A man failed to convince the Northern Cape High Court (Kimberley) why SAPS should pay him R2m after his personal information was allegedly leaked on social media.

According to The Citizen, on 1 June 2025, the applicant, only identified as Mr KM, witnessed the murder of his employer in Kuruman, and he was the only eyewitness to the incident.

The applicant made statements to the police investigating the incident, expecting that his details would be kept confidential. However, he later discovered, on his family’s group WhatsApp, that a confidential internal police communication, which contained his name, the address where the incident occurred, and his own address, had been leaked.

The communication was also shared on other social media platforms.

A few days later, an alleged gangster was killed using the same modus operandi used to kill his employer. The applicant now fears for his life.

He alleged in court papers that he confronted both junior and senior police officers involved in the investigation about the publication of his details. Although they expressed shock at the disclosure, no action has been taken to protect him or to investigate the source of the disclosure.

As a result, the applicant was shocked and traumatised and was booked off sick for a week. He also decided to temporarily move to a nearby town in an attempt to protect himself. He said the police are aware of his new address and that he does not trust them to keep this address confidential, given the previous leakage of information.

The man approached the court seeking an order declaring the state’s conduct unlawful and unjust for leaking his personal information to media outlets, and to find the state in contravention of the applicant’s constitutional rights.

He further sought that the respondents, the Minister of Police and the National Police Commissioner pay him a once-off amount of R2m to be used for the applicant’s relocation, rental, security and living expenses at a location of his choice without being subjected to the Witness Protection Programme as the applicant does not trust the state anymore.

He also sought an order allowing him to only communicate with whoever is handling the murder case through Teams or Zoom, as he fears that his location might be leaked.

The respondents denied that SAPS disclosed any private information about the applicant to the media or social media platforms. They further questioned how the applicant came into possession of an internal police communication.

They offered him the option of being placed in the Witness Protection Programme, which is not under the control of the SAPS but of the NPA, arguing that the applicant’s fear and distrust of the police, whether founded or unfounded, was misplaced, according to The Citizen.

The applicant further confirmed that he had not received any threats from the police.

In her judgment on Friday, Judge Cecile Williams agreed with the respondents that SAPS was not in control of the Witness Protection Programme and that the applicant’s fears in this regard were unfounded.

She dismissed the man’s application on the grounds that he had failed to establish a case for the extraordinary relief sought.

Full report in The Citizen

See also full Cape Times report