- The High Court in Pietermaritzburg has issued a rule nisi after ALS Paramedics accused KwaZulu-Natal MEC Siboniso Armstrong Duma of making damaging public statements about its conduct at accident scenes.
- ALS says the MEC falsely claimed it bullied officials, misreported death tolls and refused to treat patients without medical aid, allegations it argues go to the core of public trust in emergency services.
- Acting Judge P C Bezuidenhout found that there may be a defamation issue but ruled that ALS had not yet shown sufficient grounds for urgent interim relief and directed both sides to file further papers.
A private ambulance service has turned to the High Court in Pietermaritzburg after being publicly accused of bullying officials at crash scenes, inflating death tolls and refusing to treat patients without medical aid.
ALS Paramedics says those damaging public statements about its conduct at accident scenes have harmed its reputation and cannot go unanswered.
In the matter, Acting Judge PC Bezuidenhout was asked to urgently stop KwaZulu-Natal MEC for Transport and Human Settlements, Siboniso Armstrong Duma, from repeating the remarks.
The matter stems from an accident on 29 January 2026. ALS arrived at the scene at about 8.30am. During the response, there was confusion about the number of fatalities. ALS staff were informed that one person had died at Albert Luthuli Hospital. That information later proved incorrect, and the figure was corrected from twelve to eleven.
Later that day, the MEC addressed the media, directly accusing ALS of bullying on the scene. He said that both RTI, Metro and the SAPS had complained about ALS services and alleged that the service bullied others at accident scenes.
He further claimed that ALS reported there were 12 people who had died, which he called untrue, and went on to describe another reported figure as a fallacy. He suggested that if someone did not have medical aid, ALS would not assist them, even if their life could be saved.
He insisted that such matters must be handled in a manner befitting of human life.
Why ALS went to court
ALS says these remarks paint it as dishonest, aggressive and indifferent to human life. The company argues that in the emergency medical field, trust is everything, and that allegations of refusing treatment or manipulating casualty figures strike at the heart of its work.
It approached the court on an urgent basis, asking for an interim interdict to prevent the MEC from making further damaging public statements about its conduct at accident scenes while the main case is still pending. A request for a formal retraction was initially included but later withdrawn.
The MEC opposed the application. He argued that ALS has an alternative remedy in the form of a damages claim and that there was no evidence he intended to repeat the statements. He maintained that his comments were made in the public interest. He did not deny making the statements.
What the judge said
Acting Judge Bezuidenhout acknowledged that the case raises a serious question. He stated that, considering what was said, there may be an issue of whether it is defamatory.
However, the judge found that ALS had not established the requirements for urgent interim relief. He pointed out that the statements were made on 29 January 2026 and that there was no indication they had been repeated.
He noted there was no indication in the papers that after 29 January 2026, the MEC once again made these remarks or showed any intent to do so. He concluded that no case had been made out for interim relief.
Even so, the court did not dismiss the matter outright. The judge ordered that a rule nisi be issued, calling upon the MEC to show cause why he should not be interdicted from making the statements complained of. He also directed both parties to supplement their papers before the return date.
What happens next
The MEC must now show cause by 4 May 2026 why he should not be formally interdicted from repeating allegations that ALS bullied officials, misreported casualty numbers, refused treatment to people without medical aid, or managed its operations in a way not befitting of human life.
ALS must file additional papers by 10 March 2026, the MEC by 26 March 2026, and ALS may reply by 10 April 2026. Costs were reserved.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
