The trial of a Ministry of Home Affairs employee accused of allegedly facilitating the production of an Eswatini identity document for South African businessman Vusimuzi ‘Cat’ Matlala has been postponed after the defence said it had received a substantially amended charge sheet.
Nonhlanhla Phumla Malambe (47) of Mbasheni appeared before Magistrate Xolile Nxumalo at the Mbabane Magistrate’s Court where her trial was expected to commence. However, proceedings failed to take off after her lawyer Sivesonkhe Ngwenya informed the court that they had recently been furnished with an amended charge sheet and were not prepared to proceed.
“We received statements from witnesses; however, we had been served with a completely different charge sheet and that puts us in an ambiguous position to prepare,” said Ngwenya. He added that the defence was humbly requesting another date to allow him time to consult with his client.
Crown Counsel Sibusiso Phakathi submitted that the Crown was ready to proceed with trial yesterday. The matter was subsequently postponed to July 6.
Initially, Malambe faced two counts under the Prevention of Corruption legislation. The first count alleged that on or about February 12, 2024 in the Mbabane area of the Hhohho region, she unlawfully and directly or indirectly gave, or offered to give, Vusimuzi Matlala or another person the advantage of producing and/or issuing a Kingdom of Eswatini birth certificate bearing PIN 7605286100465.
The charge further alleged that the act was carried out while she was performing her duties as an employee of the Ministry of Home Affairs and amounted to an abuse of authority, breach of trust, or violation of legal duties and rules.
The second count alleged that on or about February 12, 2024, she unlawfully facilitated the production and/or issuance of an Eswatini national identity card or identity number linked to PIN 7605286100465 for Matlala’s benefit.
However, according to the amended charge sheet, Malambe now faces four counts of allegedly contravening corruption laws. Count one mirrors the earlier allegation involving the alleged issuance of a birth certificate linked to the PIN number.
Count two alleges that on or about February 12, 2024, while acting in her capacity as Assistant Regional Civil Registrar at the Ministry of Home Affairs, Malambe unlawfully facilitated the registration of a personal identification number (7605286100465) for one purported Vusimuzi Dlamini.
Count three alleges that on or about February 20, 2024, she unlawfully facilitated the processing of a national identity card for the purported Vusimuzi Dlamini.
The fourth count alleges that on the same date she facilitated the registration of a birth certificate for the purported Vusimuzi Dlamini. All four counts allege abuse of authority, breach of trust or violation of legal duties.
Alleged mother denies having child named Vusimuzi
WITNESS statements forming part of the case evidence reportedly raise questions over the identity linked to the documents.
In a statement recorded on July 31, 2025 by Christinah Shongwe, alleged to be registered as the mother of Dlamini, she denied ever having a child by that name.
“I do not know anyone by the name of Vusimuzi Dlamini. I never had any child by that name and I have never registered him as one of my children,” reads part of the statement.
Shongwe alleged that police informed her they were investigating a South African man in possession of an Eswatini national ID and that records reflected she was listed as his mother.
“They said that he appeared as my second-born in the birth order and I told the police that I do not know any person by the name of Vusimuzi Dlamini and I have never had a child with a Dlamini surname,” part of the statement alleges.
The witness further stated that in early 2024 she lost her national identity card at Motshane Clinic and only recovered it about two months later. She said she never reported it missing because she believed she had merely misplaced it at home.
“I mentioned again that I do not know a person named Dlamini. I have never had a child by that name and I have never registered him as one of my children,” another portion of the statement reads.
