Shadrack Sibiya’s lengthy bail application took another dramatic turn when the presiding magistrate criticised an example used by his lawyer while challenging the human-trafficking charge against the former senior police officer.
Advocate Estelle Killian SC was presenting closing arguments in the Randburg Magistrate’s Court when she compared the State’s case to accusing someone of armed robbery after they allegedly stole a chocolate from Woolworths.
Magistrate Hleziphi Mkhabise interrupted the argument and described the comparison as a “bad example”, asking Killian to focus on the submissions previously placed before the court.
The tense exchange came as Sibiya’s legal team attempted to convince the court that the evidence presented by the prosecution did not establish the legal elements required for a human-trafficking charge.
Defence challenges human-trafficking charge
Killian argued that the State’s allegations might relate to a separate sexual-offence charge but did not automatically amount to human trafficking.
According to the defence, this was not simply a case of the prosecution having weak evidence. Killian maintained that the facts presented in court did not meet the legal definition of human trafficking at all.
Her Woolworths comparison was intended to illustrate the difference between evidence supporting one offence and prosecutors applying a more serious charge that allegedly contains different legal elements.
Mkhabise was not persuaded by the example and instead asked the defence to address whether the alleged weakness of the State’s evidence could change the schedule under which the bail application was being considered.
Killian acknowledged that a weak case would not automatically change the applicable schedule. However, she argued that the strength of the evidence should still be considered when the court determines whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify Sibiya’s release.
Sibiya offers R20,000 bail
Sibiya has offered to pay R20,000 bail and surrender his passport. His lawyers also proposed strict conditions preventing him from contacting the complainants, their families or any witnesses connected to the case.
The defence insists that Sibiya is neither a flight risk nor a danger to witnesses. It has also argued that his continued detention is affecting his health, finances and ability to prepare properly for the criminal proceedings.
The State is opposing bail, citing the seriousness of the allegations and concerns about possible witness interference.
Prosecutors have accused members of Sibiya’s legal team of attempting to obtain a statement from a witness. The defence has denied interfering with the complainants or trying to undermine the investigation.
Complainants tell court they are afraid
The bail hearing also heard affidavits from the two young complainants, who expressed fear about what could happen if Sibiya were released.
An 18-year-old woman who has accused Sibiya of rape told the court that she was living in constant fear and experiencing suicidal thoughts. The State alleges that she was raped at a Sandton hotel in May 2026 after becoming intoxicated. Sibiya denies rape and maintains that the sexual encounter was consensual.
A second complainant, who was 16 at the time of the alleged conduct, said she feared for herself and her family. The State alleges that Sibiya sexually groomed the teenager through WhatsApp messages between July and August 2026.
Killian argued that the complainants’ fear and emotional distress, although serious, could not alone decide whether Sibiya should receive bail. She said the court still had to consider the evidence, enforceable bail conditions and Sibiya’s constitutional right to personal liberty.
Her submission that reported suicidal thoughts were not, by themselves, “exceptional” attracted attention outside the courtroom. However, the defence’s position was framed as a legal argument about the requirements for refusing bail—not a finding on the complainants’ experiences.
Former top cop faces multiple legal battles
Sibiya faces charges including rape, human trafficking, promoting the sexual grooming of a child, sexual-grooming-related offences and negligent handling of a firearm. He has denied wrongdoing, and the allegations have not yet been tested at trial.
The former deputy national police commissioner resigned from the South African Police Service shortly before the latest bail arguments. SAPS described his departure as a dishonourable discharge because disciplinary proceedings were still pending when he resigned.
His criminal case is separate from allegations raised during the Madlanga Commission’s investigation into corruption and possible criminal influence within law-enforcement structures. Sibiya has also denied the allegations made against him in that process.
After weeks of evidence, cross-examination and legal arguments, the court postponed its bail judgment to Tuesday. Mkhabise said she needed sufficient time to study the extensive documents and submissions before deciding whether Sibiya should remain in custody.
