Have judicial proceedings and tribunal inquiries become a risk to participants? 

South Africa has recently been reeling in shock following the killing of Witness D in the Madlanga Commission. 

He was gunned down on the presence of his family outside his home in Brakpan, Pretoria. 

Social commentators and analysts have linked this killing to Witness D’s role in the ongoing Madlanga Commission. 

The Madlanga Commission is a public inquiry established by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa in July 2025 to investigate alleged criminality, political interference and corruption within the criminal justice system, particularly following the disbandment of the Political Killings Task Team (PKTT) by the Minister of Police. 

The killing of Witness D has raised serious questions about whether witnesses appearing before courts or tribunals are adequately protected, especially when they are subpoenaed to give evidence on behalf of the state against accused persons. 

One may infer that the existing framework for witness protection is skewed and fails to offer comprehensive protection, particularly regarding the safety of witnesses beyond the courtroom. 

Firstly, the law makes provision for witness protection within the criminal justice system but is largely silent on witness protection in tribunal or commission inquiries. It appears that Witness D was not protected because the Madlanga Commission is not a criminal justice process but an administrative inquiry into whether the suspended Minister of Police interfered with PKTT operations. 

Secondly, the law that provides for witness protection is primarily concerned with the safety of witnesses while they are in court and remains silent on their protection outside court, including at their homes. 

Thirdly, witness protection is generally accorded only to state witnesses upon application by the Prosecutor-General, where it is believed that a specific witness is likely to be harmed, harassed or intimidated as a result of giving evidence on behalf of the state. Unfortunately, such protection is often limited to a duration of only 72 hours. 

In terms of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, the Prosecutor-General may apply to court for a state witness to be detained at a correctional facility pending the finalisation of a trial. 

In practice, however, it is not only witnesses who are at risk of harm or intimidation. All participants in judicial proceedings face potential prejudice. 

This includes presiding judicial officers, accused persons and prosecutors as key role players in court and tribunal processes. 

In 2017, Bosnian war criminal Slobodan Praljak poisoned himself with potassium cyanide in a United Nations courtroom in The Hague immediately after sentencing. In June 2024, at the Makadara Law Courts in Nairobi, Kenya, Principal Magistrate Monica Kivuti was shot dead by a police officer after she cancelled bail for the officer’s wife due to her abscondment. 

In Namibia, on 17 October 2025 in Ondangwa, a regional court prosecutor was shot in the legs and doused with a corrosive substance in full view of her children over a failed N$100 000 bail bribe. 

Given these incidents, it is evident that judicial and tribunal proceedings have become increasingly dangerous for participants. It is therefore inevitable that drastic measures must be taken to ensure the full protection of all participants. Society cannot afford to compromise the lives and safety of those involved in court and tribunal processes. 

One way to enhance safety is to conduct thorough risk assessments of witnesses and other vulnerable participants. Where necessary, witnesses should be permitted to give evidence behind closed doors, have their identities protected, or testify via CCTV. 

Authorities are urged to utilise provisions within the Witness Protection Act and the Prevention of Organised Crime Act to ensure that the lives of court and tribunal participants are safeguarded from harm or intimidation arising from their testimonies. 

Consideration should also be given to adopting surveillance mechanisms to monitor the movements of state witnesses and officers of the court, providing bodyguards where necessary, and conducting continuous environmental risk assessments to prevent a recurrence of incidents such as those involving Witness D, accused persons, magistrates and state prosecutors. 

*Lucas Tshuuya is a legal practitioner of the High Court of Namibia. -tshuuya@iway.na