Joe “Ferrari” Sibanyoni and his co-accused are expected to return to court on Thursday after their extortion case was struck off the roll. Image: Oupa Mokoena / Independent Newspapers
Mpumalanga taxi boss Joe “Ferrari” Sibanyoni extortion case is back on the court roll.
Sibanyoni and his three co-accused are expected to line up in the dock of the Delmas Magistrate’s Court.
The four accused are expected to appear in court on Thursday after the matter was transferred amid escalating tensions over the case’s sensitivity.
Sibanyoni and his co-accused face allegations of extorting more than R2 million in so-called protection fees from a local mining entrepreneur.
Tonjeni also issued a warrant for Ntaba’s arrest and convicted him of contempt of court, triggering sharp backlash from the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA).
The NPA has since accused the magistrate of misapplying the law and has moved to challenge the rulings in a higher court.
NPA spokesperson Kaizer Kganyago confirmed the authority has also lodged a formal complaint against Tonjeni with the Magistrates Commission.
“The formal complaint is premised on serious concerns that the NPA has in the manner in which she conducted the court proceedings on May 15 and 18 2026 that culminated in the two orders that she granted,” Kganyago said.
The controversial orders included the contempt conviction against Ntaba, the issuing of a warrant for his arrest and the decision to strike the criminal matter from the court roll under Section 342A of the Criminal Procedure Act.
The prosecuting authority has already filed a notice of intention to appeal both the contempt ruling and the arrest warrant, arguing that the developments have serious implications for the administration of justice.
The case has attracted intense attention due to allegations involving extortion, intimidation and organised criminal activity linked to Mpumalanga’s taxi industry.
Meanwhile, Santaco has re-elected Sibanyoni as its second deputy president despite ongoing legal troubles.
South African Reserve Bank governor Lesetja Kganyago. The Sarb already warned in March that the ongoing Middle East conflict is a clear instance of a supply shock, which raises prices while weakening demand. Image: Supplied
South African consumers could face a double blow in June as economists predict the South African Reserve Bank (Sarb) to raise interest and the government will end the R3-per-litre fuel levy relief.
The recent relief has helped motorists cope with rising global oil prices. The Sarb’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) is likely to take a hawkish stance on Thursday after inflation rose from 3.1% in March to 4.0% in April, mainly due to increasing fuel costs linked to the ongoing Middle East conflict.
Several economists now warn that inflation could climb closer to 5% in the coming months, increasing pressure on the Sarb to act pre-emptively to prevent higher prices from becoming entrenched in the economy.
The Sarb already warned in March that the ongoing Middle East conflict was a clear instance of a supply shock, which raises prices while weakening demand. The central bank said waiting for clear evidence risks leaving the policy response too late.
According to Nedbank economists Johannes (Matimba) Khosa and Nicky Weimar, the sharp jump in petrol and diesel prices has already started filtering through to broader transport and operating costs, pushing core inflation higher and increasing the risk of second-round inflation effects.
Nedbank acknowledged that the MPC had some space to wait and see how the global supply shock unfolds, as monetary policy remained moderately restrictive and the usual accelerants of spiking risk premia and significant rand weakness have not yet materialised.
“Despite these valid considerations, our analysis suggests that inflation expectations are particularly sensitive to petrol price increases, and we, therefore, see a relatively high risk of second-round effects,” they stated.
“As such, tightening monetary policy now would ensure that the inflationary consequences of the supply-side shock are temporary and likely minimise the need for more severe tightening later in the cycle.”
Nedbank expected the Sarb to raise the repo rate by 25 basis points to 7%, which would push the prime lending rate to 10.50%.
Adriaan Pask, chief investment officer at PSG Wealth, said the Sarb faced a difficult balancing act between protecting economic growth and defending its inflation credibility.
He argued that while higher fuel and electricity prices were largely supply-side shocks that interest rates could not directly solve, the Sarb could not risk appearing complacent about inflation drifting away from its preferred 3% target.
“The more durable solution lies in reforms that reduce supply-side costs, improve productivity and give South Africa a stronger, more sustainable growth platform,” Pask said.
However, the prospect of another rate increase is likely to deepen pressure on already heavily indebted households.
Workers and consumers are simultaneously facing rising transport costs, electricity tariff increases and expensive food and credit costs, while economic growth remains sluggish.
But beyond food prices, activists say the hunger crisis is also exposing deep government failures.
The coalition is now demanding an urgent national food plan, the creation of a national food council, and legal accountability for child deaths from malnutrition.
With the cost-of-living soaring, activists warn that hunger in South Africa is no longer just a charity issue, but a political emergency.
As protests and boycotts loom, pressure is mounting on government and big business to respond.
Analysts warned that although there is great potential upside with Pick n Pay, it carries significant risks based on a successful turnaround strategy.
They shared these comments after Pick n Pay released its audited annual financial statements for the 2026 financial year.
These statements contained many positives, including steady progress in its multi-year turnaround strategy and underlying operational improvements.
To fund this ongoing strategy, Pick n Pay disposed of a 12.5% stake in Boxer, raising R4.7 billion in gross proceeds.
Another positive was that the retailer’s overall level of debt decreased from R1.2 billion to just R200 million at the close of the 2026 financial year.
The remaining R200 million was repaid after the reporting date, leaving the Pick n Pay Group with no long-term debt.
Pick n Pay’s Online segment was another positive, with a 32.7% increase in turnover and successfully meeting its profitability targets.
There were also many concerning things in the numbers, including deepening trading losses in Pick n Pay’s core segment.
Group trading profit declined 4.2% to R1.7 billion, due to a R404 million increase in the core Pick n Pay segment’s trading loss to R1.0 billion.
Trading expenses as a percentage of turnover in the Pick n Pay segment rose to 21.7%, driven by above-inflation wage increases and higher advertising costs.
This showed that the turnaround still has a long way to go. It pushed out its break-even target for the Pick n Pay segment to the 2029 financial year, rather than 2028.
Turnover for the Pick n Pay segment declined 1.6%, largely due to the store estate reset program involving store closures and conversions.
It also continues to burn through cash. Its net cash reduced from R4.2 billion at the end of the 2025 financial year to R3.1 billion at the end of the 2026 financial year.
Pick n Pay has also initiated a Section 189A statutory consultation process to restructure its store labour model, which creates uncertainty.
Pick n Pay CEO Sean Summers’ feedback
Pick n Pay CEO Sean Summers
Pick n Pay CEO Sean Summers remains upbeat about the retailer’s prospects, saying the turnaround strategy remains firmly on track.
“The turnaround is supported by improving topline growth, renewed operational disciplines, and careful cash management,” he said.
“While Pick n Pay’s trading loss increased, the business today is fundamentally stronger than it was two-and-a-half years ago.”
He cited the steady improvement in company-owned Pick n Pay supermarket like-for-like sales growth and a 0.4% increase in gross profit margin.
Summers added that the company now has the balance sheet strength to support its return to profitability. However, it still needs a lot of work.
“Achieving break-even in Pick n Pay requires the successful execution of all six strategic initiatives, including the recalibration of our total employment costs,” he said.
The retailer is addressing its structurally high store labour costs through a formal Section 189 consultation process.
“One of the first issues I raised on my return was that we needed to address Pick n Pay’s significantly distorted labour cost base relative to competitors,” he said.
“Our objective is clear: to align our cost structure with industry standards while safeguarding jobs wherever possible.”
The Pick n Pay CEO said the company’s store estate reset is effectively done, and it has achieved some of the key milestones needed to achieve growth.
“We continue to see encouraging progress across the business, but the reality is that the challenges facing Pick n Pay developed over an extended period,” he said.
“This means that rebuilding the business into a leading supermarket retailer again will take time, disciplined execution and difficult but necessary decisions.”
Analyst opinion about Pick n Pay
Jonathan Fisher, a wealth manager at PSG Wealth Sandton, described Pick n Pay’s latest results as a “shocker”.
He said that although Pick n Pay managed to decrease its headline loss per share, the overall financial results were not good.
“The market’s negative reaction, with the share price declining 5% on the day, shows investors aren’t buying the turnaround narrative yet,” he said.
He described Pick n Pay’s turnaround as “a huge oil tanker that’s really trying to turn around but is just not turning”. “It’s taking forever,” he said.
He said the entire consumer market is under massive pressure, and that there are better alternatives in the retail sector, such as Shoprite.
Simon Brown from JustOneLap was also negative about Pick n Pay, pointing to the turnaround timeline, which gets moved out again and again.
He also flagged the ongoing Section 189 staff retrenchment process as an operational risk, especially if it leads to strike action.
Brown said Pick n Pay’s core brand is moving in the wrong direction and losing ground to competitors like Woolworths and Checkers.
“Pick n Pay is pulling back, dropping leases, and closing stores while its competitors are aggressively opening new stores,” he said.
Brown and Fisher highlighted that there is massive potential upside if Pick n Pay’s turnaround is successful. However, it is not guaranteed.
This means Pick n Pay is currently a highly speculative investment that carries significant risks associated with the turnaround.
Pick n Pay’s 2029 Problem Is Bigger Than a Delayed Target
A year can sound small until investors hear it.
For Pick n Pay, the move from 2028 to 2029 is not just a calendar adjustment. It is a signal. It tells the market that the retailer’s recovery is taking longer than hoped, and it tells South Africans that one of the country’s most familiar supermarket brands is still fighting its way back.
Gareth Edwards and Francis Herd use 2029 as the Number of the Day to examine a turnaround story that has become about much more than profit.
On paper, the issue is simple. Pick ‘n Pay’s core supermarket business is still under pressure, and its expected break-even point has been pushed out by a full year. Investors did not like that. The share price came under pressure after the results, reflecting frustration that the recovery has not moved quickly enough.
But behind the market reaction is a much bigger retail story.
Pick ‘n Pay used to occupy a special place in South African shopping culture. For many households, it was part of the weekly rhythm. The familiar aisles. The family shop. The retailer people felt they knew.
That world has changed.
Checkers and Shoprite are now operating with serious momentum. Checkers Sixty60 has turned convenience into an expectation, not a luxury. Once consumers get used to groceries arriving fast, the entire retail battlefield shifts. It is no longer enough to have stores, stock and history. Retailers now have to deliver speed, range, value, digital convenience and trust at the same time.
That is the pressure Pick ‘n Pay is trying to answer.
Sean Summers returned as CEO with a reputation for crisis management and a difficult mandate: stabilise the business, rebuild confidence, sharpen operations and get the core supermarket brand back to sustainable performance.
But turnaround plans are never just spreadsheets.
The human cost sits inside the labour discussion. Pick ‘n Pay is restructuring, and staff costs have become one of the major pressure points. Gareth and Francis discuss Sunday pay, working conditions, union concern and the reality that changing people’s pay is never just a financial decision. It affects families, morale and the people who keep stores running.
That is where the story becomes uncomfortable.
A struggling business may need to reduce costs to survive. Workers need stability and fair treatment. Shoppers want value. Investors want progress. Each group is looking at the same company, but not asking the same question.
For investors, the question is: when will the numbers improve?
For workers, it is: what happens to my pay and my job?
For shoppers, it is: why should I choose Pick ‘n Pay now?
For Sean Summers, the question may be the hardest of all: can he rebuild the business before patience runs out?
2029 is the new target. But the real deadline may arrive much sooner, in the choices shoppers make every week, the negotiations with workers, and the market’s willingness to believe that the comeback is still alive.
