Read more
Moroadi Cholota was extradited to South Africa from the US last August.
Former Free State premier Ace Magashule and former PA Moroadi Cholota at Bloemfontein High Court on 23 April 2025. Picture: Gallo Images/Mlungisi Louw
A Hawks investigator faced tough questioning from former Free State premier Ace Magashule’s lawyer regarding the extradition of his former personal assistant, Moroadi Cholota.
The trial-within-a-trial resumed at the Free State High Court in Bloemfontein on Wednesday, following delays caused by the ill health of state witness Benjamin Calitz.
Calitz, the investigating officer in the R255 million asbestos corruption case, has been testifying in the trial-within-a-trial.
The hearing follows Judge Phillip Loubser’s decision to allow Cholota to challenge both the court’s jurisdiction to prosecute her and the legality of her extradition from the United States (US).
Cholota stands accused of facilitating illicit financial transactions on behalf of Magashule.
Court rules defence can cross-examine witness
After Calitz delivered his evidence-in-chief and was cross-examined last week by Cholota’s legal representative, proceedings resumed with arguments from Advocate Laurence Hodes.
Hodes represents Magashule and controversial businessman Edwin Sodi and sought permission to cross-examine Calitz.
He argued that the state attempted to manipulate Cholota – originally a state witness – into implicating Magashule by extraditing her.
ALSO READ: Free State asbestos trial: Investigating officer denies misleading US over Cholota’s extradition
His request for cross-examination was based on a transcript of an interview conducted between Calitz and Cholota in the US in September 2021.
Loubser ruled that Hodes could proceed with the cross-examination of Calitz but imposed strict limitations.
“The court will not allow any question to the present witness which will have a bearing on the merits against accused 13 [Magashule].”
Cop grilled over Moroadi Cholota interview
During the cross-examination, Hodes challenged Calitz over whether Cholota had been informed in advance of his trip to the US to interview her.
“Instead, you remained silent and arrived without any prior notification to her,” Hodes said – an assertion Calitz did not dispute.
“You went all the way to America; everything was sorted out, but not once did you bother to say, ‘Let’s make sure she’s there. What if she went on holiday, or what if she is not available?”
Calitz responded by clarifying that it had not been his responsibility to handle communication.
The issue of prior notification was also raised last week by Cholota’s lawyer, Advocate Loyiso Makapela, who argued that his client had been “ambushed” when investigators arrived unannounced with agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) at her Baltimore residence, leaving her unprepared for the interview.
SA authorities sought clarification from Moroadi Cholota
While Calitz agreed with Hodes that evidence existed implicating Cholota, he firmly denied that this was used to pressure her into turning against Magashule.
The witness contended that the purpose of the trip to the US was to clarify email communications in which Magashule was named.
He argued that Cholota’s explanation could potentially have cleared her of wrongdoing.
Calitz also rejected the notion that Cholota would have become a Section 204 witness simply by implicating Magashule.
“I don’t think that would be a 204; that would be an explanation on the questions that we asked,” he said.
A witness who may be implicated in a crime can testify against co-accused individuals in exchange for immunity from prosecution under Section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA).
Cholota was extradited to South Africa in August 2024 to face charges alongside Magashule and others related to fraud and corruption.
Money laundering charges against her were recently dropped after the US declined to extradite her on those specific grounds.
The trial will continue on Wednesday.
Download our app
