SOP

Ms Ramsamy provided documents showing the standard operating procedure and case selection criteria directives issued and signed by Advocate Johnson and Mr Matthew Sesoko, Head of Investigation, in October 2024 and August 2022 respectively.

“I will deal with the section 27 referrals based on my personal experience and understanding of the SOP, case selection, criteria directive issued and signed by Advocate Johnson and Mr Sesoko in October 2024 and in August 2022 respectively.”

Director Malatji fully explained to Commissioner Bolhuis the process on how ad hoc deployments work and informed him that Gubis Solutions ad hoc services were initiated by another department without complying with the SOP.

“I fully explained to Commissioner Bolhuis the process on how ad hoc deployments work... I further explained to Commissioner Bolhuis that Gubis Solutions, ad hoc services, were initiated by the Department of Water and Sanitation without complying and/or observing the SOP mentioned above.”

The SOP is relevant only up to deployment, and cancellation is beyond the scope of the SOP steps.

“the SOP is about steps that must be followed from the time a request is made up to the time a deployment is authorised - So what I am saying now is, so the SOP is up to the point of deployment... So cancellation is beyond all that.”

Director Malatji acknowledges that the SOP was not observed in an actual deployment, leading to irregular deployment and subsequent inquiry before the Commission.

“it became relevant, Commissioner, because of the actual deployment that we carried out without observing or taking this SOP into consideration... because of irregular deployment.”

Failure to observe the SOP steps constituted irregular deployment that ought to have prompted cancellation of the deployment.

“failure to follow some or all of the SOP steps... irregular under the SOP”