laurence Hodes SC has told the Johannesburg High Court that Magistrate Syta Prinsloo made an error in her decision to deny bail to businessman Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala.

Matlala, a well-known tenderpreneur, appeared in the High Court on Monday to appeal the ruling handed down last month by the Alexandra Magistrate’s Court, which denied him bail.

He faces charges of attempted murder, conspiracy to commit murder, defeating the ends of justice, and money laundering in connection with the 2023 failed hit on his former lover, socialite Tebogo Thobejane.

In September, the Magistrate’s Court found that Matlala posed a flight risk and could interfere with witnesses if released. The court ruled that he had not demonstrated convincing circumstances to justify his release, resulting in his continued detention.

In his appeal, Hodes told the High Court that Magistrate Prinsloo had misapplied the law by treating the case as a Schedule 6 bail application under the Criminal Procedure Act.

“This appeal turns on the substantive fact that the Magistrate erred in the schedule she imposed,” Hodes said.

“It was, in fact, a Schedule 5 application. The misclassification distorted the entire bail judgment.”

Schedule 6 offences require an accused to prove exceptional circumstances before bail can be granted, while Schedule 5 has less strict conditions.

Hodes argued that the Magistrate’s reliance on the higher threshold unfairly burdened his client and resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

He also submitted that Matlala was not a flight risk and had cooperated with police since learning about the investigation in December 2024.

“He knew about the case for months, his home and office were searched, and his documents were taken and later returned. If he wanted to flee, he had every opportunity,” Hodes said.

Hodes also said that Matlala’s continued detention has caused significant harm to his business operations.

As a director of multiple companies employing dozens of workers, Hodes told the court that his incarceration threatens the livelihoods of employees, with the businesses collectively paying nearly R2 million in monthly salaries.

Hodes further criticised some of the state’s earlier claims, including allegations that Matlala owned a private jet and a boat in Mauritius.

“There is no evidence to support those claims,” he told the court.

The state opposed the appeal, arguing that Matlala was dishonest in his bail affidavit and could not be trusted. The prosecutor said Matlala initially denied having any business or financial interests outside South Africa, but later admitted to having a trust entity in Mauritius after investigators discovered it.

“It was only after he was caught out that he disclosed that fact to the court,” the prosecutor said.

“This shows he was not forthcoming and cannot be trusted under oath.”

The state also told the court that a false Eswatini identity card was found on Matlala’s phone, suggesting that he may have attempted to conceal his identity.

Matlala was arrested in May this year along with several co-accused in connection with the case.

His name has also surfaced in other investigations, with KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi previously telling Parliament’s ad hoc committee and the Madlanga Commission that Matlala was among businessmen accused of cultivating ties within law enforcement to shield criminal operations.

The Johannesburg High Court has reserved judgment until Friday on whether Magistrate Prinsloo’s bail decision should be overturned.

INSIDE POLITICS