- The plaintiff’s salary and family life fell apart after being declared dead.
- The court found he had applied for an ID number that belonged to another man.
- This ruling shows the dangers of using a false or duplicate identity number.
Madimetja Johannes Ledwaba woke up one morning and found out that, on paper, he was dead. The officer at Polokwane Correctional Services discovered that Home Affairs records incorrectly marked him as deceased.
This mistake led to his salary being frozen, his bank accounts blocked, and his necessary medical treatment cancelled. His family life also began to unravel. The strain took a toll on his relationship with the mother of his children.
Ledwaba had used an identity number assigned to another man, Madimetja Josias Ledwaba. When Josias’s death was officially recorded, the system mistakenly marked Ledwaba as deceased too.
Despite his efforts to correct the error, the bureaucratic nightmare persisted. He faced ridicule at work and accusations of dishonesty. Colleagues reportedly joked about him being “the man who came back from the dead.”
This shocking case is not just about a clerical error but serves as a warning. Using someone else’s identity number, even by accident, can ruin a person’s finances, reputation, and family life, leaving them legally erased. Ledwaba’s experience illustrates the grave consequences of identity misuse in South Africa.
The identity number at the heart of the dispute
The High Court heard that Ledwaba had previously changed his ID records to use the number assigned to Madimetja Josias Ledwaba. He first applied for an identity document in 2001 but learned that the number belonged to another person. Later, in 2002, he received a new ID but then changed the name linked to the existing number to Madimetja Johannes Ledwaba.
When Josias’s death was reported by his mother in 2009, Home Affairs followed normal procedures and registered the death. Since Ledwaba’s details had been linked to that number, the system incorrectly recorded him as deceased. Even after he applied for a new identity number in August 2010, the damage was done. He continued to face salary disruptions, financial losses, and humiliation at work.
Defamation claims and legal arguments
Ledwaba sued the Minister of Home Affairs for defamation. He claimed that the publication of his “death” implied he was dishonest or living under someone else’s identity. He argued that the false record caused emotional pain, financial loss, and harm to his reputation.
Home Affairs defended itself by stating that it acted under a legal duty to notify National Treasury of all deaths. National Treasury froze his salary to prevent illegal payments. The Department of Correctional Services was informed, which then notified the human resources staff at his workplace. The court found that each action served a valid public interest and was not meant to defame Ledwaba.
Public duty vs Personal harm
Judge CJ Muller ruled that although Ledwaba faced significant hardship, Home Affairs was not liable for defamation. The court noted that the notice sent to Ledwaba, including his death certificate, did not amount to defamation.
Furthermore, any jokes made by colleagues would be a separate issue and did not create liability for Home Affairs.
Conviction.co.za
Get your news on the go. Clickhereto follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
