Forensic expert in Machar’s trial faces legal scrutiny in South Africa

JUBA —The South African digital forensic investigator who provided key electronic evidence in the high-profile treason trial of suspended South Sudanese First Vice President Dr Riek Machar is now under intense scrutiny in his home country, amid allegations of improper relationships with criminal figures and potential tampering with forensic data.

Ratlhogo Peter Calvin Rafadi, commonly known as Calvin Rafadi, a Johannesburg-based private investigator and owner of cybersecurity firm Bizz Tracers Pty Ltd, testified as the prosecution’s final forensic witness in the special court in Juba earlier this year.

In late October 2025, electronic devices seized from Machar and seven co-accused were sent to South Africa for data extraction and analysis, in what the defence lawyers described as a serious breach of judicial procedure.

During the 15th session of the ongoing trial, it emerged that the confiscated phones and laptops were transported to an unnamed private company in South Africa, without following official judicial cooperation channels.

In late January and early February 2026, it emerged that this private company is likely Bizz Tracers Pty Ltd after Mr Rafadi presented analysis of data extracted from seized devices—including mobile phones, laptops, and SIM cards—allegedly linking Machar and seven co-accused from the SPLM-IO to arms procurement, militia coordination, and the deadly March 2025 Nasir incident.

Rafadi told the court he examined WhatsApp messages, communications, GPS data, photos, videos, and other records, concluding there was “clear demonstration of arms procurement and logistics, operational intelligence flow, a well-coordinated militia plan, and the sharing of real-time documents with some international role players.”

His testimony might have been pivotal for prosecutors seeking to substantiate charges of murder, treason, and crimes against humanity against the defendants. However, back in South Africa, Rafadi’s credibility has come under fire through the ongoing Madlanga Commission of Inquiry into Criminality, Political Interference, and Corruption in the Criminal Justice System.

The commission, chaired by retired Constitutional Court Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, has heard explosive testimony since late 2025 implicating Rafadi in a “beneficial relationship” with Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala, a businessman accused of involvement in organised crime syndicates, including the so-called “Big Five” drug cartel, and facing attempted murder charges.

Local media reports from South Africa indicate that anonymous witnesses from the disbanded Political Killings Task Team (PKTT), presented WhatsApp exchanges showing Rafadi repeatedly requesting financial assistance from Matlala for expenses such as fuel, rent, car repairs, e-hailing rides, and even contributions toward his PhD studies.

These payments were allegedly tied to Rafadi performing a “media and propaganda function” for Matlala, including public statements or media commentary critical of police units investigating political killings and syndicates potentially linked to Matlala.

More seriously, another witness reportedly testified in October 2025 that during probes into Matlala, iPhones belonging to him and his wife, Tsakani Matlala, proved extremely difficult to extract data from—described as “undownloadable” or resistant to standard forensic tools.

The witness suggested Rafadi, whom Matlala identified as his IT specialist and close contact for tech assistance, may have used his forensic expertise to tamper with the devices, preventing full extraction or altering evidence. Reports noted that extracted data appeared to come from “new devices” rather than the originals, raising chain-of-custody concerns.

Rafadi has vehemently denied all allegations, calling them speculative, unfair, and potentially fabricated by rogue elements within Crime Intelligence to discredit him. He has described his acquaintance with Matlala as stemming from shared business and background ties, and rejected any suggestion of corruption or criminality.

The forensic expert who resigned from the University of Johannesburg insisted that his resignation as a research associate from the country’s higher institution of learning in October 2025 was voluntary—not an admission of guilt—and driven by safety concerns after his name surfaced in the commission.

No formal criminal charges have been publicly confirmed against Rafadi as of early February 2026 in the case last heard on 26 January 2026. The Madlanga Commission has referred various matters for further investigation and prosecution, but specifics on Rafadi remain part of witness testimony rather than concluded findings.

The dual controversies have sparked debate about the reliability of forensic evidence in politically charged cases spanning borders. In Juba, the defence team in the Machar trial has already raised procedural concerns, including chain-of-custody issues with devices. In South Africa, the revelations contribute to broader concerns about syndicate influence infiltrating law enforcement and expert circles.

Rafadi has expressed willingness to testify further before the Madlanga Commission to address the claims publicly. As both inquiries progress—the South Sudanese trial ongoing and the Madlanga Commission hearings continuing—questions linger over the impact on international legal cooperation and the integrity of digital forensic testimony in high-stakes proceedings.