Court grants final interdict against high-ranking police officer accused of sending “death threats”

A HIGH court judge has granted a final restraining order against a high-ranking police officer accused of sending “death threats” to a man and his family after he had laid a complaint against her. 

The man referred to as ‘Mr M’, who was initially a witness in at least two murder cases, together with his wife,  had brought an application in the Johannesburg High Court, calling for Lieutenant-Colonel Fatima Gaffoor to be restrained from “threatening, harassing or intimidating” them. 

In handing down his judgment last week, Judge Stuart David James Wilson, said on March 28, 2025, he issued a rule nisi (provisional court order) calling upon any interested party to show cause as to why he should not grant a final interdict restraining Gaffoor from threatening, harassing or intimidating the couple, and to direct the minister of police, who is one of the respondents in the matter,  to take steps as may be necessary to restrain her. 

Judge Wilson in the order, outlined the reasons for reaching his conclusion. 

He said Mr M was a material witness in at least two murder cases that the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) had declined to prosecute. 

Judge Wilson said in 2014 Mr M, his wife, and their son were enrolled in the witness protection programme to protect them from reprisal from the accused in those cases. 

He said after the NPA declined to pursue the prosecutions further, the family were ejected from the programme in 2017.

Judge Wilson said the couple were not happy with the circumstances under which this took place, and laid complaints about the handling of their case, and the murder dockets underlying them at the Parkview Police Station in 2018. 

He said Gaffoor commenced her duties as head of the detectives section at Parkview Police Station on October 14, 2019. 

Judge Wilson said the docket relating to one of the couple’s complaints, which had been sent to the NPA, was “booked back” to Parkview Police Station on October 31, 2019.

“I was told in evidence that a docket is ‘booked back’ when it is removed from the NPA’s custody, and is no longer actively being considered for further prosecutorial action.”

Judge Wilson said Mr M developed the impression that the “booking back” of the docket was part of an organised effort to frustrate his complaints against the way he had been treated by the police and prosecutorial authorities. 

“The focus of Mr M’s discontent was apparently Lieutenant-Colonel Gaffoor. In late April 2020, he laid a complaint against Lieutenant-Colonel Gaffoor at the Parkview Police Station.” 

Judge Wilson said the first threatening message sent to Mr M, placed before him on the papers, was on May 5, 2020. 

It said: “You think you better than other people. Your cases will make other people lose their job. Withdraw or you get shot. You will be traced. Son of a whore”. 

He said this was followed by two more messages on May 12, 2020.

“The first simply said ‘Tik tok’. The second said ‘bang’. The meaning of these messages is obvious. It is that time is running out for Mr M to withdraw his complaints, and that if he does not there will be a ‘bang’- he will be shot.” 

Judge Wilson said the threatening messages continued regularly, and assumed more elaborate and sometimes macabre forms as they did so. 

He said on June 26, 2020, Mr M received the following message: “I have checked and u still have not withdraw (sic) your stupid cases. Your wife will be shot first and then your child will (be) next before u r killed like a dog. And nothing u can do about it. You are just a dog”. 

“The significance of this message is that it was sent from a number that everyone accepts was registered using an address linked to Lieutenant-Colonel Gaffoor’s identity number.”

The messages continued on the same number and the final one was sent on April 8, 2022. 

Judge Wilson said the messages were tied to Gaffoor in at least five respects. 

He said this included, among others,  that two of the messages were sent from a number linked to her, all of the messages refer to cases lodged by Mr M, and one of the messages refers to its author as “Gaffoor”. 

Judge Wilson said in her evidence, Gaffoor could neither deny that the messages had been sent, nor explain why they appeared to refer to her. 

He said she also could not explain why one of the numbers from which the messages emanated was linked to her. 

“Faced with these probabilities, Lieutenant-Colonel Gaffoor would have to have been an extremely impressive witness to create any hesitancy in confirming the rule. However, her evidence was poor."

Judge Wilson said as to Gaffoor’s regard for her senior position within the police service, it seemed to him that she made the threats with the expectation that she would never be held accountable. 

“In this, she was very nearly right. The facts in this case disclose a worrying atmosphere of impunity around  Lieutenant-Colonel Gaffoor. No-one in the police force appears to have sought either to exonerate her or hold her accountable, despite the very strong evidence against her. 

“I cannot imagine what led the NPA to refuse to prosecute her for breaching the protection order against her, or for sending the intimidating messages, but I see nothing on the papers that explains the decision. In this court, too, the ‘M’s’ case had to be enrolled twice before it was entertained,” he said. 

Judge Wilson said the rule nisi issued was confirmed. 

He said Gaffoor was interdicted and restrained, from harassing, threatening or intimidating the couple in any manner whatsoever, and from carrying out any of the threats made in the messages, whether herself or through the agency of any other person. 

THE POST