tender

General Khan has an interest in how the tender is evaluated and appears to have information that only an insider would have.

“This communication from General Khan suggests that he does have an interest in how this tender is evaluated ... there is information that you could only have if you were talking to somebody inside.”

It is necessary to find out if Mr Fani declared an interest in the tender and confirm the requirements for such declaration given his apparent interest.

“I think one of the questions that would have to be asked of him is whether he declared an interest and I think it is advisable that we know what is the requirement.”

Mr Mnisi states the tender was cancelled by the BAC (Bid Adjudication Committee) in line with reasons he provided, and that the probity report was a critical document considered in the cancellation.

“Ended up cancelling the tender in line with the reasons that I provided ... The BAC said, took into account, in the resolution were referenced the probity a number of times ... That gives consistency that the probity report is part and parcel of the key reasons why we cancelled the tender”

It would have been quite unfortunate if a tender worth about 80 million were awarded in light of the irregularities found.

“it would be quite unfortunate that 80 million or so, a tender of that nature, would have been awarded in the light of these irregularities”

Director Malatji stated he did not know about the allegation that 50 bids went missing which was cited as reason for the tender cancellation.

“I did not know, I did not become aware of that allegation [that 50 bids went missing].”

There was a complaint and lawsuit regarding the tender documents being removed and some missing, leading the municipality to attempt to cancel the tender, but the court ordered the tender must proceed with evaluation, stating no basis to cancel.

“the municipality cancelled this tender because of a complaint about documents having been removed and being retained, some documents missing. Then it went to court, and the court directed that this tender must continue. There is no basis to cancel it, and the processing or the evaluation of the tender should proceed”

Director Malatji denies knowing about the complaint or allegation that documents were removed and missing, which led to a court order that the tender must proceed and not be cancelled.

“You say you never became aware of that... tender went to court because there had been a complaint or an allegation that documents were removed and some documents were missing, and the Court Ordered that that is the basis to cancel the tender.It must proceed to evaluation.You say you never became aware of that”

Sergeant Nkosi confirms that there was a tender involved which Mr Mampane had concerning an appointment, but he cannot recall the reason why Mr Mampane asked to say no to the appointment.

“But Mr Mampane did have a tender and he asked you to let him say no to that appointment, but you still say you cannot remember why he asked you to let him say no to that appointment.”

The tender was cancelled in October, but a WhatsApp message from April asked to prevent an appointment related to that tender, which was still thought to be active at that time.

“the tender, as a matter of fact, was cancelled in October. That is fact that is being put to you. We are looking at WhatsApp messages in April ... "Boetie, please let him say no to that appointment." ... was sent after he got information that the tender was cancelled ... at this point of this message, in April, the tender had not been cancelled”

Sergeant Nkosi acknowledges that if the tender was cancelled in October, then he could not have heard about the cancellation in April, so the message then couldn't have been sent after he heard the tender was cancelled.

“if the tender was cancelled in October, then in April he could not have been told or heard from anybody that the tender had been cancelled because it had not been cancelled. You should be able to accept that.”

Sergeant Nkosi sent a document to Mr Mampane related to a tender that was still under consideration at the time, thereby raising questions about why such a document was sent before the tender cancellation.

“you need to explain why you sent this document to Mr Mampane when it was a document relating to a tender that was still under consideration.”

Sergeant Nkosi maintains his position despite being challenged that the document he sent was not just the public list of bids but an internal Tshwane document regarding the status of the tender.

“your understanding, if it was your understanding, is simply wrong. ... I still stand by what I have said. ... the document is actually an internal Tshwane document, the date of which is not clear, but it is dealing with the status of this tender.”