Not off the hook: Joe “Ferrari” Sibanyoni faces charges of allegedly forcing a mining entrepreneur to pay “protection fees” between 2022 and 2025. Photo: Supplied
Taxi boss Joe “Ferrari” Sibanyoni was granted bail by the Delmas Magistrate’s Court in Mpumalanga on Thursday after the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) officially re-enrolled the R2.2-million extortion and money laundering case.
“This is a Schedule 5 bail application, which is not opposed by the state,” the magistrate said.
“The court, having considered all the evidence before it, is satisfied that all the applicants have satisfied the court that it is in the interests of justice that they be released on bail and bail is therefore granted.”
The matter will return to court on 1 September. The case was re-enrolled after state prosecutor Mkhuseli Ntaba failed to appear for a scheduled bail hearing at the Kwaggafontein Magistrate’s Court on 18 May.
Ntaba cited threats to his life while travelling to court and has since been placed on precautionary leave by the NPA.
Sibanyoni, together with co-accused Bafana Oupa Sindane, Mvimbi Masilela and Philemon Msiza, faces charges of allegedly forcing mining entrepreneur Tengani Ntuli, the director of Tengane Mining, to pay “protection fees” between 2022 and 2025.
On Thursday, Sibanyoni filed papers in the Mbombela High Court seeking to halt his imminent arrest after the NPA re-enrolled the matter and issued a J50 arrest warrant.
Sibanyoni’s lawyer, advocate Shaun Abrahams, said the warrant was an overreach because a court summons would have ensured his client attended the hearing.
Speaking outside the Delmas Magistrates Court, NPA spokesperson Kaizer Kganyago said Sibanyoni’s release on bail had effectively rendered his court interdict moot and that the state would be ready to proceed on 1 September.
Kganyago said the suspension of the prosecutor remained in place and that the authority had moved to challenge the contempt order because it effectively barred the prosecutor from practising.
“We are happy as the NPA that the matter is now back on the roll and therefore it can now proceed accordingly,” he said.
The NPA has appealed the contempt order and lodged a formal complaint against the magistrate with the Magistrates’ Commission. Chief magistrate Tuletu Tonjeni had initially struck the matter off the roll and held the prosecutor in contempt of court.
However, the case was later re-enrolled in the Delmas Magistrate’s Court on Thursday, which released Sibanyoni and his co-accused on bail after the state indicated it would not oppose the application.
A source close to the Mail & Guardian said new information allegedly linked the magistrate who first struck the matter off the roll to the alleged extortion group.
The source said that although the prosecutor was absent during the initial bail hearing, the investigating officer was present in court but was ignored by the magistrate.
According to the source, defence lawyers proceeded with arguments in the prosecutor’s absence, after which the matter was struck off the roll in favour of the accused. The prosecutor was found guilty in absentia and a warrant for his arrest was issued.
The source further alleged that the magistrate did not acknowledge the presence of the investigating officer in court.
“New information received is that the same magistrate who struck the case off the roll once presided over a murder case against accused number four, Oupa Sindane, and acquitted him after trial,” the source said.
In his affidavit, mining entrepreneur Ntuli told the court that Sibanyoni began extorting him after a meeting in KwaMhlanga in July 2021, where he met community liaison officer Makhaya Msiza and business forum chairperson Mvimbi Masilela to discuss supplying mining material.
He said the pair later introduced him to their alleged boss, Sibanyoni, who subsequently demanded a protection fee.
Ntuli detailed 27 cash payments he allegedly made to Sibanyoni in varying amounts totalling R2 291 022.
“Mr Joe Sibanyoni would, from time to time, demand money for bonuses. I would deposit this bonus as cash deposits into MJ & Sons Transport ABSA bank with my reference as TT Ntuli, as per his instruction.”
Professor Lukas Muntingh, the director of the Dullah Omar Institute for Constitutional Law, Governance and Human Rights, said that the controversial case had created the impression that safety concerns raised by prosecutors were not being adequately addressed by the NPA.
He said there appeared to be no contingency plan in place and that the matter had not been handled appropriately.
“The impression I got from the news reports is that the prosecutor sounded as though he was left on his own, even though everybody knew it was a high-profile matter and that he had raised safety concerns,” he said.
Muntingh said prosecutors should know what procedures to follow after receiving threats.
“Surely if I am a prosecutor and I receive a threat of any nature, I must know what the next steps are. From what has been reported in the media, it does not seem to be the case,” he said.
He said prosecutors did not belong to the Legal Practice Council and had no independent professional body to represent their interests or ensure their safety.
“If an advocate were threatened, then the legal bodies would step in,” he said, adding that prosecutors often “find themselves out in the wild”.
University of KwaZulu-Natal public law head Suhfaya Bhamjee said threats against witnesses and officials involved in criminal matters formed part of a broader systemic problem.
“We have seen witnesses threatened, cases withdrawn, dockets gone missing and police allegedly paid off. It becomes an entire cycle,” she said.
“It is sad to say that these sorts of threats are not unusual. They happen regularly and are not widely reported because they do not concern high-profile cases.”
Bhamjee questioned the effectiveness of protections available to those involved in the justice system.
“We talk about the protection of whistleblowers but where does the guarantee for safety or protection of prosecutors come in?” she said.
Muntingh said threats against prosecutors and magistrates had serious implications for the criminal justice system and the state’s ability to hold offenders accountable.
“Just because the trial is over does not mean the criminal gangs stop,” he said.