Police Commissioner Welcomes the Dismissal of Brigadier Rachel Matjeng

The South African Police Service (SAPS) has dismissed Brigadier Rachel Matjeng with effect from 30 June 2026, following an internal disciplinary process that found her guilty of multiple counts of serious misconduct. The charges, which include accepting gratification, money laundering, improper conduct, providing a list of SAPS members for financial benefit, and dishonesty, stem from her relationship with businessman Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala. This high-profile dismissal underscores the SAPS's commitment to combating corruption within its ranks and highlights the stringent disciplinary framework governing public sector employees in South Africa, particularly those entrusted with upholding law and order. The case serves as a critical reminder of the legal and ethical obligations placed upon senior public officials.

The South African Police Service (SAPS) recently announced the dismissal of Brigadier Rachel Matjeng, a senior official, effective 30 June 2026. This significant development, welcomed by Acting National Commissioner Lieutenant General Puleng Dimpane, follows the conclusion of an internal disciplinary process that found Matjeng guilty of serious misconduct. The charges against her, including accepting gratification, money laundering, and conduct prejudicial to the administration of the SAPS, are linked to her relationship with alleged underworld figure Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala. This dismissal sends a clear message regarding the SAPS's stance on corruption and criminality within its ranks, reaffirming its commitment to integrity and public trust.

This article will delve into the legal framework underpinning such dismissals within the South African public sector, specifically focusing on the South African Police Service. It will examine the statutory provisions and disciplinary regulations that govern the conduct of police officials, the requirements for fair dismissal, and the broader implications of this case for accountability and ethical governance in state institutions. For legal practitioners, understanding these mechanisms is crucial for advising clients involved in public sector employment disputes or those navigating the complexities of disciplinary actions against state employees.

Employment within the South African Police Service, like other public service entities, is governed by a multi-layered legal framework designed to ensure accountability, fairness, and adherence to constitutional principles. Central to this framework are the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, which guarantees the right to fair labour practices, and the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA), which provides the overarching statutory basis for employment relations, including fair dismissal. The LRA stipulates that a dismissal must be both substantively and procedurally fair, with recognised grounds for dismissal including misconduct, incapacity, or operational requirements.

More specifically for police officials, the South African Police Service Act 68 of 1995 (SAPS Act) empowers the institution to establish regulations for the discipline of its members. These are concretised in the SAPS Discipline Regulations, which outline the types of misconduct and the procedures to be followed in disciplinary hearings. These regulations apply to all employees within the SAPS, excluding the National and Provincial Commissioners, and provide a distinct framework for managing employees according to the values and standards of the Service. Serious misconduct, as defined in these regulations, can lead to dismissal, necessitating a formal disciplinary enquiry. The Public Service Act 103 of 1994 also plays a role in the broader public service context, although the SAPS Act and its regulations are primary for police members.

Brigadier Matjeng's dismissal was the culmination of an internal disciplinary process that found her guilty on multiple counts of serious misconduct. The specific charges included accepting gratification, money laundering, improperly advising Matlala against the interests of the SAPS, providing him with a list of SAPS members for financial benefit, and dishonesty. These findings directly relate to the types of serious misconduct outlined in the SAPS Discipline Regulations, which include acts that detrimentally affect the image of the Service, bring it into disrepute, or involve dishonesty.

The procedural fairness of such a dismissal is paramount under South African labour law. The LRA requires that an employee be given an opportunity to be heard in a disciplinary enquiry, and that the dismissal be for a fair reason (substantive fairness). In Matjeng's case, the dismissal followed an internal disciplinary hearing, suggesting that the SAPS adhered to these procedural requirements. Her testimony before the Madlanga Commission, where she admitted to a romantic relationship with Matlala but denied corrupt dealings, likely formed part of the evidence considered during the internal process.

The gravity of the misconduct, particularly involving corruption and a breach of public trust, typically justifies dismissal as a substantively fair sanction. The Acting National Commissioner's statement that the outcome sends a clear message against corruption and collusion with criminals reinforces the substantive fairness argument, aligning the dismissal with the SAPS's mandate to uphold the law and maintain public confidence. While Matjeng's internal dismissal is separate from ongoing criminal proceedings where she faces charges of fraud, corruption, money laundering, and contravening the Public Finance Management Act, the disciplinary findings effectively end her policing career.

This case can be contrasted with instances of 'deemed dismissals' under the Public Service Act or SAPS Act, where an employee's employment is terminated by operation of law, for example, due to prolonged unauthorised absence or conviction of a crime leading to direct imprisonment. However, Matjeng's dismissal was the result of an active disciplinary process for specific acts of misconduct, rather than an automatic operation of law. The Labour Appeal Court has previously dealt with challenges to SAPS dismissals, emphasising that the LRA mechanisms should be used to challenge breaches for LRA remedies, and that the Labour Court's jurisdiction is assessed on the pleaded cause of action. Any potential appeal by Brigadier Matjeng would likely focus on the procedural fairness of the internal hearing or the substantive justification for dismissal, within the framework of the LRA and SAPS regulations.

The dismissal of Brigadier Rachel Matjeng serves as a stark reminder of the rigorous standards of conduct expected from members of the South African Police Service and, by extension, all public officials. It reinforces the principle that serious misconduct, particularly involving corruption and dishonesty, will not be tolerated and will lead to the termination of employment, irrespective of rank. The SAPS's decisive action in this matter underscores its commitment to upholding its Code of Conduct and the broader constitutional imperative of professional ethics in public administration.

For legal practitioners, this case highlights the critical importance of understanding the interplay between the Labour Relations Act, the South African Police Service Act, and the specific disciplinary regulations governing public sector employment. Advising clients in similar situations requires a thorough grasp of both substantive and procedural fairness requirements, as well as the avenues for internal appeals and external dispute resolution through bodies like the CCMA or Labour Court. The ongoing scrutiny of public officials and the emphasis on good governance mean that adherence to ethical standards and legal processes in disciplinary matters remains paramount.