Malesela Teffo brought an application before the Johannesburg High Court in the public interest in support of 'Cat' Matlala and he is co-accused.
Former advocate Malesela Teffo has been laughed out of court by the accused he had initially aimed to assist.
Teffo brought an application before the Johannesburg High Court under the banner of the Malesela Teffo Pro Bono Foundation – an organisation he said was founded to support indigent litigants.
The foundation’s application was made on the grounds of public interest, with Teffo seeking to have the case dismissed.
“This application has been informed by the serious allegations that I harbour against the state, insofar as the accused in this matter were concerned.
“Not any specific accused, but accused one up to five, whereby, in the heart of my hearts there has been gross violation of their constitutional rights of all the accused in this matter,” Teffo said.
Yoh pic.twitter.com/q6FBuWW3U6
— Tina (@Tina_Hokwana)
August 31, 2026
Teffo’s approach to be granted an audience with the court caused over an hour delay of Monday’s resumption of the attempted murder trial of Vusimuzi ‘Cat’ Matlala and his co-accused.
During discussions in the chambers before the proceedings began, Teffo was challenged on his right to be granted the audience he requested.
Teffo produced documents proving the establishment of the foundation as a legal entity, before being questioned on his disbarring.
After deflecting and obfuscating Judge Cassim Moosa’s questions, Teffo reluctantly admitted that the High Court ordered his disbarring on 16 September 2022.
“What I humbly request in this honourable court, your worship, is the context, because it doesn’t say struck off the roll. Struck off the roll has its own processes.
“There it says removed. There is a context, and I agree, my name has been removed,” said Teffo.
Moosa became audibly impatient with Teffo, demanding a simple response to his questions.
“Have you, as at today, the 31st day of August 2026, been reinstated onto the roll of advocates?” asked Moosa.
“Good question, your lordship,” said Teffo, before declaring in the same breath that he was a member of the Legal Practice Council (LPC) in good standing but owed fees dating back to 2024.
“Just give me the date when you were readmitted by the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng division, onto the roll of advocates,” asked Mossa, to which Teffo responded with a date in 2009.
At this point, the five accused became impatient with Teffo, and instructed their legal representatives to urge the court to proceed with the day’s intended business.
Advocate Anneline van den Heever and her colleagues argued that court time was being wasted as the forthcoming witness was only available for a short period of time.
Van den Heever directed the court to a statement previous issued by the LPC on Teffo’s status as an advocate.
“The LPC wishes to categorically state that these reports are incorrect. Mr Teffo remains struck from the roll of legal practitioners and has not been readmitted to the legal profession. He is therefore not entitled to practise as a legal practitioner in South Africa
“The LPC confirms that no such matter, relating to Mr Malesela Teffo’s possible readmission, has been considered or approved by the Council, and accordingly, no decision has been taken supporting Mr Teffo’s readmission to the legal profession,” the LPC stated in July.
While Teffo protested what he had earlier called a “fraudulent order”, the judge stood down his application until he was able to produce documents proving he had been readmitted as an advocate.
The business of the court proceeded with the questioning of a doctor over her medical treatment of accused Musa Kekana at Edenvale hospital following his arrest.
An application had been granted earlier in the day to protect her identity, with the court hearing it was her first time in court and that she was nervous.
The doctor confirmed she had attended to the 35-year-old accused, who had complained of coughing up blood since allegedly being strangled while in police custody.
She stated that a primary trauma survey found him to be responsive and mobile, but found the patient to have expiratory wheezing and a bilateral crackle – a sound picked up with a stethoscope that points to possible inflammation of the chest.
An X-ray and the doctor’s preliminary diagnosis pointed to a lower respiratory tract infection, consistent with pulmonary tuberculosis.
Kekana’s defence Advocate Riaan Gissing asked the doctor what led her to make these conclusions.
“Based on the evidence that was available to me, my number one differential at the time was an infective process.
“An alleged assault was not ruled out, but my role at the time was not to say whether the patient was assaulted or not,” she stated.
