“‘I’ll Be Killed’: Tenderpreneur ‘Cat’ Matlala Refuses Cape Town Trip Despite Police Guard

Prominent businesswoman and alleged tenderpreneur, ‘Cat’ Matlala, has declined an offer of police-escorted travel to Parliament, citing serious concerns for her personal safety. Her decision comes amid ongoing parliamentary hearings into state contracts and allegations of large-scale corruption involving politically connected business figures.

According to sources close to Matlala, she was offered police protection to attend the National Assembly but rejected the arrangement, believing the proposed security measures were inadequate. “She fears potential attacks or harassment, even with a police escort,” a source revealed, adding that Matlala remains deeply concerned about threats linked to her involvement in sensitive procurement investigations.

The refusal has sparked debate over the adequacy of state-provided protection for individuals summoned to testify in politically charged inquiries. Legal experts argue that while law enforcement can offer protection, witnesses cannot be compelled to accept if they believe their safety remains at risk. “Ms. Matlala’s decision falls within her legal rights,” explained Advocate Thabo Dlamini, a Johannesburg-based lawyer. “Authorities can ensure security measures, but participation must remain voluntary.”

Members of Parliament have expressed concern that such refusals could delay progress in key corruption probes, especially when witnesses or implicated parties hesitate to appear before committees. Civil society organizations have echoed these worries, calling for stronger safeguards for witnesses, whistleblowers, and business figures linked to controversial government contracts.

“Safety must be guaranteed for anyone participating in parliamentary or legal proceedings,” said a Corruption Watch spokesperson. “Without credible protection mechanisms, transparency and accountability suffer.”

Matlala, who has been repeatedly linked in media reports to lucrative government tenders, has not commented publicly on her stance. Her legal team maintains that her refusal to travel stems purely from safety concerns, not an attempt to evade questioning.

As Parliament awaits her appearance, the situation underscores South Africa’s ongoing struggle to balance accountability with personal security in politically sensitive investigations.