More than two months after the death of Maajida Kondowie, her family says they are still waiting for critical answers from the South African Police Service (SAPS), raising concerns about communication, the handling of evidence, and the overall progress of the investigation into her death.
Maajida sustained serious injuries on 25 July 2026 and was admitted to Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital. She died two days later, on 27 July 2026. The case was opened at Eldorado Park SAPS under Case Number 525/07/2026 and assigned to Warrant Officer Masimula.
According to the family, they do not accept the account that Maajida jumped from a moving vehicle driven by her boyfriend. They maintain there was a documented history of alleged abuse prior to the incident and contend that certain physical evidence does not align with the version of events presented to them.
On 30 September 2026, 65 days after Maajida's passing, the family publicly outlined several concerns regarding the investigation. These included allegations of limited communication from the Investigating Officer, delays in receiving post mortem results, questions surrounding physical evidence, and concerns about a possible conflict of interest linked to reported family connections within the police station handling the matter.
In response to media enquiries submitted by Lenasia Times Group of Newspapers, SAPS Provincial Spokesperson Colonel Dimakatso Nevhuhulwi confirmed that station management had taken note of the family's concerns regarding the progress of the investigation.
Colonel Nevhuhulwi stated that the matter is currently being investigated as an inquest docket and that the case requires forensic post mortem examinations, the results of which remain outstanding. She explained that forensic pathology services fall under the provincial Department of Health and indicated that some witness statements had already been obtained. Once the investigation is completed, the matter will be referred to the Inquest Court for a decision.
Addressing concerns over communication, she said SAPS expects investigating officers to maintain appropriate communication with complainants or appointed family representatives and to provide updates on the progress of an investigation, subject to operational and legal considerations. According to the investigation diary, feedback was last provided to the family's appointed representative, identified as an aunt, on 21 September 2026.
Colonel Nevhuhulwi further advised that family members who are dissatisfied with the handling of an investigation or the feedback provided may lodge a formal complaint with the Station Commander or District Commissioner. Alternatively, they may contact the Gauteng Service Complaints Standby line on 082 442 2000.
However, despite receiving 16 detailed questions sent to Colonel Nevhuhulwi, she did not answer the majority of the questions submitted.
Among the questions that remained unanswered were:
- Why, after 65 days, the family has still not received the post mortem findings or a comprehensive written update on the investigation.
- Why the family reportedly had to obtain the Investigating Officer's details themselves instead of being formally contacted after the case was opened.
- Whether it is acceptable practice for every interaction with an Investigating Officer in a serious death investigation to be initiated by the victim's family.
- What action SAPS would take if an Investigating Officer repeatedly ignored calls, SMS messages and WhatsApp messages from a victim's family.
- How an official status report could allegedly contain incorrect details about the Investigating Officer himself and whether that matter had been investigated.
- Why physical evidence raised by the family would reportedly not be examined until after receipt of an autopsy report.
- Whether SAPS can confirm that all physical evidence identified or provided by the family has been properly secured, documented and preserved.
- Whether threatening voice notes allegedly sent by the boyfriend to Maajida's mother have been investigated as possible intimidation or interference in an active investigation.
- Whether SAPS has formally assessed the alleged conflict of interest involving reports that the boyfriend's aunt works at Eldorado Park SAPS.
- What safeguards are in place to ensure investigations remain impartial where a person of interest has family connections to a police station involved in the matter.
- Whether SAPS would consider transferring the investigation to another officer, specialised unit or police station to avoid any perception of bias.
- Whether SAPS Provincial Management has reviewed the docket to determine if all investigative steps have been carried out properly and within a reasonable timeframe.
- What accountability measures exist when an Investigating Officer is accused of failing to communicate with a victim's family or failing to actively progress a case.
- What assurances SAPS can provide that the matter is being actively pursued and what specific investigative steps will be taken to move the case forward.
- Whether disciplinary action would be taken if the investigation was found to have been delayed or mishandled, and who would ultimately be held accountable for the family's concerns regarding the handling of Case 525/07/2026.
For the Kondowie family, the central issue remains the pursuit of answers surrounding Maajida's death.
They continue to call for greater transparency, improved communication, a senior level review of the investigation, confirmation that all evidence has been properly handled, and the release of the outstanding post mortem findings.
As the investigation continues, many of the family's concerns remain unresolved, with numerous key questions still unanswered by Colonel Nevhuhulwi, leaving the family searching for clarity, accountability and justice 65 days after Maajida's death.
Featured Advertiser: High Resolution Ad at this link
