Thulani Khumalo is alive, despite claims a Somali syndicate killed him
Thulani Khumalo is a South African entrepreneur who operates a spaza shop from his home in Vosloorus. (Facebook)
Thulani Khumalo is a South African entrepreneur who operates a spaza shop from his home in Vosloorus. On 3 May last year, Khumalo took to both social and news media to share that his life was in danger, accusing foreign spaza shop owners of attempting to kill him. Around the time of his outcry, accounts known for perpetrating an anti-immigrant narrative online twisted his outcry to proclaim him dead, alleging that he was killed by 'a syndicate of Somalians'. However, as our investigators found, Khumalo is alive, well and 'shocked' at the news of his death, despite doing nothing to dispel the rumours.
When Thulani Khumalo took to social media to share how threats were being made on his life, allegedly by foreign spaza shop owners who saw his business as competition, he never imagined that his story would be manipulated to make it seem like he had been killed by 'Somali syndicates' — at least that is what he says.
In early May last year, Khumalo shared a message on Facebook, stating that he was being 'hunted down' by a man hired to kill him, all because he tried to be a South African spaza shop owner. Prior to this, Khumalo had posted about how he was trying to
Khumalo's message drew widespread support from government officials and the broader public.
Political parties, he said, offered him 'protection in terms of security, telling me they would tell the police to patrol this area regularly'.
'They also offered me funding, for example, the MK party, but this never materialised; it was only for that day. Political parties that visited were the ActionSA and the ANC from Ekurhuleni.'
The message became popular on X, with some accounts alleging that Khumalo had been killed.
Among these are the @Isephara and @joy_zelda accounts, which both stated at different times of the year that Khumalo had been killed by a 'syndicate of Somalians', once on 3 May, about an hour after he claimed that he was being hunted down, and another in August. Both these X accounts regularly post content with anti-foreigner sentiment.
Between May and August, Khumalo was interviewed by
The X post from the @ISephara account, Khumalo's initial Facebook post and the claim made in August 2024 by @joy_zelda can all be seen here:
Speaking to investigative journalist Tabelo Timse, Khumalo alleges that the threats began around March and April last year. This is noteworthy because in March, he posted a picture of himself in what appears to be his spaza shop, including the words '
'It started when I saw foreign shop owners casually walking up and down the street daily. Some will approach me to ask how much I am willing to sell this shop [for] or how much rent I want. When I refused [to sell or rent], I noticed people hiding down the street at the second school gate,' he said.
Khumalo's shop is run out of his garage in a residential area. Hence, in order to verify the threats that he alleges, it would be important to understand the general foot traffic on that street.
He added, 'This one time, I saw three guys hiding. Later, I noticed they were walking up
the street, so I went inside the house. These three guys robbed someone who looked similar to me — I think I was the target. So, during the robbery, one robber was shot in the foot and he is the one who said they were looking for me. I don't know what happened to that guy.'
However, relaying a similar incident to the
City Press
in June 2024, he claimed that it was his friend who was mistaken for him and shot in the leg.
Khumalo says he went to the police but was told to provide proof of the threats before a case could be opened. He never appears to have provided such proof.
Khumalo says he had no idea that the threats on Facebook would go viral, despite stating, 'Vosloorus, please make this trend …' He added that he had to deactivate his social media accounts when allegations of his death surfaced.
'I, and those close to me, including my family, never posted anything about my death. We were all shocked when we saw this account posting and my younger brother replied to those posts that I was alive and that this was fake news. But this person just went on and on about my death, even asking for donations,' he said.
Khumalo still uses the same Facebook account from which he claimed that he was being hunted down and he has not taken the initiative to clarify the false narrative about his death. He says he sees 'no need' to clarify that he is alive because people can see that he is active on social media.
'This fake news about my death is also putting my life in danger because I am now exposed.'
In a country where anti-immigrant sentiment is rife and xenophobic attacks continue to be perpetrated, it is important to clarify when misinformation is being generated and spread, even if the clarification favours a perceived 'enemy'.
Khumalo has not been killed by so-called Somalian syndicates. Just as he feared for his safety, he also compromised the safety of competing entrepreneurs, who may have had nothing to do with the threats or his 'death'.
Khumalo has missed multiple opportunities to come clean and dispel the rumours about his death — the first when he was interviewed by news media a month after his viral post, and the second which presents itself every time he logs in and posts on his account.
Despite not explicitly setting the record straight, criminality against Khumalo cannot be condoned, and we hope that he finds proof to take legal action against those allegedly making threats against his life and business.
Tabelo Timse is a freelance journalist and media consultant and a former investigative journalist at the amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism.
Yossabel Chetty is a Researcher at the
.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
2 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
The law is not neutral — it serves power or it serves the people
The recent court challenge by corporate law firms against the Legal Sector Code is more than a legal dispute, it represents a profound political and institutional crisis. It calls on all members of the legal fraternity, across every sector, to respond with clarity, conviction and courage. The law does not exist in a vacuum, untouched by our country's history, and neither should we. At the core of this legal challenge is a disturbing message that the inclusion of black people in key parts of the legal sector is bad for business. The use of law to defend elite power is nothing new — it has long been a tool for preserving exclusion in South Africa. From the legal justifications of apartheid to post-apartheid tactics of delay and obstruction, the legal profession has often stood guard over the gates of privilege. It is therefore unsurprising — though no less alarming — that this claim is now being made under oath, in a country where the majority is black. If this moment does not compel us to speak out, then perhaps we are complicit in the unequal future being forged in our name. As in every contested space, power does not yield without a contestation — it fortifies itself. The government's black economic empowerment code for the legal sector reveals that, three decades into democracy, these corporate law firms have not been able to self-regulate in a way that meaningfully includes black professionals at the highest levels. These same firms are adept at identifying black talent on university campuses, sitting on transformation committees, publishing polished equity reports and championing mentorship initiatives. Yet, when real accountability is required and they are asked to disrupt entrenched patterns of opportunity, democratise access to work for smaller firms or transparently report on transformation progress, they recoil, and compliance is then framed as a threat to their freedom to trade. This is not a principled stand; it is a calculated defence of privilege. It exposes a profession more committed to the appearance of transformation than to its substance. While these corporate law firms tie transformation in red tape and legal technicalities, we must remember that the Constitution is not neutral. It is a charter for total social transformation and it commits South Africa to a future rooted in social justice, human dignity, equality and freedom for all. It rejects all forms of racism and sexism and it demands that we all play a role in building an inclusive society. We must abandon the romantic notion that the Constitution will do the work on its own. As a transformative charter, it demands action — not from some anonymous public, but from the very institutions and professions that now invoke it to escape accountability. Section 22 of the Constitution protects the right to choose one's profession and it was never meant to entrench monopoly power. Yet, in the hands of some corporate firms, it is being used to stall transformation and delegitimise a fair redistribution of opportunity. When a fraternity sees the very Constitution born of struggle being used to shield privilege, the bitter irony must not go uncontested because corporate law firms are not exempt from confronting the dissonance between constitutional ideals and the lived realities of South African society. The rule of law must never be weaponised to preserve an unjust social order. If these firms truly valued legal integrity and constitutional governance, they would have embraced transformation long ago. They've had more than 30 years and have consistently chosen not to. Similarly, had they attended to meaningful transformation, government intervention would not be necessary. Similarly, Kathleen Dlepu, former chairperson of the Legal Practice Council, asked: 'What if the voices of resistance to the Legal Sector Code aren't just coming from the usual suspects? What if, behind the legal jargon and procedural masks, we find the fingerprints of those who once pledged allegiance to transformation, not as outsiders, but from within?' Her words force uncomfortable questions: Who signed these court papers? Which senior counsel is willing to lend their name to this gatekeeping? Which junior counsel, allegedly the future, is being showcased as window dressing while undermining black advancement? These questions matter because law is never neutral. It either serves power or it serves the people and the South African story requires that the law is used for the good of the people. The entire legal fraternity bears a social responsibility to take a clear and public stance on what is unfolding. The disproportionate stranglehold on transformation maintained by firms that built their power during the darkest chapters of this country's history must be called into question. We cannot look to institutions that profited from the systemic exclusion of black people to lead us into a just future especially when their messages, no matter who delivers them, ultimately undermine the legitimacy of black practitioners. Transformation is not a favour; it is a constitutional imperative that rests on all stakeholders. This is a moment for clarity — not compromise. The legal profession cannot continue to obscure its failings behind rhetoric. It cannot claim nobility while actively defending structural exclusion and those of us who believe in the Constitution's vision must be willing to call this out for what it is — a crisis of legitimacy. Beneath the veneer of constitutional argument lies a longstanding truth — the powers that control corporate law in South Africa hold the view that transformation in the legal profession is, and has always been, treated as optional. Similarly, this is a moment to acknowledge that entry into elite corporate law circles has often required silence about the racial inequalities that continue to shape our profession. People died for this democracy. Scores of people willingly and unwillingly gave up their singular human experiences in the name of the idea that, one day, this country would not require the well-being and prosperity of black people as a sacrifice for a firm to remain in business. We cannot let those sacrifices happen in vain. Bwanika Lwanga is a corporate and commercial attorney and a columnist with an interest in African regional trade, spatial justice and social justice issues. Abongile Nkamisa is a lawyer and legal researcher interested in corporate accountability, access to information and law to advance social justice.
Mail & Guardian
2 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Digital occupation: How surveillance technologies repress dissent from Gaza to Cape Town
Surveillance technology is increasingly being used to monitor civilians. From the skies above Gaza to the streets of Cape Town, surveillance technologies are no longer confined to military zones. Tools once developed for war and occupation are now being deployed to monitor, profile and suppress civilian populations — particularly those being used in solidarity with Palestine or challenging systems of injustice. One such tool is SocialNet, developed by US-based company ShadowDragon, a contractor for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a federal law enforcement agency. The software scrapes user data from more than 200 platforms — including Instagram, Facebook, OnlyFans and Bluesky — to construct detailed profiles of individuals' political views, associations and activities. Once used to hunt 'terror suspects' abroad, such software is now used domestically in the US to track activists, immigrants and students. According to Surveillance Watch, ShadowDragon and similar technologies have been deployed to monitor pro-Palestinian activists — especially after the 7 October 2023 Hamas attack and the escalation of war in Gaza. Peaceful protesters have faced online harassment, disciplinary action and immigration enforcement — all triggered by surveillance-generated intel. The net effect: digital repression masquerading as national security. South Africa is not immune. Amid pro-Palestinian solidarity actions — marches, boycotts, and teach-ins — activists report being photographed at protests, tracked on social media and warned by law enforcement. In some cases, private security firms with Israeli ties are alleged to have assisted in data collection and monitoring. The methods may differ, but the logic is the same: control space, suppress dissent and treat activism as a threat. Aerial surveillance systems such as Eye in the Sky reinforce this logic. Originally designed for military reconnaissance, these systems use high-resolution cameras mounted on planes or drones to survey entire neighbourhoods — recording protest routes, tracking crowds and compiling footage for analysis. Often deployed without public oversight or judicial authorisation, they turn urban centres into open-air observation zones. In Gaza, similar technologies are used by Israeli forces to monitor and target civilian movement. In Cape Town, they watch citizens exercising constitutional rights. The digital occupation framework reminds us that surveillance is not neutral. It is political. It is often racialised. And it is global. Facial recognition tool NesherAI, allegedly used by the right-wing Zionist group Betar, exemplifies this transnational repression. The software reportedly identified Palestinian student activist Mahmoud Ahmed Khalil on a US campus. A dossier about him was posted publicly and allegedly shared with ICE. The same technologies tested on Palestinians under occupation are now used to suppress solidarity abroad. South Africa's Constitution guarantees the right to privacy under section 14, while the Protection of Personal Information Act aims to regulate the collection and use of personal data. Internationally, Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibits arbitrary interference with privacy. Yet these laws struggle to keep up with the speed and scale of militarised surveillance tools imported — legally or otherwise — into civilian life. Worse still, these tools do more than watch — they shape behaviour. Protesters begin to self-censor, students avoid organising and communities withdraw from public dissent. The psychological toll of being constantly observed is immense, particularly for racialised or marginalised groups. It mimics the tactics of occupation: isolate, intimidate, control. As South Africans, this moment demands clarity and political courage. The same state surveillance once used to crush anti-apartheid movements is being repackaged through private tech firms and foreign alliances. The rhetoric is new — 'smart cities', 'public safety', 'counter-extremism' — but the effect is old: silence dissent, maintain control, and fracture solidarity. From Gaza to Cape Town, from drones to data-mining, surveillance is not just a security tool, it is a system of domination. If we do not resist its expansion, we risk accepting a future in which privacy, protest, and political freedom become casualties of a permanent digital occupation. Sõzarn Barday is a writer and attorney based in South Africa and has a particular interest in human rights within the Middle East. Opinions shared represent her individual perspective.
Mail & Guardian
2 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Global March to Gaza is a moral reckoning
More than 2,000 people – 55 from South Africa – have converged in Egypt in a show of international solidarity. This week, I joined a South African delegation en route to the Rafah border in Egypt as part of the Global March to Gaza — a peaceful international mobilisation demanding an end to Israel's siege and the immediate opening of humanitarian corridors. We are not here as observers. We are here to demand life for Gaza. More than 2,000 activists have converged in Egypt in a coordinated show of international solidarity. South Africa is represented by a 55-person delegation comprising civil society leaders and grassroots activists — one of more than 50 national groupings unified in this global effort. Together, we will walk nearly 50km across the Sinai Desert toward Rafah, Gaza's last, closed lifeline. This is no symbolic journey. It is a moral reckoning. Since October 2023, Israel's unrelenting assault on Gaza has killed more than 54,000 Palestinians. Thousands more remain buried beneath the rubble. Tens of thousands have been maimed, orphaned or injured. Nearly the entire population of Gaza — 2.2 million people — is being starved. According to the United Nations, less than a third of the required humanitarian aid is making it through. In early May, an estimated 500 trucks were needed each day to sustain life in Gaza. In recent weeks, that number has plummeted to fewer than 100. Some days, none arrive. We are marching to say: Let the aid in. End the siege. Let Gaza live. We are not alone in this call. Early this week, Israeli naval forces seized the MV Madaleen — a vessel carrying aid and 12 international activists, including 22-year-old Swedish campaigner Greta Thunberg — intercepting it in international waters and towing it to Ashdod. The yacht, part of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition, was en route to Gaza with medical supplies, baby formula and essential foodstuffs. Its capture has been condemned as an act of piracy by human rights groups. As the sea is closed, so too is the sand, reinforcing the systematic isolation of Gaza from every direction. The Global March to Gaza, running from 13 to 19 June, is a high-profile action that brings together a broad constellation of global solidarity — activists, health professionals, scholars and civilians — united by one shared conviction: the world can no longer look away. This morning, 13 June, delegations from across the world will leave Cairo for al-Arish, a city in Egypt's North Sinai region roughly 344km from Rafah. From there, we begin the 48km Global Walk to Gaza — a multi-day overland march through the desert. We will walk during the cooler hours of early morning and evening, resting overnight in tents — tents that will later be donated as part of the aid package for Gaza. At Rafah, we will establish a protest encampment, holding vigils and staging peaceful sit-ins over several days to demand the opening of the crossing. We are expected to return to Cairo on 19 June. But the march's goal is not simply to arrive at Rafah. It is to hold space. To create pressure. And to break the silence. Alongside us is the Soumoud convoy, an independent land convoy made up of volunteers from Algeria, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia and Egypt. Travelling from Tunis across North Africa, the convoy brings humanitarian supplies and messages of solidarity. It is an act of regional mobilisation grounded in a single word — soumoud , or steadfastness. Saif AbuKeshek, chair of the march's international committee, says the march was born out of people's growing refusal to accept government complicity. 'People are no longer willing to tolerate their governments' silence while a people continues to be annihilated,' he told organisers. 'That's where our pressure is going: for the international complicity in the genocide.' For South Africans, this march carries particular weight. We come from a nation that knows too well the brutality of repression and the necessity of international solidarity. Our government's referral of Israel to the International Court of Justice was a bold act of legal principle. This march is its moral mirror. It is the people's turn to take a stand. We walk because Gaza is not just a humanitarian crisis—it is a test of the world's moral compass. We walk because silence is complicity. We walk because starvation must never be a tool of war. And we walk so that the world cannot say, 'We did not know.'
