08-08-2025
Ex-employee accuses Mathews Phosa of harassment, covert surveillance and public smear campaign
Jan Venter seeks R25 million in damages from attorney and ANC veteran Dr Mathews Phosa
Image: Bongiwe Mchunu
A high-profile legal battle is set to unfold in the North Gauteng High Court next week. It involves serious allegations of harassment, unlawful surveillance, and manipulation of legal and media systems.
The case pits Jan Hendrik Stephanus Venter against prominent attorney and political figure Dr Mathews Phosa, with Venter claiming R25 million in damages for emotional trauma, reputational harm, and ongoing threats to his safety and dignity.
In an urgent affidavit filed with the court, Venter, who claimed to be Phosa's former employee, recounts in his founding affidavit a harrowing incident that he says marks the beginning of a pattern of malicious conduct.
Papers filed with the court state: 'One day before a meeting at the offices of his colleague, Ulrich Roux, I was taken into a bathroom and forced to strip naked under the pretext that I may have been wearing surveillance devices.
'I was in tears, traumatised, and emotionally destroyed. Others saw my condition in the boardroom immediately afterwards, including Mr Roux.'
Venter alleges that despite reporting criminal charges against a second respondent, the case 'went nowhere - no doubt due to his legal connections and influence'.
He accuses Phosa of orchestrating malicious media campaigns to discredit him, including arranging for legal papers to be served.
At the same time, he claimed he was incarcerated, falsely implicating him in a defamation case linked to the book 'Predator Politics'.
Venter claims that Phosa arranged for a media outlet to publish an article falsely portraying him as a 'secret weapon' supporting Phosa's legal battles — a story Venter describes as 'a malicious manipulation of facts' designed to damage his credibility.
'Only Dr Phosa could have supplied that false information to the journalist, as I had no access to media or communications while incarcerated,' Venter asserted.
He also detailed promises made by Phosa to support him financially and legally, promises which he says were never fulfilled, highlighting a pattern of betrayal and exploitation.
In response, Phosa expressed shock, telling IOL that he was never formally served with any legal summons and was unaware of the case's specifics.
'If a person intends to litigate, they must ensure we receive the summons first. We know he is currently in jail… so it is difficult to respond to something we don't know,' he said.
The third respondent, whom Venter accuses of persistent threats and unlawful surveillance, is also under scrutiny.
Venter claimed that this individual made verbal threats, employed intimidation tactics, and implied constant surveillance, contributing to his ongoing distress.
Venter's affidavit paints a bleak picture: 'I have lost all income, assets, and savings; I cannot find meaningful employment due to the reputational damage; I have been left without food, transport, housing security, or medication.'
