Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd

The Water and Sanitation Department specifically mandated the use of Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd and refused to engage multiple service providers for budgetary and administrative reasons.

“The Water and Sanitation Department specifically mandated the use of Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd citing that they were already using this service provider ... refused to engage multiple different service providers for budgetary and administrative reasons.”

Gubis personnel were already working and deployed to sites prior to the official deployment letter, with the Water and Sanitation Department dictating their preferred service provider role.

“Gubis personnel were essentially already working and deployed to sites prior to me issuing the official deployment letter. As the paying and user department, the department dictate their preferred service provider and mandate was strictly limited to facilitating the base of their operational instruction.”

The department was already using Gubis prior to Major Phiri's involvement and owed approximately 2 million for services rendered that were unpaid.

“the department was already using Gubis before I was even involved... approximately 2 million generated by Gubis for service rendered to the department ... they were using it and the services were not paid ... now they include it to the next year ...”

The Water and Sanitation Department had already made promises to Gubis that they would commence work on the night of 31 December 2024.

“Furthermore, the Water and Sanitation Department had already made promises to Gubis that they will commence work on the night of 31 December 2024. Gubis personnel were essentially already working and deployed to sites prior to me issuing the official deployment letter.”

The deployment of Gubis sites was approved by the department management through their representative Mr Herman Segolela, not by APSS Inspector Phiri.

“Gubis was not given many sites by APSS Inspector Phiri. It was given sites by the department, the management of the department of Water and Sanitation through their representative, Mr Herman Segolela.”

Water and Sanitation decided to use only Gubis for reservoirs and pump stations scattered across seven regions for reasons unknown to Major Phiri, which he thinks are competent.

“The anomaly was that the reservoirs and pump stations were scattered all over seven regions, but Water and Sanitation decided to use only Gubis for their reasons, which are unknown to me, but I can think that they are competent.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies having any personal, business, financial, or other association with Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd or its directors or shareholders.

“I have no, never had any personal business, financial, or any other association with Gubis 85 Solutions, (Pty) Ltd or any of its directors or shareholders.”

A lot of money has been paid irregularly benefiting some service providers, including Gubis, in the context of ad hoc security services.

“a lot of money has been paid, which is irregular and that benefited some service providers within... and amongst them, it is Gubis.”

Director Malatji was initially unaware that Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd received many allocations for ad hoc security services until a complaint was made and the matter was investigated.

“before I received that complaint, I was not aware.”

Dr K E Madihlaba allocated two security sites to Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd via notification letters dated 20 and 21 January 2025, deploying 24 security officers and patrol vehicles, with the total value being R1060345.02 per month.

“Dr K E Madihlaba allocated two sites to Gubis 85 solutions (Pty) Ltd through notification letters dated 21 January 2025 and 20 January 2025 respectively. These notification letters deployed 24 security officers per site, two patrol vehicles for one site and one patrol vehicle for another site. The total value attached to these allocated sites was R1060345.02 per month.”

Dr K E Madihlaba did not have the authority to allocate the sites to Gubis 85 Solutions, which authority lies with Director APS S Mr Malatji, who never gave such permission or delegated it to Mr Phiri or Dr Madihlaba.

“I did not authorise Dr K E Madihlaba to allocate the two sites to Gubis 85 solutions (Pty) Ltd, nor did Dr K E Madihlaba have authority to allocate sites because such authority lies with the Director APS S , Mr Malatji. At no stage has Mr Malatji informed me that he gave permission for the allocation of these sites and/or that he delegated the allocation of sites to Mr Phiri and to Dr K E Madihlaba.”

The witness was not aware of nor involved in the allocation of ad hoc security sites to Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd and does not know the number or value of such allocations.

“I was not privy to the allocation of additional adhoc sites to Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd. As a result, I would not, and I do not know the number of sites allegedly allocated to Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Limited, nor the value of the services provided by Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Limited”

Inspector Phiri allocated numerous security service sites to Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd during January 2025 without proper authority.

“It has come to my knowledge recently that the then Inspector Phiri allocated numerous sites to one of the service providers, Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd. The schedule of sites allocated to Gubis 85 (Pty) Ltd during January 2025 is attached as Annexure SB4, notification for deployment letter signed by Mr A L Phiri.”

Inspector Phiri allocated 42 sites to Gubis 85 Solutions over about two months in early 2025, involving millions of rand of public funds, and this allocation was irregular and illegal.

“It is clear that it is irregular and it was completely illegal to do so, and that the person that allocated those sites, Mr Phiri implicated, had no authority to do so. ... it is 42 allocations over a space of two months running into millions of rands allocated to one company.”

Inspector Phiri was the signatory issuing notification letters to Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd, allocating sites and setting out numbers of security officers, patrol vehicles, and monthly costs per site.

“Mr Phiri is a signatory, issued notification letters to the directors of Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd ... each notification letter mentioned the name of the allocated site, number of security offices to be deployed, number of patrol vehicles, and monthly cost per site.”

Inspector Phiri allocated 40 sites to Gubis 85 Solutions valued at over R141 million during 14 January to 13 February 2025.

“During the period of 14 January to 13 February 2025, Inspector Phiri allocated 40 sites to Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd to the value of R14101520.89.”

Between January 2025 and February 2026, purchase orders were created for ad hoc security services from Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd, amounting to approximately R13,635,333.60 inclusive of VAT, for services allegedly provided during Commissioner Bolhuis' tenure as caretaker of APSS.

“The purchase orders created out of this process were registered on the TMPD system only on the following day, 6 March 2025. These included purchase orders for ad hoc services, ostensibly procured from Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd. In the aggregate amount of R1363533.60. ... Though these purchase orders were created and loaded on 5 and 6 March 025, after my acting stint as caretaker of APSS, some of these purchase orders refers to work and services allegedly provided during my tenure as caretaker.”

Commissioner Bolhuis denies giving permission or being aware of the skewed allocation of work favoring Gubis 85 Solutions during January and February 2025 or involving any other company in this manner.

“I reiterate that I never gave permission nor was I aware of such allocation of work to Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Limited during the time in question and in particular January 2025, February 2025 or to any other company.”