The Phones Were Handed Over. Police Say They Were the Wrong Ones

In October 2025, Lieutenant-General Shadrack Sibiya stood outside his Centurion home after police had searched it and told reporters he had given officers what they came for: three cellphones. A month later, suspended Police Minister Senzo Mchunu put out a letter saying he had handed over "all my electronic devices" to the South African Police Service (SAPS).

The police officer leading the case against both men now says, under oath, that he has reason to believe those were not the right phones.

In an affidavit filed to obtain a second search-and-seizure warrant, Brigadier Kunene of the KwaZulu-Natal Serious and Violent Crime Investigation Unit says there are "reasonable grounds" to believe Mchunu and Sibiya surrendered replacement devices rather than the handsets they used during the period under investigation. The claim was first reported by News24 on Thursday.

Mchunu rejects it. In court papers, he calls the allegations untrue, says he complied with every warrant in good faith and denies ever trying to deceive the police. No court has tested either version.

What the affidavit alleges

According to reports of Kunene's affidavit, records from cellphone network providers showed the men's numbers being moved onto different handsets shortly before the 2025 warrants were carried out.

The affidavit also says that neither man was at home when police arrived for the first searches. Investigators contacted them and asked them to hand over their devices. Some of the phones that were surrendered, Kunene says, showed signs of having been switched on for the first time only recently, and of having been reset to factory settings.

That matters because of how a phone is identified. Every handset carries a unique serial number, its IMEI. A SIM card, and the number attached to it, can be moved from one handset to another in minutes. If investigators are right, the numbers police wanted were handed over, but the phones that held the messages, call logs and photographs may not have been.

Mchunu's own account of what he gave up in November 2025 included his everyday cellphone, a tablet, a state laptop and two unused phones that News24 reported were "lying in a cupboard". At the time his spokesperson, Sthembiso Mshengu, described the handover differently: "These were gadgets the minister used daily."

Six devices wanted, one phone seized

The second warrant was granted by the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Johannesburg on 21 September 2026 under the Cybercrimes Act, and executed the same day at Mchunu's family home in KwaZulu-Natal. Sibiya's house was searched that morning too, and devices belonging to Mchunu's chief of staff, Cedric Nkabinde, were also targeted.

This time police did not ask for "electronic devices" in general. The warrant listed at least six specific phones and an iPad, each identified by telephone number, IMEI number and the period investigators believe it was in use. One of the numbers is linked to Mchunu's Vodacom contact details, and to more than one IMEI.

Police left with one cellphone, which Mchunu handed over in the presence of his lawyer.

The warrant covers properties in Bryntirion Estate, Panorama, Empangeni, the Brakfontein area of AbaQulusi and Ngwelezana, and allowed officers to search Mchunu himself. It does not allow anyone to read what is on the devices. Under its terms, police may confirm only make, model and IMEI number; reading messages or other content will need a further court order.

Mchunu goes to court

Mchunu has asked the High Court in Johannesburg to set aside the September warrant, arguing that it was obtained through misleading information and that the supporting affidavit does not set out facts showing a reasonable suspicion that a crime was committed. He also wants an order that police give him notice before any future search.

Kunene opposes that. He argues that the history of this investigation shows that warning the targets in advance would defeat the purpose of finding the devices that are still outstanding.

Mchunu's camp has its own complaint: Mshengu says the devices taken in 2025 have never been returned.

Why the phones matter

The investigation flows from cases of defeating the ends of justice and fraud opened at Durban Central police station in 2025. The offences listed in the warrant include obstructing the course of justice, conspiracy, fraud, corruption and a possible breach of the law that protects Parliament's proceedings. Others named in the investigation include Sibiya, Nkabinde, alleged political fixer Brown Mogotsi and businessman Vusimuzi "Cat" Matlala.

It began with KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, who alleged in July 2025 that Mchunu and Sibiya had interfered in policing: disbanding the Political Killings Task Team and moving 121 KwaZulu-Natal political murder dockets to Sibiya's office in Pretoria. Mkhwanazi also pointed to WhatsApp messages he said linked Mchunu to Matlala and Mogotsi. Mchunu has denied wrongdoing throughout. Sibiya told Parliament he moved the dockets lawfully on the minister's instruction.

In other words, much of this case was always going to come down to messages. That is why the question of which handsets police hold is not a technicality.

President Cyril Ramaphosa placed Mchunu on special leave in July 2025 and set up the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry into criminality and political interference in the justice system. Mchunu is still on paid leave. Reports this week put the cost to taxpayers of his leave, including an acting minister's pay and legal fees, at R8.89 million.

Sibiya resigned from SAPS in October 2026. He separately faces unrelated sexual offence charges in the Randburg Magistrate's Court. Sibiya's response to the replacement-device allegation could not be found at the time of writing.

The question no one has answered

The commission has heard from Matlala this week. Its hearings are meant to be close to their end. The criminal case against the men it has spent more than a year examining still turns on a basic question that no court has yet settled.

Police asked for six devices in September and left with one. If the affidavit is right, the phones that matter are still out there. If Mchunu is right, police have had them all along. Only one of those can be true.