An Eastern Cape police officer who beat up, shot at and attempted to run over his wife in a car was on Wednesday given two options — serve out a three-year jail sentence or pay a R3,000 fine for his crimes.
The leniency of this punishment is a stark reminder of the systemic failures in addressing gender-based violence in SA.
It is highly likely that Const Mmusi Joseph Matsoso opted for the R3,000 fine, which is less than half of his monthly salary, thus avoiding jail time. But then again, had he opted to serve his time, the sentence is so lenient he could have been out in a year or so, thanks to potential parole for good behaviour.
According to the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (Ipid), the police watchdog, the incident happened in June 2016. For reasons which remain unclear, it was only finalised on Wednesday in the Aliwal North magistrate's court — almost eight years later. The prolonged delay in delivering justice is unacceptable and points to severe inefficiencies within the judicial system.
The introduction to the Ipid statement reads: “The Independent Police Investigative Directorate welcomes the sentence imposed on a police officer who was arrested for attempted murder, assault, and discharge of a firearm.”
Yes, they welcomed the sentence. The case was never reported on by TimesLIVE Premium before and therefore only came to light when Ipid — whose duty is to ensure that police adhere to the law and bring them to book should they not — was seemingly patting themselves on the back for the conclusion of this matter.
Initially, we believed the three-year jail sentence or R3,000 fine to be an error, but it was not. Ipid confirmed it to be correct.
TimesLIVE Premium understands that Matsoso, a clear perpetrator of gender-based violence, remains under the employ of SAPS, but sadly, he is one of thousands of criminals in disguise who are officers of the law.
In December 2023, in a parliamentary reply, police minister Bheki Cele confirmed that 5,489 police officers had been arrested since 2019 for various crimes. Of those, 3,981 are still employed by SAPS — despite their arrests. They had faced charges ranging from murder, attempted murder, rape, kidnapping, burglary — you name it. At the time, SAPS said only 430 convictions had been secured.
While the court's decision was being finalised in Matsoso's case, Cele was in Soshanguve, outside Pretoria where the ANC Youth League and community had marched to the police station to demand that competent, non-corrupt police be deployed to restore order in the crime-ridden community.
Accepting the memorandum, Cele ironically touched on the matter of gender-based violence, saying: “One thing we always raise or tell the police is when a woman is abused and comes to the police station, you drop everything and you attend to that woman. You don't tell women to go back and negotiate. It's not their job to negotiate. Yours is to go and arrest that perpetrator. Therefore it is important that while all communities are protected, there should be extra protection for women, young people and the elderly”.
Cele added his office was “trying to tighten the issue of selection to get authentic people, not people who are dying for a job, but people who are going to be committed. I always say there is no job in the police. Here it's a service. You must come here if you want to serve.”
Well, Mr Cele, for the past eight years you have paid a salary to an officer who is a perpetrator of gender-based violence. He and many others like him continue to work under your employ, going against their oath to serve and protect and at times even thwarting and sabotaging your very mission of service.
How can the public trust a system that allows convicted perpetrators of severe domestic violence to continue serving the same people they offend?
We can only hope that in all these years, Matsoso has never had to deal with GBV cases. How many criminals, who act and do as he does, would have got away with their crimes under his watch?
When it comes to Ipid, it is terribly worrying when a body, which is meant to be a guardian for the public, would welcome a sentence which to the victims of gender-based violence is an outright insult. It is possible that the statement is a terrible “cut and paste” job which was not properly scrutinised before it was issued?
“Outraged, concerned, engaging in talks with justice or Cele's office about the terrible conduct of this officer” is what should have been included in the statement.
This entire incident shows that South Africans, particularly women, are not safe at all, and unfortunately, the people entrusted with looking out for them, their spouses, the police ministry, Ipid and even the justice system, continue to fail them.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.