Statement on the fourth quarter reports by the Public Protector, Advocate Kholeka Gcaleka

 

KwaMhlanga, Mpumalanga Friday, 04 April 2025.

 

Programme Director

Members of the media

Ladies and Gentlemen,

 

Today we take stock of the work we did in the fourth quarter of the financial year that ended on Monday the 31^st of March 2025.

 

As you are aware, the Public Protector Act, requires of us to account to the public through the release of the finalized investigation quarterly reports, unless the Public Protector is of the opinion that exceptional circumstances do exist that forces a specific report to be classified as confidential.

 

The investigations of the Public Protector South Africa (PPSA) are approached using an enquiry process that seeks to determine what happened, what should have happened, is there a discrepancy between what happened and what should have happened, and does that deviation amount to improper conduct, maladministration, and/or undue delay? The question regarding what happened is resolved through a factual enquiry relying on the evidence provided by the parties and independently sourced during the investigation.

 

The reports being released today focuses mainly on the following areas of investigation conducted:

 

• Irregular appointments in the various spheres of government
• Abuse of power and unethical conduct by Members of the Executive
• Delays in services reaching communities
• Maladministration and malfeasance in the State institutions

 

In the financial year 2024/25, we report the finalisation of 7,672 cases that required our investigation and intervention compared to 6,205 cases in 2023/2024 financial year. Out of this,  a sum total of 3,328 cases were finalised through investigations in the financial year ended in 31 March 2025 compared to 2,827 in the same period in the 2023/24 financial year.

 

Today, I therefore present a sample of finalised investigative reports for the fourth quarter, however a full report is available on our website.

 

Report No. 38: Investigation into allegations of abuse of state resources by the President of the Republic of South Africa, Mr MC Ramaphosa and Ms Sefora Ntombela the former Premier of the Free State Provincial Government to advance the interests of the African National Congress (ANC) during the Letsema Campaign in Bloemfontein, by handing over an RDP house to Ms Ntsaku during the Letsema Campaign, resulting in the conflation between the state and the political party lines.

 

On 23 April 2022, Mr Ramaphosa attended the launch of the ANC Letsema Campaign and in the morning of the event he, in the presence of Ms Ntombela handed over the keys of the Hillside View House to Ms Ntsaku, which was paid for by the Free State Provincial Government.  The investigation established that Mr Ramaphosa was invited by Ms Ntombela only on the morning of the launch of the Letsema Campaign to hand over the keys of a house to Ms Ntsaku. He was neither aware that the handing over of a house would take place during the Letsema Campaign, nor did he have knowledge that the house was paid for by the Free State Provincial Government, as he was informed that he would be handing over a house paid for by a private donor. Therefore, the allegations against Mr Ramaphosa are unsubstantiated.

 

Therefore, the allegation that Mr Ramaphosa, the President of the Republic of South Africa utilised state resources to advance the interests of the African National Congress during the Letsema Campaign, in Bloemfontein, by handing over a RDP house to Ms Ntsaku, which resulted in the conflation between state and political party, is not substantiated.

 

However, the allegation against Ms Sefora Ntombela the former Premier of the Free State Provincial Government, is substantiated.

 

Accordingly, the conduct of Mr Ramaphosa does not constitute improper conduct as envisaged in section 182(1) of the Constitution and maladministration as envisaged in section 6(4)(a)(i) of the Public Protector Act.

 

The Public Protector has taken cognisance of the fact that Ms Ntombela is no longer the Premier of the Free State or in the employ of government, therefore remedial action that the Public Protector would have taken as a result of the irregularities identified herein will serve no judicious purpose.

 

The President of the Republic of South Africa

To take cognisance of the findings and remedial action contained in this report. 

 

The Premier of the Free State

Within ninety (90) calendar days from the date of this Report, in terms of section 125(1) of the Constitution, table the Report before the Provincial Legislature for deliberation in order to sensitise Members of the Executive of their obligations in terms of section 136 of the Constitution and the Policy.

 

The MEC COGTA and Human Settlements

Within ninety (90) calendar days from the date of this Report, in terms of section 7(3) of the Housing Act,1997 ensure that the HOD Human Settlements undertakes the necessary processes to rectify the incorrect allocation of the Hillside View House to Ms Ntsaku.

 

The HOD Human Settlements

Within one hundred and twenty (120) calendar days from the date of this Report, in terms of section 7(3) read with section 7(5) of the Housing Act,1997, rectify the incorrect allocation of the Hillside View House to Ms Ntsaku, to reflect the details of the rightful owners in line with section 16 of the Deed Registries Act,1937, as undertaken in the meeting held with the Investigation Team on 05 February 2025.

 

REPORT 32

I begin with Report Number 32, a complaint relating to irregular appointments of officials in the Bushbuckridge Local Municipality; Mr P Zwane and Ms TF Kgwedi who were allegedly appointed in the posts of Occupational Health and Safety Administration Clerk as well as Human Resource Administration Clerk respectively.

 

It was alleged that Mr Zwane did not meet the requirements of the advertised post which required candidates to have a Diploma in Human Resource Management and a minimum of two (2) years’ working experience in the same environment. Mr Zwane has a Bachelor’s Degree in Public Administration without working experience in the Occupational Health environment.

 

Similarly, Ms Kgwedi’s appointment was questioned by the complainant, who alleged that she too was appointed while she did not meet the requirements for the position of Human Resources Admin Clerk. The advertisement for the position required the candidates to possess a Grade 12 Certificate, without an option of equivalent qualifications; a National Diploma in Human Resource Management and a minimum of two (2) years’ experience in the Human Resources environment. She too did not meet the requirements.

The complainant alleged that the recruitment and appointment processes of the candidates were not done in line with the municipal policies, and the municipality had secured and reserved the posts for the appointed candidates.

 

Our investigation and findings, did confirm that both Mr Zwane and Ms Kgwedi were irregularly appointed as they did not meet the requisite academic qualifications and work experience.

 

We also found that the conduct of the interviewing panel, violated the Constitution and the Municipality’s Employment Practice Policy.

 

In terms of the remedial action the Executive Mayor is therefore required within 90 calendar days from the date of this report to table the report before the Municipal Council for deliberation and obtain approval for the appropriate course of action to address these irregular appointments.

 

The executive mayor, within 60 calendar days from receipt of this report to develop a system of delegation that will maximise administrative and operational efficiency and provide for adequate checks and balances. This should include strengthening of internal controls regarding recruitment in general, within the Municipality.

 

The Municipal Manager is required within 90 calendar days from receipt of this report to initiate disciplinary proceedings against members of the shortlisting and interviewing panels, namely, Mr SR Shilenge, Mr AM Mnisi, Mr D Hobyane, Ms RRL Mohlala and Mr SP Mokganya; whose conduct resulted in the irregular appointment of Mr Zwane and Ms Kgwedi.

 

The Municipal Manager must within 60 calendar days from the date of receipt of this report ensure that all officials in the human resource management as well as any employee who participate in the recruitment process, are properly trained to comply with the Employment Practice Policy in order for future appointments to be made in full compliance with the Policy.

 

REPORT 34

The next matter is Report Number 34 which was the complaint regarding the allegation of improper conduct and maladministration in the Limpopo Department of Health by a Departmental  official, namely, Mr Mothibe Rhodes Msiza who performed remunerative work outside his official duties without permission from the employer.

 

The complainant alleged that maladministration occurred at the department with a full-time employee of the department, Mr Msiza, working at the Groblersdal Hospital, while simultaneously serving as a full-time ward councillor at the Municipality. The Public Protector was requested to investigate whether the law allows a person to hold two (2) positions simultaneously in a government institution and if Mr Msiza had made the required disclosures of his employment to both the Health Department and the Municipality.

 

Our investigation revealed that Mr Msiza was elected as a ward councillor of ward 31, Elias Motsoaledi Municipality from August 2016 and performed other remunerative work while employed by the Department of Health without obtaining the permission from the executive authority as required by section 30(1) of the Public Service Act.

 

He failed to comply with the provisions of section 30(1) of the Public Service Act in that his application to perform other remunerative work was only made nineteen (19) months after he occupied a position as a ward councillor, and such application was incomplete and defective and was thus never approved. He, however, declared his financial interests to the municipality as required.

 

Mr Msiza continued to serve as ward councillor with the full knowledge that he did not have the required permission from his employer until he resigned four (4) years later.

 

The Labour Relations Unit of the Department failed to take corrective action against Mr Msiza after the then Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Groblersdal Hospital, Dr LJ Rashokeng, referred the transgression to the unit for advice and action in August 2018. The department only took action on 12 January 2022, by instituting disciplinary proceedings against Mr Msiza, who in turn resigned on 25 January 2022, however, these actions took place, after the Public Protector raised the allegations with the Department.  This was more than five (5) years after the department became aware of the matter.

 

Mr Msiza’s conduct was in contravention of section 7(3)(b) of the Public Service Act.

 

The Department also failed to execute cost recovery measures with regards to the remuneration of Mr Msiza by the municipality while he remained in the employment of the department. The department also did not take any steps to recover the costs when he resigned. This is in contravention of section 31(1)(a)(ii) of the Public Service Act that empowers the accounting officer to recover the remuneration irregularly paid.

 

Failure by the department to act promptly in dealing with the misconduct of Mr Msiza amounts to maladministration and improper conduct.

 

Accordingly, the following remedial action is taken:

 

The Head of Department is required to within 30 calendar days from the date of receipt of this report to institute legal proceedings against Mr Msiza for the cost recovery of the remuneration irregularly paid to him by the municipality without the permission of the executive authority.

 

The Head of Department must alternatively, make a determination in terms of section 31(1)(a)(iv) of the Public Service Act to approve the retention by Mr Msiza of the whole or a portion of the remuneration he received in contravention of section 30(1) of the Public Service Act. In the exercise of this discretion, as provided for in the above legal provision, the Head of Department must consider the seriousness of Mr Msiza’s conduct in this regard, who continued to serve as a councillor knowing that he did not have approval of the executive authority to do so.

 

The Head of Department must within 90 calendar days from the date of receipt of this report conduct a full audit in respect of all employees within the department who may be serving either as municipal councillors or in any other remunerative work to ascertain whether they have obtained the required permission as required by section 30(1) of the Public Service Act.  In the case of transgression, implement necessary remedial action in accordance with the Public Service Act.

 

The Head of Department must within 60 calendar days, take corrective action against the following officials of the department for their failure and/or delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings against Mr Msiza, in line with the provisions of the Public Service Act:

• Mr N Z Molefe, the Sekhukhune District Labour Relations Officer; and
• Mr M Molepo, the Deputy Director, Labour Relations, Provincial Office.

 

REPORT 36

Let me move to Report Number 36, whereby a complainant reported allegations of irregular appointment of Ms MC Sepheka as a Director: Community Services in the Maluti-a-Phofung Local Municipality, without meeting the minimum requirements for the position.

 

The complainant alleged that in February 2022, the municipality advertised numerous vacant positions for senior managers directly accountable to the Municipal Manager, including the position of Director: Community Services. The positions were filled in July 2022, whereby Ms Sepheka was appointed to the position of Director: Community Services, without meeting the minimum requirements.

 

One of the requirements as per the advertisement, was to have potential candidates undergo a Competency Based Assessment as required by law and regulations within local government.

 

Through our investigations it was established that Ms Sepheka did not meet the requirements as she obtained a score of “Basic” in the Competency-Based Assessment and was therefore deemed unsuitable for a Director position.

 

It was also established that the selection panel did not reconvene as per the requirement to finalize its report recommending the appointment of Ms Sepheka to the Council for the said position.  When the Executive Mayor Mr Gilbert Mokotso presented the report to Council, it was based on a draft report which was not signed off by the Municipal Manager, Mr Futhuli Mothamaha. This meant that the Council was misled regarding the appointment. As a result, the Council resolved to appoint the candidate.

 

This means that the conduct of Mr Mokotso and the Council constitutes improper conduct.

 

 

Accordingly, the Public Protector takes the following remedial action:

 

The Member of the Executive Council for COGTA must take cognisance of the report and ensure the implementation of the remedial action.

 

The Speaker of Council is required within 60 calendar days from the date of this report to take appropriate action against Mr Mokotso, the Executive Mayor, for breaching the Code of Conduct for Councillors.

 

The Executive Mayor is required within 90 calendar days from the date of this report table the report before the Municipal Council for deliberations and obtain approval to pursue a judicial review, as provided for in section 158(1)(h) of the Labour Relations Act,1995 to address the irregular appointment of Ms Sepheka as the Director: Community Services.

 

The Municipal Manager must within 60 calendar days from the date of this report ensure that future appointments are made in full compliance with section 56 of the Municipal Systems Act, 2000 as amended, and the Appointment Regulations.

 

MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE

 

As part of this quarterly report, we release reports related to allegations against Members of the Executive who are alleged to have breached the Executive Ethics Code, issued in terms of Executive Members’ Ethics Act (EMEA).  The detailed reports can be accessed from our website.  Just to give some of the highlights we investigated the following:

 

Report No. 33:  An investigation into allegations of abuse of power and/or improper conduct and breach of the Executive Ethics Code by the President of the Republic of South Africa, Mr MC Ramaphosa. The investigation emanates from a complaint lodged by the leader of the Democratic Alliance, Mr John Steenhuisen (the Complainant) on 16 April 2024. In his letter, the Complainant stated that and requested an investigation in terms of section 4(1)(a) of EMEA into the conduct of the President stemming from the announcement he made on 14 April 2024, when he attended an African National Congress (the ANC) campaign event in Zandspruit, Gauteng ahead of the elections.

 

The President communicated the information during the ANC event / public gathering at Zandspruit on 13 April 2024 and at that time, the information was already out in the public domain. There is no evidence before the Public Protector to conclude that the statement by the president communicating what was previously communicated or announced by the Gauteng Provincial Government and already in the public domain, was in violation of the provision of section 96 of the Constitution.

 

Report No. 35: Investigation into allegations that Mr Bhekokwakhe Hamilton Cele, the former Minister of Police, acted in breach of clause 2.1(a)-(d), 2.3(c), 2.3(d) and 2.3(f) of the Executive Ethics Code[1] (the Code) by using public funds to attend the 2023 Rugby World Cup in Paris, accompanied by his Executive Assistant, and exposed himself to a potential conflict of interest by accepting sponsorship from a private company.     

 

The allegation that Mr Cele acted in a manner that is inconsistent with his office when he used public funds to attend the 2023 Rugby World Cup in Paris, is unsubstantiated.

 

Report No. 37: Investigation into allegations of maladministration and/or abuse of power by the President of the Republic of South Africa, Mr MC Ramaphosa regarding his conduct when he allegedly handed over a Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) house to Ms Martha Louw in Donkerhoek, Northern Cape, during the African National Congress’ Letsema campaign held on 01 October 2022, is unsubstantiated.

 

Report No. 39: Investigation into allegations of irregular appointment of the Executive Manager: Complaints and Investigations in the Office of the Ombudsman for the City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality, is unsubstantiated.

 

Report No. 40: Investigation into allegations of improper conduct, maladministration and/or abuse or unjustifiable exercise of power by the former Minister of Home Affairs, Dr PA Motsoaledi and the Premier of the Eastern Cape Province, Mr LO Mabuyane in relation to the designation Bulembu Airport, Bhisho, and the acceptance of R20-million donation from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) government, respectively; including the alleged failure by the South African Revenue Services to ensure that all goods and foreign currency were declared during the landing of the UAE delegation at Bulembu Airport.

 

The evidence at the Public Protector’s disposal shows that the proof of email sent by Mr Makhode to Ms TA Fosi (Ms Fosi), Chief Executive Officer, Government Printing Works, purporting to be the transmission of Notice of designation, showed that it was “not responding.” The evidence from Ms Fosi also indicates that she did not receive an email from Mr Makhode on or about 12 April 2023. Resultantly, the publication of the Notice of designation only occurred subsequent to a follow-up email from Mr Makhode to Ms Fosi on 03 May 2023.

 

The Public Protector noted with concern that the publication of the designation of Bulembu Airport only happened on 05 May 2023, despite being approved by Dr Motsoaledi on 12 April 2023. Although, Regulation 8 of the Immigration Regulations does not prescribe timelines regarding the publication of the notice, it is reasonable to expect that it to precede the actual activity, which did not happen in this instance. In fact, by the time the designation was published in the Gazette on 05 May 2023, the UAE delegation had even left the Republic.

 

The Public Protector also noted that although Dr Motsoaledi designated Bulembu Airport as a port of entry and exit in terms of section 9A of the Immigration Act read with Regulation 8, there is a need to harmonise these regulations with section 30 of the BMA Act. There must be clarity on the circumstances which would ordinarily trigger the application of section 9A of the Immigration Act vis-a-vis section 30 of the BMA Act. This is so, because whilst the DHA asserts that section 9A of the Immigration Act applies in ‘temporary designation’ to irrefutably show that it caters for such kind of designations.

 

Considering the above observations, the following recommendations are made in terms of section 6(4)(c)(ii) of the Public Protector Act.   

 

Minister of Home Affairs:

Within a period of twenty four (24) months upon receipt of the final report, takes steps to initiate and finalise the harmonisation of section 9 of the Immigration Act and section 30 of the BMA Act in the regulations to be promulgated in terms of section 36(1)(k) of the BMA Act.

 

Member of the Executive Council for Finance, Eastern Cape Provincial Treasury

Within one hundred and twenty (120) calendar days, take steps to ensure that the EC Treasury issues instructions in terms of section 18(2)(a) of the PFMA to regulate the acceptance of donations, gifts, and sponsorships by departments, whether in cash or in kind.

 

As indicated earlier, these reports can be obtained on the Public Protector website: www.pprotect.org

 

Let me also emphasise that the remedial actions by the Public Protector are binding. Consequently, we urge all role players to implement prescribed remedial actions within the said timeframes.  A lot of progress has been done in this aspect within two years we have increased from 2% implementation of remedial action.  To date, we are sitting at 39% implementation of the Public Protector’s remedial actions.

 

Accessibility of PPSA

 

Besides the issuing of these reports today, the PP is establishing a satellite office here where were at today at KwaMhlanga which is aimed at expanding the PPSA’s footprint and bring its services closer to persons and in the greater KwaNdebele area and the surrounding areas. The move is part of the broader expansion strategy of the PPSA to ensure that communities, especially remote communities, have access to its services.

 

Currently the PPSA only has one provincial office in Mpumalanga, which is situated in Mbombela, over 300km from this area of Kwa-Mhlanga.

 

The satellite office will provide services to surrounding communities such as Siyabuswa Moloto, Ekukhanyeni, Moteti, Pieterskraal and others. Its proximity to these communities will save them time and money when they want to lodge complaints with the PPSA. Other than Mbombela, some complainants used to travel to Pretoria, which is about 80km away, to access the services of the PPSA. All these factors had contributed to the low number of complaints that the PPSA has been receiving from Mpumalanga provincial over the years, when comparatively, when were had an office in Siyabuswa, the Public Protector would receive between 70 and 100 complaints, per month, only from the Siyabuswa office.

 

Let me also amplify the fact that the release of this fourth quarter report today coincides with the launch of the satellite at the KwaMhlanga Magistrate Court. The opening of this office is part of our broader outreach strategy to expand our footprint to ensure easy access to our services throughout the country. We also plan to open similar offices in other areas of this District, this is one of many offices that we plan to open countrywide.

 

In an effort to ensure that members of the public are not left behind where we cannot reach them, we are also launching the Self-Service Portal today. This will enable members of the public to lodge their complaints and also access progress of their complaints using their smart phones or any other electronic device through the internet. The self-service link is https://cma.pprotect.org

 

To breach the digital and social divide, we are also launching our call-back facility. This facility will enable members of the public to send a message for free to our Call Centre Agents to prompt one of them to call them back. The call-back number is 083 274 4124.

 

Conclusion

As I conclude, I wish to express our dismay at the level of moral decay in our society as the nation continues to struggle to comprehend the case of a 7-year old Cwecwe in the Eastern Cape. The reality is that there are many similar cases that go unreported. I am however encouraged to see State institutions taking necessary steps to investigate the case of Cwecwe.  We condemn any act of violence against women and children.

 

It is worrying that this incident comes nine (9) months since we issued an investigation report on systemic deficiencies in our country's criminal justice system in responding to gender-based-violence challenges.  In the same vein, the Public Protector is committed to contribute to the fight against the abuse of women and children, by our investigation into systemic deficiencies plaguing the child maintenance system in our country which is progressing well and we aim to finalise the investigation in the coming months.

 

I thank you.

 

NOTE TO THE EDITORS

 

QR Code

https://cma.pprotect.org