Suliman Carrim no-show at Madlanga commission: Here’s what happens next
· Citizen
The Madlanga Commission’s chairperson, retired Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, has confirmed that the commission will lay criminal charges against North West businessman Suliman Carrim.
Carrim failed to appear before the commission on Friday, despite the commission’s dismissal of his application to indefinitely delay his testimony on medical grounds.
Visit asg-reflektory.pl for more information.
The ruling was handed down on 29 July 2026.
The commission’s evidence leaders opposed the application, challenging the credibility of Carrim’s claims, arguing that, despite asserting that he is medically incapacitated, Carrim has been leaving his medical facility for extended periods each day, reportedly up to eight hours.
The evidence leaders also asked that Carrim undergo an independent medical examination and that a further postponement be granted only if this condition is met.
Carrim no-show
On Friday, Carrim’s lawyer, Kameel Premhid, appeared on his behalf, and the commission heard that the businessman did not undergo an independent examination.
Evidence leader Advocate Adila Hassim said Carrim did not undergo the examination despite the commission’s best efforts to communicate with him.
“Immediately following the ruling, the evidence leaders took steps to obtain the names of suitable independent specialists who could attend to the task.
“We provided the name of such a specialist to Mr Carrim’s representatives the day after the ruling, that’s 30 July. On 31 July we received a response from Mr Carrim’s attorneys saying that they had forwarded that information to the family and to the treating doctor,” explained Hassim.
“So we heard nothing further from Mr Carrim’s attorneys. And so we wrote again on 3 August, the deadline, requesting a response by 10am on 4 August, specifically asking whether Mr Carrim has consented to an independent medical evaluation, because we were concerned about putting things in motion and putting people out unnecessarily.
“No response was received on 4 August. We approached the [Professionals Association] president, who nominated a specialist. We thank the president of that association for responding to the commission’s requests urgently and providing everything required, and we regret any inconvenience caused.
“The president provided us with the details of the independent specialist. This was communicated to Mr Carrim’s attorneys on 6 August. It was only on 12 August that the evidence leaders received the treating doctors’ report, which Mr Premhid has now referred to the commission.”
Doctor’s report
The report provided a detailed explanation of what is said to have occurred following the ruling on 29 July. However, this information was not provided to the evidence leaders when they attempted to contact his family following the ruling, said Hassim.
“The report essentially is an opinion by the same treating doctor as to why Mr Carrim could not consent to an independent medical evaluation, and it provides further material clinical information regarding his condition.
“Notably, it says nothing about the outings that we referred to in the postponement application, the daily outings by Mr Carrim.
“The difficulty we have also with the report is that it’s a lengthy report that’s furnished two days before the hearing, without any opportunity for the evidence leaders to obtain a considered expert opinion upon, an expert opinion of the contents of the report.
“The report is expressly marked, strictly private and confidential, medical privilege invoked, not for dissemination, and that it is furnished strictly and only for the consideration of the chairperson, commissioners, and the evidence leaders. That places us in a difficult position, because it’s prepared at a level of clinical detail, and it says so.
“At this time, the doctor says the last reports were for a layperson. This report, he says, is prepared at the level of clinical detail that’s appropriate for consideration by a medical professional, but the restriction that’s imposed upon its dissemination makes it impossible for us to obtain, for our own purposes, any independent assessment from an expert of that report.”
The commission resolved to lay criminal charges against Carrim, saying they will make findings based on the evidence he gave in March. He will no longer be required to appear before the commission.