Former police marksman Matipandile Sotheni will remain behind bars after the Brakpan Magistrate’s Court on Monday refused his application for bail in the murder case of state witness Marius van der Merwe.
Sotheni, who previously served in the South African Police Service’s Special Task Force before moving into the private security sector, is accused of playing a role in Van der Merwe’s fatal shooting outside his home in December 2025.
In handing down judgment, the court ruled that granting bail would not serve the interests of justice, citing the strength of the prosecution’s case, concerns over possible witness intimidation, and the risk that the accused could evade prosecution.
He is facing a string of charges, including murder, conspiracy to commit murder, attempted murder, and various firearm-related offences arising from the killing.
Van der Merwe was ambushed and shot dead in the driveway of his Brakpan residence on December 5, 2025, while his wife and two young children witnessed the attack.
Magistrate Tlakale Sathekge said Sotheni had not succeeded in proving the exceptional circumstances required for release on bail in a Schedule 6 matter.
The court found there was a reasonable possibility that Sotheni could interfere with witnesses, tamper with evidence, or otherwise prejudice the administration of justice if released.
According to the state, Van der Merwe was an important witness in a separate murder probe and had also appeared before the Madanga Commission of Inquiry into alleged political interference in the criminal justice system under the pseudonym “Witness D”.
Evidence presented in court revealed that Van der Merwe had complained of being followed by a black Suzuki Swift in the days leading up to his death.
Investigators allegedly connected the vehicle to Sotheni through his girlfriend, who is listed as the registered owner.
The prosecution further claimed that tracking records placed the vehicle in the vicinity of Van der Merwe’s home on several occasions before the fatal shooting.
Although Sotheni acknowledged being in Brakpan during the relevant period, he maintained that his visits were unrelated to Van der Merwe and were instead connected to meetings with the late Wiandre Pretorius, who had also been implicated by the slain witness.
However, the magistrate found that Sotheni’s version was riddled with inconsistencies and noted that aspects of his explanation shifted during the course of the bail hearing.
The court also took into account allegations that an AK-47 rifle allegedly linked through ballistic evidence to the murder was discovered in a vehicle owned by Sotheni’s employer and assigned to him.
Defence attorney Nthabiseng Mohumane argued that the prosecution’s case relied heavily on circumstantial evidence and lacked direct proof identifying Sotheni as the gunman.
The court, however, held that circumstantial evidence could be highly persuasive when viewed as a whole.
Sathekge concluded that the state had established a prima facie case connecting Sotheni to the offences.
The magistrate further expressed concern about the safety of witnesses, pointing out that Van der Merwe was killed shortly after testifying before the commission despite measures taken to shield his identity.
Since his arrest in March, Sotheni has remained in custody and told the court he has a permanent residence, strong family connections in South Africa, and several financial obligations, including supporting his children and extended family members.
The court was not persuaded by these submissions, finding that some aspects of his personal circumstances had not been fully disclosed at the outset and that certain claims regarding financial dependants were not backed by evidence.
The case was postponed to July 30 for further investigation, with Sotheni remaining in custody pending his next court appearance.
