Heated exchange at Madlanga Commission over Carrim postponement request
A heated exchange erupted at the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry on Tuesday after lawyers for North West businessman Suliman Carrim accused the commission’s chairperson of appearing to have already made up his mind about their request for more time.
Tensions flared between Commission Chairperson Mbuyiseni Madlanga and Carrim’s legal team during arguments over a postponement application linked to new documents that emerged shortly before the day’s proceedings.
Carrim’s counsel, Rafik Bhana, told the commission his team needed more time to study documents they believe are central to the line of questioning expected during Carrim’s testimony.
Bhana said the legal team had received additional material late the previous evening and again early on Tuesday morning, leaving them with little opportunity to properly consult their client.
He criticised what he described as the commission’s continued “drip-feeding” of documents to Carrim’s legal team.
Bhana told the commission that witnesses should not be expected to deal with complex financial information without adequate time to review it and take instructions.
“This is highly prejudicial to us,” Bhana said, adding that the legal team intended to bring a formal postponement application.
The commission’s evidence leader, Matthew Chaskalson, opposed the request.
Chaskalson confirmed that a spreadsheet handed to Carrim’s legal team had been compiled between 5 am and 6 am on Tuesday morning.
However, he argued that the information did not justify a lengthy delay in proceedings.
Instead, he proposed that the commission stand down briefly to allow Carrim and his lawyers to consult before questioning resumed.
According to Chaskalson, the issue arose because Carrim allegedly failed to disclose payments totalling more than R2 million made by one of his companies to Medicare24 Tshwane District.
“The witness was specifically asked to furnish a statement on the nature and extent of his relationship with Medicare24 Tshwane District,” Chaskalson told the commission.
He said the payments, amounting to about R2.12 million, should have been included in Carrim’s statement to the inquiry.
Chaskalson argued that Carrim’s legal team did not require several days to respond to questions about the payments and said a short consultation break would be sufficient.
The dispute escalated when Bhana suggested that Justice Madlanga appeared to have already decided not to allow a postponement application.
Madlanga immediately pushed back against the claim.
“I take strong exception to that,” the chairperson said, rejecting Bhana’s conditional apology for the remark.
The tense exchange underscored growing friction during Carrim’s appearance before the commission as it probes financial transactions linked to his business dealings.
Carrim’s legal team has argued that some of the transactions being raised relate to companies that were not specifically mentioned in the notice requiring him to provide a statement to the commission.
However, Madlanga indicated that witnesses appearing before the inquiry are expected to assist the commission in uncovering all relevant facts, even where the issues extend beyond the strict wording of the notice.
“We are a commission of inquiry which is fact-finding,” Madlanga said during the exchange.
“When witnesses are asked to address issues, the expectation is that they will assist the commission by disclosing information that may be relevant.”
The commission later adjourned briefly as the panel considered how to proceed.
ALSO READ:
