The Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg has temporarily restricted the publication and republication of allegations made by model and television personality Blue Mbombo against businessman Thami Ndlala, with the matter set to return to court in November.
The order, issued on October 3, follows an urgent application brought by Ndlala.
The court issued a rule nisi calling on Mbombo to show cause on November 9 why the orders should not be made final.
Pending the return date or further order of the court, the order restricts the publication or republication of certain allegations made by Mbombo against Ndlala as established facts.
The allegations identified in the order include claims that Ndlala subjected Mbombo to repeated death threats, verbal abuse or emotional torment, hired people to intimidate her, and threatened her life and that of her minor child.
The court also directed Mbombo to remove the impugned statements from her social media accounts, including Instagram and TikTok, and other social media or entertainment platforms associated with her, within 24 hours of being served with the order.
The court order comes after allegations made publicly by Mbombo against Ndlala, which have also resulted in police involvement. A case was registered at Midrand Police Station.
Following the latest developments, the Thami Ndlala Foundation called for an independent investigation into the conduct of police officials involved in handling the matter.
The foundation said it had concerns about whether proper policing and investigative procedures were followed before action was taken against Ndlala.
It also raised questions about whether personal relationships or outside influence may have affected how the matter was handled. The foundation said it was concerned by information suggesting that people connected to Mbombo may have had access to or influence over police officials dealing with the case.
The foundation said it was not making a finding of criminal misconduct against any police official, but called for an independent investigation to establish whether there had been improper influence, preferential treatment, conflicts of interest or other inappropriate interference.
“The Foundation’s position remains simple: investigate properly, follow the law, test the evidence,” it said.
The foundation also criticised what it described as an apparent “arrest first, investigate later” approach, arguing that serious allegations should be subjected to proper investigation before coercive action is taken.
It said the matter should also be viewed against the backdrop of South Africa’s ongoing gender-based violence crisis, arguing that police resources and investigative capacity should remain focused on cases where victims require protection from violence and abuse.
The organisation further warned about the consequences of serious allegations being circulated publicly before they have been tested, saying a person’s reputation, livelihood and family can be affected by claims shared on social media.
The latest court order, however, is an interim order and does not amount to a final determination on the allegations against Ndlala.
The matter is due back before the Gauteng High Court on November 9, when the respondents will have an opportunity to show cause why the relief should not be made final.
The costs of the urgent hearing have also been reserved for determination on the return date.
IOL
