Supermarket Owner's Call to Hawks Triggers Corruption Case Against Five Police Sergeants

The owner of Oreo Supermarket in Vanderbijlpark did not pay. Instead, when five police officers allegedly demanded 100,000 rand to make a problem disappear, the owner picked up the phone and called the Hawks.

That decision set in motion a months-long investigation that ended this week with five sergeants from the Vanderbijlpark SAPS Task Team appearing in the Vanderbijlpark Regional Court to face charges of corruption and extortion. The case has been postponed to 13 July while investigators continue their work.

The five accused officers are Johannes Thakhski, 45; Ntombeko Seya, 44; Mpho Molatedi, 39; Nhlanhla Sithole, 42; and Tlokotsi Kganya, 36.

According to police statements, the alleged shakedown began in 2024 when the five officers raided Oreo Supermarket under the stated purpose of searching for illicit cigarettes. Once inside, they allegedly demanded 100,000 rand from the business owner to avoid arrest. After negotiations involving a third party, that figure was reduced to 25,000 rand. The owner refused to pay and reported the incident to the Hawks’ Vaal Serious Corruption Investigation unit.

The investigation moved quickly. Authorities authorized an undercover sting operation to catch the officers collecting the reduced payment. The operation did not proceed as planned on the scheduled day due to operational delays, but investigators pressed on.

As the case deepened, the picture grew darker. Additional allegations emerged that the complainant had faced threats and intimidation following the initial extortion attempt. Those new claims were documented and added to the growing body of evidence against the five officers.

By the time the Hawks completed their investigation, the docket was forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions for review. The DPP approved criminal prosecution, and summonses were served on all five accused members on 18 June 2026, compelling their appearance in court this week.

For the business owner at the centre of this case, the road from that 2024 raid to a courtroom appearance has been long and, by the account of investigators, not without personal risk. The threats and intimidation documented in the case file suggest the cost of coming forward was not only financial.

The postponement to 13 July signals that prosecutors and investigators need more time to prepare for trial. Whether the full weight of what was allegedly demanded inside that supermarket two years ago will be answered in court remains the open question.