Court declares late politician Mosiuoa “Terror” Lekota incapable, holds Advocate financially accountable

PRETORIA— In a significant ruling that could reshape elder care and estate management practices, the North Gauteng High Court has on Monday declared the late Mosiuoa “Terror” Lekota, a prominent figure in South African politics, as having been of unsound mind and incapable of managing his affairs from May 25, 2025, until his death on March 4, 2026.

Judge Anthony Millar delivered the verdict after uncovering a troubling final chapter in the life of the veteran politician, which was marred by cognitive decline, alleged financial exploitation, and attempts to conceal his medical condition from his family.

The urgent application for the court’s intervention was initiated by Lekota’s wife of nearly 51 years, Ntombenhle Cynthia Margaret Augusta Lekota, aged 75.

Despite their marriage being conducted in community of property, the couple had been living apart since around 2010, with Lekota residing in Gauteng with his partner, Advocate Luzelle Adams, with whom he had a 16-year-old son.

Ntombenhle’s concerns grew during a visit in January 2026 when she found her husband surprisingly lucid yet entirely unaware of their financial circumstances.

He struggled to remember the status of their medical aid, could not explain the abrupt cessation of monthly support payments to her, and failed to recognize his financial advisors.

Central to the case were medical assessments following a stroke that Lekota suffered in April 2025.

He was evaluated by neurologist Dr. Zanele Makasi on January 27, 2026. However, obtaining written consent for disclosure was problematic; Lekota had difficulty writing his name and mistakenly identified Advocate Adams as his wife.

Alarmingly, the consent was retracted mere hours later after a private meeting involving Lekota, Adams, and Dr. Makasi.

The court appointed a curator ad litem to oversee the case, who encountered significant resistance in obtaining Dr. Makasi’s report.

Findings indicated that as early as October 14, 2025, Lekota was “dependent upon other persons for… cognitive activities,” and by January 2026, he demonstrated substantial cognitive impairment, reflected in poor scores on cognitive tests.

This assessment was corroborated by independent neuropsychologists and surgeons.

Investigations into Lekota’s financial dealings revealed “alarming” transactions. Between April 2024 and February 2026, over R1.68 million was transferred from Lekota’s accounts to Advocate Adams or entities associated with her.

Notably, on February 12, 2026—the same day that an interim curator, Lekota’s son Kotane, was appointed—Adams executed two transactions totaling R400,000 from Lekota’s account, including a R250,000 transfer to her attorneys.

Judge Millar stated that it was “irresistible” to infer that Adams had “emptied Lekota’s bank account… while the parties were negotiating in good faith at court.” Following the court’s order, both Adams and her attorneys repeatedly failed to cooperate with the curators, refusing to grant access to essential financial records.

The judge condemned their actions as “disgraceful” and “tactical.”

In a remarkable move, Judge Millar referred the case for disciplinary investigation.

He ordered that documents be submitted to the Health Professions Council of South Africa to query why Dr. Makasi permitted the withdrawal of consent from a patient she believed was cognitively impaired.

The judgment will also be forwarded to the Legal Practice Council and the Johannesburg Society of Advocates, raising serious questions about Adams’s conduct, particularly regarding her management of the accounts of a man she knew to be incapable and the suspicious last-minute financial transfers.

The court ruled that Lekota was of unsound mind from May 25, 2025, effectively nullifying any power of attorney he may have granted to Adams at that time.

Furthermore, Advocate Adams was ordered to bear the costs of the application from March 5, 2026, on a punitive attorney-client scale, including the fees for senior counsel.

Judge Millar firmly dismissed the argument that the case was moot due to Lekota’s death, emphasising the importance of ensuring that Mrs. Lekota can assert her rights to her undivided half of the joint estate and demand accountability.

This ruling underscores the vulnerabilities faced by the elderly and highlights the critical legal and ethical responsibilities of professionals entrusted with their care and financial assets.