Cele faces fresh scrutiny over reported Medicare24 forensic findings

Former police minister Bheki Cele is facing renewed scrutiny after the Sunday Times reported that a police forensic investigation recommended his prosecution over alleged benefits from businessman Vusimusi ‘Cat’ Matlala. Cele denies receiving money from him.

The newspaper’s account raises a question that extends beyond whether the two men knew each other: was private hospitality or money used to seek influence over a public contract? That requires evidence about the purpose of any benefit, the recipient’s conduct and the decisions being sought.

What is alleged, and what Cele disputes

In its report published on 4 October 2026, the Sunday Times describes a 370-page investigation completed in April. It says investigators examined company bank records and alleged cash withdrawals close to meetings with Cele. The People has not obtained that forensic report.

Cele told the newspaper that he received no money and had no influence over the contract’s cancellation after leaving office. He acknowledged staying free of charge at a penthouse associated with Matlala, while disputing that he was obliged to declare the accommodation as a retired person.

Those are different issues. An admitted stay does not prove an alleged cash payment. Equally, leaving office does not answer the factual question of what assistance someone was asked to provide. The evidence must establish the connection, rather than expecting the public to infer it from the relationship alone.

The court challenge is a separate step

The Sunday Times also says the report forms part of Fadiel Adams’s High Court challenge to the withdrawal of charges against General Fannie Masemola. The underlying application has not been obtained by The People.

A request to review a prosecution decision, a forensic recommendation and a criminal conviction serve different purposes. None can be substituted for another. A reported recommendation does not establish that Cele has been charged or that a court has accepted the allegations.

Our earlier article, Matlala’s Medicare24 case pauses for a prosecution review, covers the related criminal proceedings. The fresh issue here is the reported assessment of benefits allegedly involving the former minister.

What accountability should establish

The public needs a clear account of which findings prosecutors have received, what action they have taken and why. Any decision to proceed should be tested against the evidence; any decision not to proceed should be capable of explanation through the appropriate legal processes.

For police procurement, the stakes are practical. A supplier should retain public work because it meets the contract’s requirements. Whether anyone tried to replace that standard with private access and influence is the question this reported investigation now puts before the authorities.