The Madlanga Commission Looks Into a Luxury London Trip

What Happened?

The Trip Details

In July 2022, Imogen Mashazi, who was the city manager of Ekurhuleni at the time, flew to London for a three‑day shopping weekend. She went with her husband and two friends on a privately chartered plane.

Who Paid?

The invoice shows that the flight cost about R3.5 million. The money came from businessman Ze Nxumalo through his company, ZIG Revenue Management.

Evidence Presented

Invoice and Payment

Advocate Adila Hassim showed the commission a copy of the invoice. It proves that Nxumalo’s company paid the full amount for the charter flight.

Testimony from Advocate Adila Hassim

Hassim told the commission that businessman Mohammed “Mo” Sayed had sent details of the trip to Maj‑Gen Feroz Khan, the suspended deputy crime intelligence boss. This suggests Khan knew exactly what was being arranged.

Why It Matters

Declaration Rules

Public officials must declare any gifts or benefits they receive. Mashazi did not tell the municipality about the London trip. Hassim said that not disclosing a trip of this size is a serious problem.

Questions About Return Favors

A payment of R3.5 million for a weekend flight is far beyond a normal gift. Hassim argued that such a large sum makes it reasonable to wonder if Nxumalo expected something in return—perhaps influence, protection, or special access to Mashazi in her role as city manager.

Role of Maj‑Gen Feroz Khan

What He Knew

The commission heard that Khan received the travel details from Sayed, indicating he was aware of the trip’s arrangements. His knowledge is now part of the investigation into whether any improper conduct occurred.

Next Steps

Further Evidence

Advocate Matthew Chaskalson SC has joined Hassim to lead more evidence concerning Khan. The commission will continue to examine the relationship between Nxumalo, Mashazi, Khan, and anyone else involved.

What the Commission May Decide

After reviewing all the facts, the Madlanga Commission will decide if any rules were broken, whether any benefits were improperly given, and what actions, if any, should be taken against those responsible.

Conclusion

The London trip raises big questions about transparency and accountability in public office. A multi‑million‑rand flight paid for by a private businessman, not declared by a city manager, and known by a senior intelligence official, all point to the need for careful scrutiny. The commission’s work will help determine whether this was simply a generous gift or something that crossed the line into improper influence. Until then, the case reminds everyone that openness and honesty are essential when public money—or private gifts—are involved.