High Court order restricts publication of claims linking Madibela to criminal activity
The Gauteng Division of the High Court in Johannesburg has granted Solomon Soka Madibela an urgent interim order restricting the publication and dissemination of statements allegedly linking him to criminal activity.
The order, dated 8 October 2026 and issued by Judge Strydom J, is directed against podcast host MacGyver “MacG” Mukwevho and Benjamin Buti Maponya, who is identified in the court papers as the operator of the X account @RevoGangSta777.
The order follows an urgent application brought by Madibela in which he sought to stop what his legal representatives describe as defamatory statements concerning him and/or his company.
What the court ordered
The court granted Madibela leave to have the application heard on an urgent basis and ordered that the matter proceed ex parte at the initial stage.
The order specifically seeks to restrain the first and second respondents, as well as anyone acting on their instructions or under their control, from publishing, broadcasting, streaming, airing, uploading or otherwise disseminating statements concerning Madibela that allege or suggest that he is involved in, or suspected of, criminal activity.
The court order states that the restriction applies to the podcast known as Podcast and Chill Networks and “any other platform”.
The order further directs the second respondent, within two hours of being served with the order, to remove and delete from the X account @RevoGangSta777 the allegedly defamatory posts concerning Madibela and/or his company.
The court also interdicted and restrained the second respondent from publishing, posting, reposting or otherwise disseminating the statements on X or any other social media or electronic platform.
Interim order remains in place pending the return date
Importantly, the order operates as an interim interdict with immediate effect pending the return date.
The court papers state that the respondents are to show cause why a final order should not be granted.
The order records the return date as 22 October 2026 at 10:00, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. The respondents may anticipate the return date on 24 hours’ notice to Madibela in terms of Rule 6(8).
The applicant was also granted leave to supplement his papers before Tuesday, 13 October 2026.
Court cites urgency
The order records that the court dispensed with the ordinary forms, service and time periods provided for under the Uniform Rules of Court, treating the application as one of extreme urgency in terms of Rule 6(12)(a).
It further states that leave was granted for the application to be heard ex parte in terms of Rule 6(4)(a).
The court directed that the notice of motion and founding papers be served on the respondents forthwith by the sheriff, with additional service permitted by email, WhatsApp and/or direct message on X to their known addresses.
Dispute centres on alleged defamatory statements
At the centre of the application are statements which Madibela says are defamatory and which, according to the order, allegedly portray him as being involved in or suspected of criminal activity.
The court papers do not, in the order itself, make a finding that Madibela committed any criminal offence.
Rather, the order restrains the publication of the statements pending the respondents’ opportunity to oppose the application and explain why a final interdict should not be granted.
The distinction is significant because an interim interdict is not, by itself, a final determination of the underlying dispute or a finding of liability for defamation.
Who is before the court
The matter is between Solomon Soka Madibela as applicant and MacGyver “MacG” Mukwevho as the first respondent and Benjamin Buti Maponya as the second respondent.
Madibela is represented by attorney L Dube of Dube Lesley Attorneys Inc.
The court order records that the costs of the application are sought against the respondents jointly and severally, on the scale as between attorney and client, including counsel’s costs on Scale C.
However, the order specifically reserves the costs of the 8 October 2026 hearing for determination on the return date.
Next step is the October hearing
The case will now return to the High Court, where the respondents will have an opportunity to oppose the application and show cause why the interim restrictions should not be confirmed as a final order.
Until then, the 8 October order remains an interim court order and restricts the publication and dissemination of the statements identified in the proceedings.
The court papers make clear that the final outcome of the dispute over the alleged defamatory statements has not yet been determined.
