Hearing day 92

Mr Mnisi confirms his response to paragraphs 10 to 14 of the notice and identifies Annexure GM1 in Bundle 2 as part of his response.

“paragraphs 10 to 14 , I confirm the content of the statements . Further, in my Bundle 2 , GM1 , I confirm it is my annexure to this response”

Mr Mnisi describes his friendship with Sergeant Fannie Nkosi as based on compatibility and common interests, and that they socialized regularly from around 2015-2016.

“I confirm that I regard Sergeant Nkosi as a close personal friend of mine . Our relationship did develop over a period of time . As our friendship developed , we found ourselves socialising regularly . We also shared certain interests and hobbies of common nature , such as biking , sports shooting , and , of course , an appreciation for good food”

Mr Mnisi states he met Sergeant Nkosi through a mutual acquaintance known as Mr Simphiwe Mashile.

“I first met Sergeant Nkosi through a mutual acquaintance , better known as Mr Simphiwe Mashile”

Mr Mnisi met Sergeant Nkosi on a number of occasions during their friendship and found him to be a good listener and source of personal guidance during a turbulent period in his life including a painful and hostile divorce.

“I met with Sergeant Nkosi on a number of occasions during the course of our friendship . I can not state the exact number of the frequency of these meetings , unfortunately , at this stage . ... At the time , I was going through a deeply painful and hostile divorce , which placed me under immense emotional strain . I found Sergeant Nkosi to be a good listener . I found myself confiding in him increasingly , seeking personal guidance and advice , relying on him for support with respect to personal challenges that I was facing at the time”

Mr Mnisi confirms he did not receive any payment or benefit directly or indirectly from Sergeant Nkosi or through any third party.

“I have not received any payment or benefit either directly or indirectly from Sergeant Nkosi . I further confirm that I have not received any payment or benefit from a third party from Sergeant Nkosi .”

Mr Mnisi confirms meetings with Sergeant Nkosi and Mr Mpho Lekukela relating to work matters, although he cannot provide details for privacy reasons, and that he facilitated discussion between them in late 2023 due to strained relations.

“I can confirm I did meet Mr Mpho Lekukela in the presence of Sergeant Nkosi and agent gentleman known as Mr Simphiwe Mashile ... I can not for privacy and confidential reasons go into the details as to what transpired between the two of us as it was a workplace-related issue ... I then approached Mr Simphiwe Mashile to request Sergeant Nkosi ... to facilitate the discussion ... This I can confirm occurred in the later part of 2023 .”

Sergeant Nkosi's brother's company, despite being registered as a vendor within the City of Tshwane's supplier database and allocated a vendor number, seldom received communication from procurement.

“Sergeant Nkosii informed me at some stage whilst we were socialising that his brother's company, he was finding it difficult to navigate within the City of Tshwane’s procurement environment. He indicated to me that despite his brother's company being registered as a vendor within the City's supplier database system and being allocated a vendor number, for some reason he seldom received communication from procurement”

The request for the vendor number was to ascertain whether the brother's vendor number had been correctly migrated and captured on the City's new SAP Ariba business network.

“My request was purely to ascertain whether his brother's vendor number had been correctly migrated and captured accordingly on the City's new SAP Ariba business network.”

There were numerous complaints from suppliers about difficulties engaging with the City's procurement process due to changes and new internal controls.

“At the time, there were numerous complaints received and raised by many suppliers who were having difficulty in engaging with the City's procurement process as a result of the change or the implementation of new internal controls.”

The City of Tshwane was in the process of digitising its supply chain management function to implement SAP Ariba, causing many procurement issues and complaints at the time.

“At this time the City was in the process of digitising its supply chain management function to the implementation of SAP Ariba, which caused a lot of issues all around and was subject to many complaints at the time.”

SAP Ariba is a procurement platform designed to assist organisations with managing, sourcing, purchasing suppliers' contracts, invoicing, and payments in one connected system linking buyers and suppliers to the SAP Business Network.

“SAP Ariba is a procurement platform which assists organisations in managing, sourcing, purchasing suppliers' contracts invoicing, payments in a one connected system. It links buyers and suppliers to the SAP Business Network.”

Concerns about procurement difficulties were regularly brought to the attention of relevant officials and MR MNISI himself, particularly during the transition to the new SAP Ariba business network.

“These concerns were regularly brought to the attention of the relevant officials and myself, particularly during the transition of the new SAP Ariba business network, with suppliers reporting challenges relating to vendor registration.”

City officials, including MR MNISI, assisted many suppliers with issues arising from migration to the new SAP Ariba system to ensure digitisation of supply chain management benefits were realised.

“We all had to assist in the migration of these issues as the benefits to the City were enormous. Put in simple terms, we rolled up our sleeves and we assisted in whichever way we could as a pure mechanism of ensuring that we digitised the supply chain management system.”

The main benefits of SAP Ariba for the City included better control over company spending, improved procurement compliance and approval workflows, stronger supplier management and risk visibility, faster, more automated source-to-pay processes, improved invoice accuracy with fewer manual errors, and better spend insight for decision-making and savings opportunities.

“The main benefits of SAP Ariba for the City were the following. Better control over company spending. Improved procurement compliance and approval workflows. Stronger supplier management and risk visibility. Faster, more automated source-to-pay processes. Improved invoice accuracy and fewer manual errors. Lastly, better spend insight for decision-making and savings opportunities, just to name a few.”

In November and December 2025, training sessions for supplier development took place to assist SMMEs on the SAP Ariba system as part of the City’s supply chain management institutional arrangements.

“MR MNISI”

The procurement training included ensuring that SMMEs were capacitated to meet administrative compliance requirements and to prepare competitive bidding processes with effective pricing and contracting online.

“Inclusive within this training programme, Chair, was to ensure that the procurement training fundamentals and SMMEs were capacitated. We needed to ensure that SMMEs knew how to complete administrative compliance requirements. We needed to ensure that SMMEs were prepared and were able to prepare competitive bidding processes with effective pricing, contracting as well, online.”

The City was experiencing supply chain management issues, including irregular expenditure, which required implementation of the SAP Ariba system to curb these matters.

“Amongst this, what is key, Chair, is that the City was experiencing supply chain management issues, which are well-known issues. The City has found itself incurring issues of irregular expenditure of the past and we had to curb these issues. In terms of us curbing these matters, we had to come up with a system where we implement Ariba.”

The implementation of SAP Ariba was still persisting and its change management process was difficult to manage and for suppliers to understand.

“Chairperson, the Ariba implementation was still persisting. The reason I am bringing this on board is that this is an issue that is still persisting and the change management process was a difficult one to manage and for suppliers to understand.”

The City aimed to move its supply chain management to a completely digital platform to reduce barriers to entry and increase competitiveness in bidding processes.

“This is part and parcel of the City's goals to completely move to a digital platform from a supply chain management perspective, moving away from physical tender documents and papers which could be easily manipulated.”

Administrative glitches like not ticking a box caused disqualification in competitive bidding, reflecting barriers to entry experienced by many service providers.

“Administrative glitches of a person not ticking a box resulted in disqualification. These were findings that were raised by the agent.”

A multi-department partnership including Group Financial Services, Group Economic Development, SARS, Provincial Department, and NYDA was formed to train SMMEs on supply chain management and tax matters to overcome barriers to entry for suppliers.

“This was a partnership with supply chain management and Group Financial Services that was managing in conjunction with Group Economic Development. You can see...We had representatives from SARS, we had representatives from Provincial Department, we had representatives from NYDA. It was a provincial issue-wide matter that we were trying to resolve.”

The City resolved that the Supply Chain Management division must conduct SMME training workshops in all seven regions, including education on migration to SAP Ariba and administrative mandatory evaluation criteria for bidders.

“A resolution is taken that the City must ensure... supply chain management Division would conduct SMME training workshops to educate committees and residents about supply chain management matters... Work shops must be conducted in all seven regions of the City. This... includes matters of migration of SAP Ariba, ensuring that administrative mandatory evaluation criteria are clearly understood by various bidders.”

All procurement transactions from 0 to 750 were done online, and the process had been seamlessly migrated, enabling evaluations, conclusions and adjudications online.

“Which gives guidance that all procurement from 0 to 750 were done online. The process had been seamlessly migrated, and all procurement was effectively evaluated, concluded and adjudicated online.”

The City was piloting official competitive bidding processes for three groups: health, communication, marketing and events, economic development and spatial planning, with a plan for full electronic rollout by July including big business units.

“We were already piloting the official competitive bidding processes for three groups within the City, being health, communication, marketing and events, as well as economic development and spatial planning, with the plan to ensure that from the 1st of July, the entire city with the big business units also go online.”

The service delivery war room chaired by the Executive Mayor includes members from the Mayoral Committee, City Manager, executives and key business units, and addresses urgent and pertinent matters about service delivery issues that persist unresolved.

“This is a service delivery war room where urgent, pertinent matters are escalated and must be addressed accordingly... It is chaired by the Executive Mayor of the City. There are members of the Mayoral Committee, the City Manager, all executive structures and key service delivery business units.”

Many stakeholders and suppliers found it difficult to understand the change from paper-based to digital environment in competitive bidding, which was targeted as a corruption combating measure.

“Many of them found it difficult to understand the move from the City from a paper-based environment to a digitalised environment. This is something I championed from the beginning of my appointment at the City, purely as a means of combating corrupt and elucidated activities.”

Between Dec 2024 to June 2025, Sergeant Nkosi assisted Mr Mnisi by recommending the services of a driver; there was no quick procurement involved and Mnisi paid the driver himself.

“Further, I do state for the record that during the period of December 2024 to about June 2025, he assisted me by recommending the services of a driver. There was no quick procure involved. He merely assisted a friend in need, and I paid the driver for the services he was providing to me.”

Mr Mnisi confirms he met Mr Mandla Mgcina introduced by Sergeant Nkosi in a social setting coincidentally, exchanged pleasantries, provided contact details on request, but denied any prior meeting, engagement, or interaction of any nature.

“I confirm that I did meet Mr Mandla Mgcina, and I was introduced to him by Sergeant Nkosi. The introduction happened in a social setting and from my, I think, view was entirely coincidental... My interaction with Mr Mgcina was limited to being introduced to him, where we briefly exchanged pleasantries... I reiterate that no meeting, engagement, or interaction of any nature ever took place between myself and Mr Mandla Mgcina, to his or another's intervention.”

Mr Mnisi denies having any business or commercial relationship or any personal, professional, or intermediate connection with Mr Joseph Anyoni, either directly or indirectly through Sergeant Nkosi.

“I confirm for the record that I do not know Mr Joseph Anyoni. I have never had any direct or indirect, either through Sergeant Nkosi or any other person in relationship associations with dealing with him, nor have I ever had any personal, professional, or intermediate connection or interaction with him.”

Mr M R M N I S I states he doubted his interaction with Mr Mgcinaa who tried to contact him on a few occasions.

“I have doubted my interaction with Mr Mgcinaa above. He did try to contact me on a few occasions, I must also confirm.”

Mr M R M N I S I states he has never met, communicated, or interacted with Mr Vusimuzi Catmlala in any manner and confirms no personal, professional, social, or official relationship has existed between them.

“I have never met, communicated, or interacted with Mr Vusimuzi Catmlala in any manner whatsoever. I accordingly confirm that no personal, professional, social, or official relationship has existed between myself and Mr Matlala.”

Mr M R M N I S I states he has never met, communicated, or interacted with Mr Sibanyoni in any manner and has never had any direct or indirect engagement with him.

“I reiterate that I have never met, communicated, or interacted with Mr Sibanyoni in any manner whatsoever, nor have I ever had any direct or indirect engagement with him.”

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.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any relationship, direct or indirect, with Ngaphesheya Construction and Projects CC or any of its shareholders, directors, or representatives.

“I have no, nor have I ever had any relationship with Ngaphesheya Construction and Projects CC, directly or indirectly. I further confirm that I have no interest in or relationship with any of the shareholders, directors, or representatives of the said entity.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any interest or relationship with Triotic Protection Services CC, its shareholders, directors or representatives, but is aware it was previously associated with the Deputy Executive Mayor of the City of Tshwane, who has since resigned from that position.

“I confirm that I have no, nor have I ever had any interest or relationship with Triotic Protection Services CC, either directly or indirectly. I further confirm that I have no interest in relationship nor have I ever had any relationship with the shareholders, directors, or representatives of the said entity. I am, however, aware of the fact that Triotic Protection Services was previously associated with Deputy Executive Mayor of the City of Tshwane. My understanding is that he was, at some point in time, a director of the entity. He has since resigned from that position.”

Mr M R M N I S I confirms knowing that Sergeant Nkosi's brother is a director of Ngaphesheya Construction and Projects but denies any personal, business, financial or other relationship with him or the company.

“I confirm that I know that Sergeant Nkosi's brother is a director of Ngaphesheya Construction and Projects. Notwithstanding that fact, I confirm that I have no, nor have I ever had any personal business, financial, or other relationship with him or his company.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any interest or relationship with Vimtsire Security and Protection Services CC or any of its shareholders, directors or representatives.

“I confirm that I have no, nor have I ever had any relationship or interest in Vimtsire Security and Protection Services, either directly or indirectly. I further confirm that I have no interest in or relationship with any of the shareholders, directors, or representatives of the said company.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any interest or relationship with Two Cops and Security Services CC and any of its shareholders or directors.

“I confirm that I have no, nor have I ever had any interest nor any relationship with Two Cops and Security Services CC, either directly or indirectly. I confirm that I have no interest in nor relationship with any of the shareholders, directors, or representatives of the said company.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any personal, business, financial or any other association with Two Cops and Security Services CC or any of its shareholders or directors.

“I also confirm that I have no personal, business, financial, or any other association which exists between myself and Two Cops and Security Services CC or any of its shareholders or directors.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any personal, business, financial or any other association with Elshadai Security Services CC or any of its shareholders or directors.

“I further confirm that I have no personal, business, financial, or any other association which exists between myself and Elshadai Security Services or any of its shareholders or directors.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any interest or relationship with Elshadai Security Services CC or any of its stakeholders, shareholders, directors or representatives.

“I further confirm that I have no, nor have I ever had any interest nor relationship with Elshadai Security Services CC, either directly or indirectly. I further confirm that I have no interest in or relationship with any of the stakeholders, shareholders, directors, or representatives of the said entity.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any relationship with any of the bidders in respect of TMPD 02/2016/17, either directly or indirectly, including with their shareholders, directors or representatives.

“I confirm that I have no, nor have I ever had any relationship in or with any of the bidders in respect of TMPD 02/2016/17, either directly or indirectly. I further confirm that I have no interest in or relationship with any of the shareholders, directors, or representatives of the said companies.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any personal, business, financial or any other association with Vimtsire Security and Protection Services CC or any of its directors or shareholders.

“I confirm further that I have no personal, business, financial, or any other association which exists between myself and Vimtsire Security and Protection Services CC or any of its directors or shareholders.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any interest or relationship with bidders in respect of TMPD 01/2024/25, either directly or indirectly, including with their shareholders, directors or representatives.

“I want to confirm that I have no, nor have I ever had any interest in or relationship with any of the bidders in respect of TMPD 01/2024/25, whether directly or indirectly. I further confirm that I have no interest in or relationship with any of the shareholders, directors, or representatives of said companies.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any interest or relationship with bidders in respect of TMPD 03/2024/25, either directly or indirectly, including with their shareholders, directors or representatives.

“I confirm that I have no, nor have I ever had any interest in or relationship with any bidder in respect of TMPD 03/2024/2025, whether directly or indirectly. I further confirm that I have no interest in or relationship with any of the shareholders, directors, or representatives of said company.”

Mr M R M N I S I denies any personal business financial association with any of the bidders in respect of TMPD 03/2024/25 including their shareholders or directors.

“I further have no personal business financial association which exists between myself or any of the bidders in respect of TMPD 03/2024/2025 or any of its shareholders or directors.”

Mr M R M N I S I states that Sergeant Nkosi persistently forwarded him names of two prospective bidders who were subsequently awarded as part and parcel of this panel.

“I do, however, wish to place on record that Sergeant Nkosi persistently forwarded me names of two prospective bidders who were subsequently awarded as part and parcel of this panel.”

Bid Specification Committees independently scrutinised the bid TMPD 01/2024/25 to validate specifications and ensure no bias towards specific bidders.

“there were about seven of them who served within the Specification Committee. Their role is to independently look at specific specifications to validate whether they do not favour specific bidders”

The Bid Specification Committee advertised the bid on 26 August 2024 with a closing date of 2 October 2024 for submissions.

“The advert was completed and advertised on the 26th of August 2024... The closing register for this bidding question was the 2nd of October 2024”

The Bid Evaluation Committees worked extensively to review numerous bids before presenting final evaluation reports to the Bid Adjudication Committee for scrutiny and consideration.

“The Bid Evaluation Committees sat on various occasions, taking into account there were a number of bids and there was immense work that needed to be concluded in terms of providing this... I have attached GM 13 and 14 as the final BEC reports that were presented to the Bid Adjudication Committee for consideration and scrutiny”

An independent external legal firm conducted probity oversight to validate the Bid Evaluation Committee's work before awards were made.

“this was subject to an independent probity by an external legal firm who is independent to validate that the work that has been concluded by the Bid Evaluation Committee before it comes to BEC is up to standard and they have not missed any glitch or process within the supply chain management structure”

The Bid Specification Committee completed a process indicated by signed approval from the Chief Financial Officer and the City Manager approving the tender advertisement as fully compliant.

“I have recorded Annexure GM 9 and 10 as a form of communication wherein myself as the Chief Financial Officer and the City Manager approve and endorse the tender for advertisement as a result of these being fully compliant from the first date of the advert”

The tender relates to services for monitoring and prevention of illegal and building occupation and demolition of unlawfully erected structures within the City, listed as item 5 in the approved advert communications.

“The tender relates to the provision for services for monitoring prevention of illegal and building occupation as well as demolition of unlawfully erected structures within the City. The tender was listed here under number 5 with the approved advert”

All bids were duly recorded and secured under lock and key, accessible only by approved individuals.

“These bids, Chair, I must address that once submitted, are stored safely under lock and key and can only be accessed via official register through certain approved individuals within the procurement structure.”

The tender officially closed on the 2nd of October and about 7 bids were received at the time of closing.

“This tender officially closed on the 2nd of October. According to the stipulated submission deadline and procurement requirements, there were a total of about 7 bids that were received at the time of closing.”

The bid opening process was conducted in line with the City's supply chain management procedures to ensure transparency, fairness, and compliance with applicable regulatory frameworks.

“The bid opening process was conducted in line with the City's supply chain management procedures to ensure transparency, fairness, and compliance with applicable regulatory frameworks.”

The tender was subject to extensions on three occasions: 31 March 2025, 29 June 2025, and 27 September 2025.

“This tender, Chair person, was subject to extensions on three occasions, 31st of March 2025, 29th of June 2025, 27th of September 2025.”

The closing register is a raw document finalized and distributed on the closing day, with confirmed 57 bids received in total for the tender after extensions.

“this is the raw closing register that was finalised on the day, which was distributed to several individuals who are interested in. ... we can see the stamp of authority and confirmation that there were 57 bids that were received.”

All extensions were done in line with the City's supply chain management processes and policies under the delegated authority of the Director Acquisition Management, and the Chief Financial Officer was not responsible for the approval of such extensions.

“All these extensions, Chair, I can confirm were done in line with the City's supply chain management processes and procedures and policies under the delegated authority of the Director Acquisition Management. ... I, in my capacity as the Chief Financial Officer, am not involved or responsible for the approval of such extensions. It is a delegated function.”

The bid specification process included the terms of reference TMPD01 for the provision of services for monitoring and prevention of illegal and building occupation, and demolition of unlawfully erected structures within the City of Tshwane on 19 September.

“The bid specification process duly was considered and approved with the terms of reference of TMPD01, pertaining to the provision of services for the monitoring and prevention of illegal and building occupation, as well as demolition of unlawfully erected structures within the City of Tshwane on the 19th of September.”

The bid specification process was conducted by a separate committee with independent perspective, which completed declarations of authorities in accordance.

“this was a process that was undertaken by a separate committee from an independent perspective. They had completed the declarations of authorities in accordance.”

The bid specification committee was constituted by seven members and chaired by Mr March.

“This committee was constituted by seven member panel, chaired by Mr March.”

The Bid Evaluation Committee had appropriate representation from supply chain management, the user department, and the department responsible for the tender, promoting objectivity, technical competence, and compliance within the City supply chain management framework.

“The composition of the BEC ensured appropriate representation from supply chain management, the user department, as well as the department responsible for this tender, thereby promoting objectivity, technical competence, and compliance within the City supply chain management framework.”

The Bid Evaluation Committee was duly constituted with six members, chaired by Mr Victor Kgopa, and commenced work on 1 August 2025.

“the Bid Evaluation Committee was duly constituted and comprised of six members, chaired by Mr Victor Kgopa, and they commenced their work on the 1st of August 2025.”

The Bid Evaluation Committee convened several times to evaluate the bid according to prescribed evaluation criteria including administrative compliance, functionality, and preferential procurement requirements, and presented findings and recommendations to the Bid Adjudication Committee on three separate occasions.

“Within this process, the Bid Evaluation Committee convened on several occasions, like I have stated, to evaluate the bid in accordance with the prescribed evaluation criteria, including administrative compliance, functionality, and preferential procurement requirements. Following to its deliberations, the committee presented its findings and recommendations to the Bid Adjudication Committee on three separate occasions for consideration and further guidance.”

The final Bid Evaluation Committee reports have been attached as Annexure GM13 and GM14.

“The final Bid Evaluation Committee reports have been attached as Annexure GM13, as well as GM14.”

The work of the Bid Evaluation Committee is to ensure they look at the established scope of reference, including personnel, equipment, and other requirements necessary for a bidder to be successful.

“The work of the BEC is to ensure that they look at the established scope of reference. ... On 3.5.1, on the personnel that might be required per region and what the key requirements would be for any bidder to be successful in terms of passing the stage on the personnel perspective. We further move on to 3.5.2, in terms of equipment.”

The Bid Evaluation Committee looks at key requirements such as personnel, equipment, number of vehicles required and other specifications of contact information necessary for compliance.

“On 157 we elaborate in detail, Chair, what type of equipment must be brought on board, how many vehicles are required, what other specifications of various contact information must be brought on board for this.”

The segregation of duties and compliance work within the tender process are indicated on page 161 (page 12 of the argument document).

“On page 12, it is on 161. And I am dealing with this on purpose, Chair, to try and give an indication of these segregation of duties and the work of compliance that must”

The tender bidding process is rigorous and involves multiple stages including administrative compliance checks, physical site inspections, and a preference points system.

“This tender was subjected to a four-stage bidding process, whereby firstly administrative compliance requirements have to be facilitated by the BEC... Physical site inspection to validate the submissions and POE... Lastly is the preference point system”

The Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) conducts independent pre-compliance assessments to scrutinize bidders' submissions and eliminate non-compliant bidders early in the process.

“This is a pre-compliance schedule that is done independently by the committee that I have referred to, the BEC, where they clearly scrutinise where the bidders have clearly outlined and provided their CSC…”

The Bid Evaluation Committee is multidisciplinary, comprising individuals from supply chain management, TMPD, user departments, and the departments regularly utilising the tender.

“BEC and the members that have been appointed, I am going to reiterate, are made up of individuals from supply chain management, TMPD, the user department, as well as the departments who regularly utilise or make use of this tender. It is a multidisciplinary structure, a form of individuals and expertise who are together involved with dealing with these matters.”

The Bid Evaluation Committee excludes bidders who are registered as restricted or blacklisted suppliers by the National Treasury and those who are state employees.

“From a pre-compliance perspective, we check whether the company declared CSD number. This is to confirm whether they are registered on the National Treasury's Centralised Supplier Database... They are suppliers who are blacklisted from doing business with the state... Second component is state employees. We do not do business with state employees.”

Bidders who do not attend the compulsory briefing session are disqualified at the pre-qualification stage.

“There is a compulsory briefing session. If you do not attend that clarification engagement, you are disqualified at this point from the onset.”

The administrative requirements for bidders include completion of forms MBD1, MBD4, MBD5, MBD8, and MBD9, including declaration of interests, procurement documentation, and independent tender completion certification.

“The key items of completion for administrative requirements, bidders must ensure that the minimum bidding documents are fully completed. MBD 1 for argument’s sake must be completed in full. MBD 4, which references declaration of interest, must be completed in full... MBD 5. MBD 8 is an essential declaration of past SCM management experience. MBD 9 is an essential declaration which certifies the independent completion of this tender.”

The certification of independent tender determination is done by the bidder who makes a commitment to the accuracy of the bid information.

“It is the bidder, Chair. In short, they make a commitment that all the information completed here is from us as the bidder, and we stand by it.”

There are 10 bidders who have passed the stage of administrative requirements and moved on from administrative to mandatory compliance.

“So now, Chair, the bidders who remain and move on from administrative to mandatory compliance are the 10 bidders who have passed the stage of administrative requirements .”

The Bid Evaluation Committee, comprised of individuals from all departments within the City, conducts an independent checklist of each remaining bidder.

“the BEC , which is comprised of multifaceted individuals from all departments within the City, then conducts an independent checklist of each bidder that is remaining .”

Due diligence is done in terms of double checking that the Bid Evaluation Committee has disqualified the correct individuals in line with the schedule provided.

“It also demonstrates that due diligence is done in terms of double checking with the work of themselves that the BEC have in fact disqualified the correct individual s in line with the schedule that has been prepared earlier on .”

Bidder 19 will be disqualified from the process for failure to adhere to key mandatory requirements including photographic evidence and R10 million liability insurance.

“It is already an indication to me that bidder 19 , without saying his name , will be disqualified from the process for failure to adhere to the key requirements as designated by the mandatory requirements .”

Minimum bidder requirements include having a PSIRA certificate and providing declarations of interest under oath by BEC members.

“The minimum requirements is firstly, the bidders must have a PSIRA certificate . These bidders have that ? They conduct a checklist , Chair. This is all under oath . There are declarations of interest that are completed by all members of the BEC .”

Bidder 19 does not provide photographic evidence of vehicles as required, which is a grounds for disqualification.

“Bidder 19 , for some reason , does not provide photographic evidence of vehicles as required in the specifications , meaning there is a glitch here and it is an area of concern , which means he might not be able to pass and go to the next stage .”

Bidders 12, 109, 44, 51, and 54 did not meet mandatory requirements and are disqualified from the process moving forward.

“So , the bidders that are listed here , which is 12 , 109 , 44 , 51 , and 54 for argument ' s sake , do not meet the mandatory requirements . They are disqualified from the process moving forward .”

Bidders 2, 5, 21, 23, 26, 32, 35, 36, and 40 are compliant from mandatory perspective and are moving forward to the next stage of physical verification.

“The top is a tabulated – it is a table that informs bidder 2 , 5 , 21 , 23 , 26 , 32 , 35 , 36 , and 40 that are compliant from mandatory perspective .”

The physical verification is conducted on site by the Bid Evaluation Committee made up of multifaceted individuals from supply chain management, TMPD, and the user department responsible for utilising the tender.

“...the Bid Evaluation Committee , I am going to reiterate , Chairperson , they are made up of multifaceted individuals across the City from supply chain management , TMPD , as well as the user department that is responsible for utilising this tender . They then must go out on site and conduct physical inspections and validate whether the vehicles that have been provided as part and parcel of the bid are actually those vehicles ...”

The Bid Evaluation Committee members are appointed by the City Manager and are representatives seconded by departments such as TMPD and Human Settlements.

“Members of these committees are appointed by the City Manager . They are representatives , and they are seconded by the departments .”

Bidder 21 does not have a number 5 tonne truck as designated in the bid and thus needs to be disqualified from physical assessment.

“Bidder number 21 , for some reason , does not have a number 5 - tonne truck as designated within the bid that was submitted . They then need to be disqualified as a result of not meeting the requirements from a physical assessment perspective .”

Eight bidders are compliant from a site inspection perspective and must be evaluated further in stage four which considers pricing and preference points.

“We are now remaining on table number 7 . 2 , with about eight bidders who are compliant from a site inspection perspective , whom must therefore then be evaluated further on stage four . Stage four is when you consider pricing and preference points systems .”

Bidders 2, 15, 23, 26, 32, 35, 36, and 40 have passed the entire compliance process and are now evaluated at the last stage where procurement process is assessed.

“Bidder 2 , 15 , 23 , 26 , 32 , 35 , 36 , and 40 , Chair , are now the bidders who have passed the process from A to Z , and at the last stage , where they are evaluating the procurement process .”

The Chairperson and secretary of the committees are appointed or seconded by the supply chain management team.

“And then the chairperson and the secretary of these committees are appointed by or are seconded by the supply chain management team .”

Mr Mnisi does not play a role in appointing members of these committees; they are appointed by the City Manager.

“No , I do not . Members of these committees are appointed by the City Manager .”

The Chief of Police is responsible for providing TMPD individuals to the Bid Evaluation Committee to avoid hand-picking individuals favorable to anyone.

“The Chief of Police will be responsible for providing individuals who are from TMPD to certain , on BEC . If it is Human Settlements who is involved as well , group Human Settlements department must second individuals who will serve in BEC as well .”

Mr Mnisi advises and recommends to the City Manager on the list of individuals who may serve on the committees but does not make final appointment.

“I do , Chair. I am CC 'd on that , and I do confirm that we did receive a list from the various departments , and this is a list that the City Manager can endorse . I do advise and I do recommend it .”

Mr Mnisi confirms he is carbon copied on matters relating to committee member nominations and endorses the process when departmental heads have recommended individuals.

“I am always carbon copied on those matters , and when there is a descending view, I raise that . And in this instance , when I am carbon copied and I see the list of individuals and I am happy that the process has been followed and that the relevant departmental heads have recommended individuals , I endorse it , and I have no issue whatsoever .”

The tender responsibility lies with the TMPD, but if this function is not in place, the Human Settlements department normally uses the tender as Human Settlements or Shared Services; TMPD owns the tender and provides funding.

“responsible for the tender in this case will be TMPD ... the owner of this tender is TMPD ... they make available some sort of funding to ensure that this tender is executed accordingly”

GM13 is a BEC report that was referred back to BAC for refinement and alignment with supply chain management requirements.

“GM 13 is a BEC report that was referred back ... to the BAC for further clarification, refinement, and alignment with the applicable supply chain management requirements”

The final BEC report GM14 addressed concerns raised by BAC and was approved as the final report.

“GM 14 ... is the final BEC report that was considered and approved. BEC is now coming on board and saying we have dealt with these concerns ... these are the responses ... it is the final BEC report that was considered and approved”

The Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) makes evaluations and recommendations to the Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC). On three occasions for this tender, BAC referred matters back to BEC for refinement.

“The Bid Evaluation Committee presents its evaluation outcomes and recommendations to the Bid Adjudication Committee ... On three occasions for this tender ... the matter was referred back to the BEC ... the Bid Evaluation Committee duly considered the BEC's input and effected the necessary corrections”

The BAC's powers, including the power to refer back to BEC, are delegated through the MFMA and SCM policy to the City Manager who delegates further to the Bid Adjudication Committee including Mr Mnisi as chairperson.

“It is in the delegation of authorities ... the roles and responsibilities of the Bid Adjudication Committee as per the MFMA ... delegated to the City Manager, who further delegates them to myself (chairperson) and other members serving on the Bid Adjudication Committee”

BEC must respond to probity concerns and if they do not, the matter is referred back, which happens when answers are not readily available or BEC needs to reconstitute to respond to BAC queries.

“BEC will say , where is the probity report in terms of this bid ? Or the probity raised these concerns , have you addressed them accordingly ? We are not seeing this clearly stated in the BEC report . The BEC is there to answer that question ... when answers are not readily available by the BEC , or whether the BEC themselves need to reconstitute in terms of responding to the BAC on that particular query”

The policy requires the Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC) to ensure the procurement process has no glitches or shortcomings and if issues are found, the matter must be referred back to the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) for clarification.

“the policy makes reference to the BAC performing its function ensuring that the process has been followed to the T without any glitches or shortcomings . If the BAC picks up shortcomings within the process , we are entitled to refer that back for clarification”

The accounting officer has the power to refer matters back to BAC if necessary and approve or disapprove BAC's conclusions on awards.

“an accounting officer perspective , Chair , where the BAC would conclude on an award . The accounting officer has got the power to refer that back and say , I am referring this back ... If we respond accordingly , the accounting officer then okays that response and approves .”

The Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC) was not comfortable with the pricing structure 'as and when' which led to the report being referred back to the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) to provide clarity.

“B A C w a s n o t c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g : The pricing per award leads to bid pricing, and some of the pricing in the fee structure are as and when. BAC further notes that as and when is not standard pricing.”

The concept of 'as and when' pricing is a rate-based appointment implying work isn’t done every day, and lack of stipulation could allow bidders to submit invoices even when no work has been done.

“So, Chairperson, it is a rate-based appointment, meaning there will not be illegal invasion every day. So, if we do an appointment without clearly stipulating as and when, the bidders might take advantage of that and submit a monthly invoice, even when there was no work that has been done in terms of removal of illegal structures and invasion.”

The final probity report was not provided to the BAC at the time to confirm that all concerns were addressed, though the BAC was aware the bid underwent probity process.

“The third aspect is that we, as BAC, were fully aware that this bid underwent probity. However, the final probity report was not provided to the BAC at this stage, confirming that all the concerns that were raised had been addressed.”

There was a massive provision of services used across all regions not catered for in the bid specifications, and lack of clarity on methodology for allocating regions to bidders led to referral back to BAC by acting Chairperson.

“Concerns in terms of service provided used across all regions was a massive provision which was not catered for in the specifications. There was no clarity in terms of methodology used in terms of allocating regions to specific bidders. On the basis of that region, Chairperson, it was resolved that this tender be referred back by the acting Chairperson of that day.”

BAC cannot make a determination on why the highest scoring bidder was not recommended due to the need for consensus and proper delegation of authority; directives must allow BEC to finalize matters first.

“In practise, Chair, had the BAC made a determination, there would be a breach in lines in terms of the delegation of authorities... So, we do not make a directive because there will be a breach of process. We have to allow the BEC to make a determination. There must be consensus throughout the process.”

The BEC report was not substantive enough about why the highest scoring bidder, who appears cheapest, was not awarded.

“The report was not substantive in terms of why is this bidder, who appears to be the cheapest, not awarded... That is not attached in the BEC report.”

The bid evaluation process revealed concerns about compliance, probity, and transparency, including incomplete communication from the probity audit team and partial responses only from five bidders out of 57.

“During his deliberations, the BAC raised several concerns relating to the compliance, probity and transparency of the evaluation process... the BAC noted that documentation provided on validity extensions reflected responses only from five bidders rather than all 57. There was no formal communication received from the independent external probity audit team that the matters had been adequately resolved.”

The BEC resolved that the tender remained valid until end of September, with recent extension as a precaution to ensure validity upon finalization.

“The BEC resolved that the tender remained valid until the end of September and that the recent extension was just a precautionary measure to ensure the validity upon finalisation.”

The bid evaluation committee highlighted the need for greater clarity and transparency, particularly regarding the methodology used to allocate regions in the preference points system which was not clearly articulated in the report.

“The bid evaluation committee also highlighted the need for greater clarity and transparency in the report, particularly regarding the methodology used to allocate regions... The BEC indicated that the bid specifications did not prescribe specific allocation criteria... However, other than limiting bidders to one region, the bid evaluation committee then decided to utilise the preference points system which will be applied in terms of determining allocation of bidders.”

Following these concerns, the BAC resolved to refer the probity report back to the Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) for clarity on inconsistencies and to obtain a final probity confirming all issues have been addressed.

“the BAC resolved to refer the report back to BEC on the following directive: [1] Provide clarity on the apparent inconsistency regarding the recommendation of a bidder previously disqualified by the external independent probity team. Obtain and submit a final probity confirming that all issues have been dealt with satisfactorily.”

The Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC) raised concerns about inconsistencies in the probity report regarding a bidder flagged for non-10 compliance who was nonetheless recommended for award without adequate explanation.

“Specifically, the BAC noted a discrepancy where a bidder which was flagged by the probity team for non-10 compliance was nonetheless recommended for award without adequate explanation.”

The BEC improved the clarity and detail of pricing by breaking down blanket amounts into specific articulations for personnel, vehicles, and additional vehicles on an as-and-when basis compared to the previous bid matrix (GM15).

“In the previous GM15 you would have said Region 1, Bidder 15, a holistic price of 25000 for argument's sake. Now it is clearly articulated on what the pricing for personnel is, what the pricing for vehicles is, what the pricing for additional vehicles are, and it is on an as-and-when basis.”

The BAC insisted on a final probity report providing physical evidence and assurance that all concerns, including those related to validity of extensions and disqualifications, were satisfactorily addressed before approval.

“You cannot just tell us by word of mouth, as BEC, that Probity Team have confirmed the report is now fine, you can approve. We need a portfolio of evidence to convince us, as the BAC, that indeed, that certainty was obtained.”

The preference points system is to be clearly articulated in the final report showing how awards are broken down and applied.

“Include in the report how a preference points system would be applied. For those reasons, Chairperson, we therefore refer the report back.”

Bidder number 2, Vimtsire Security and Protection Services, was disqualified for not submitting three years audited financial statements and not having a five-tonne truck, yet was recommended for award by the BEC, which raised a major concern with the BAC.

“Bidder number 2, Vimtsire Security and Protection Services, Chair, did not submit three years audited financial statements... However, they were disqualified, indicated that the bidder did not have a five-tonne truck, therefore were disqualified. However, the bidder is being recommended for region 5... major concern that BAC had picked up, BAC had raised, therefore had to refer the matter back.”

The BEC verbally indicated to the BAC that the disqualification matter concerning bidder number 2 was deliberated with the probity team and resolved, but BAC required physical probity confirmation report.

“Remember I indicated, Chair, earlier that the BEC verbally indicated to the BAC that this bidder number 2, the matter was deliberated with the probity team, it was effectively dealt with and they were compliant... However, we could not rely on that, we needed physical evidence in the form of a probity confirmation report as we would normally have.”

At the BAC meeting of 24 November 2025, the BAC took note that bidders 32 (Elshaddai Security Services), 35 (Ngaphesheya Construction and Projects), and 5 (Two Cops and Security Services) were non-compliant at the time of evaluation.

“The BAC took note of further issues, that Bidder number 32, Elshaddai Security Services, Bidder 35, Ngaphesheya Construction and Projects, as well as Bidder number 5, Two Cops and Security Services, at this stage were non-compliant at the time of evaluation.”

The BAC accepted that all issues previously raised by the probity team had been satisfactorily addressed and subsequently approved the BEC recommendations subject to Regulation 43 implementation and tax compliance confirmation through the Centralised Supplier Database System.

“...the BAC finally approved the recommendations of BEC subject to the implementation of Regulation 43. It was further noted that subsequent to verification through the Centralised Supplier Database System, there was confirmation that affected bidders were now tax compliant.”

The final report of GM17, recommended by the Chairperson of BAC, confirmed that all probity concerns were adequately addressed and bidder number 2 was compliant.

“The issue where a probity concern, which was identified and there was confirmation received from the probity team in the form of Forensic Assurance Review Report as an addendum, attached by the external independent verifier, that bidder number 2 was indeed compliant.”

Three bidders - Elshaddai Security Services, Ngaphesheya Construction and Projects, and Two Cops and Security - were non-tax compliant at the time and were given a formal seven-day period to become tax compliant.

“The three bidders, Elshaddai Security Services, Ngaphesheya Construction and Projects, Two Cops and Security, at this stage were non-tax compliant. If they are non-tax compliant by law, we need to give them seven days. We need to notify them that you are a prospective bidder. You need to ensure that your tax measures are in place. We will be giving you a formal seven-day period.”

Chairperson of BAC plays a role in influencing the bid adjudication process by participating in meetings and can reject BEC recommendations, but oversight is claimed not to be improper influencing.

“If you are a Chairperson of the BAC and you participate in each of those meeting where you are able to send things back to the BEC, then it means you can influence the process ... with respect, I would like to maintain the statement that I do not influence, but I play an oversight in terms of ensuring that all due processes are followed accordingly at the stage of the Bidder Adjudication Committee.”

Group Audit and Risk (GAR) of the City of Tshwane conducts probity audits on tenders, including appointing independent external legal firms to provide legal support and ensure objective comprehensive probity reviews before matters are considered by the Bid Adjudication Committee, to address past compliance shortcomings.

“Group Audit and Risk is a department within the city which is formally engaged and mandated to conduct a probity audit on the tender under consideration ... GAR further appoints an independent external legal firm to provide specialised legal support and to ensure an objective, comprehensive probity review prior to matters being presented to and considered at the Bid Adjudication level ... It is an additional step that we have put on board as a result of the deficiencies that we have picked up in the past in terms of shortcomings on matters of compliance.”

Group Audit and Risk submitted a Proactive Forensic Assurance Review Report into tender TMPD 01-024-25 for the Tshwane Metro Police Department. The report was completed and notified to the Accounting Officer's office on 4 April, allowing audit assurance before awarding TMPD 01-2024.

“Group Audit and Risk make a submission to the Accounting Officer ... It is a Proactive Forensic Assurance Review Report into Tender TMPD 01-024-25 for the Tshwane Metro Police Department ... The completed final Proactive Assurance Review Report form part that will notify your office on the 4th of April, meaning the Accounting Officer's office was given a go-ahead, an indication that the probity will be conducting an auditor assurance exercise before TMPD 01-2024 is awarded.”

The primary objective of a probity audit is to provide assurance that the work of the BEC adheres to all applicable supply chain management prescriptions, legislative requirements, and governance standards, ensuring the evaluation process is fair, transparent, consistent and compliant. The probity process includes identifying and assessing risks, irregularities, deviations and providing corrective recommendations to ensure full compliance prior to adjudication. Probity findings carry significant governance weight and must be fully addressed with due process or justified appropriately if disregarded.

“The primary objective of a probity audit is to provide assurance that the work of the BEC adhere to all applicable supply chain management prescripts, legislative requirements and governance standards ... The probity process further entailed identification and assessment of potential risks, irregularities, deviations and the provision for corrective recommendations to ensure full compliance prior to adjudication ... the probity findings and recommendations carry significant governance weight and are regarded as authoritative. As such, they are required to be fully addressed and resolved and cannot be disregarded or overridden without appropriate justification and due process within the applicable regulatory framework.”

The probity report is conducted by an independent external legal firm which validates all compliance related to procurement and bidder evaluations for the City of Tshwane, reducing irregular expenditures.

“it is a mirror exercise by a team of external independent individuals who do exactly what the BAC has done”

The probity report identifies bidders that must be disqualified for non-compliance at various stages of the procurement evaluation process, including administrative compliance, mandatory requirements, and site inspections.

“we have taken note of these bidders. We confirm that these bidders must be disqualified for these reasons”

Bidders number 2 and 21 were found non-compliant at site inspection stage despite BAC requiring an addendum report to ensure completeness.

“independent individuals ... confirm that two bidders, 21 and 2, are not compliant at this stage ... BAC had referred this report back and required an addendum report ... that this matter had indeed been completed”

The probity report concludes that findings cast doubt on the integrity of the tender process in the city, indicating significant irregularities that could expose the city to litigation, but BEC may correct identified defects before final recommendation.

“The findings cast doubt on the integrity of the tender process undertaken in the city. While they are significant enough to make the process irregular and expose the city litigation, the BEC may still correct the identified defects before submitting this report to the BAC for final recommendation.”

The probity steps are conducted sequentially after BAC has concluded its work, ensuring orderly progression from administrative to site inspections.

“After BAC has concluded, Chairperson ... Yes.”

Delays caused by the probity process, while acknowledged, are necessary to ensure no irregularities in procurement and tender awards.

“I still deem these delays are necessary to at least ensure that there are no irregularities”

An award process (TMPD2 in 2016) was deemed irregular, which could have been easily avoided if necessary assurance exercises had been brought to board.

“I think it is TMPD2 in 2016 , that process was deemed irregular , Chair . And had this exercise been brought to board , it could have been easily avoided at that time .”

The city incurred irregular expenditure and illicit activities which necessitated internal control mechanisms to reduce such occurrences.

“that the city is not subject to litigation from errors which could have been avoided . This was a necessary internal control mechanism to reduce irregular expenditure , on one , and curb illicit activities , Chair .”

Delays in tenders cause the extension of previous tenders which are already expired, leading to spending R800 million a year on expired awards that should not have been spent.

“the point that the other witness made was the result of this delay is that the previous tender or the award which has already expired then has to be extended . And if you are spending R800 million a year , people whose awards have expired , you are now appointing them on a month-to-month basis for a period of a year , and you are spending R800 million that you should not have spent on them .”

The city was sitting with irregular expenditure almost worth R18 billion, and neither the chief financial officer nor the city manager could afford for this to continue, hence the need for proper planning and assurance exercises.

“The city was sitting with irregular expenditure almost worth R18 billion . The situation now is the chief financial officer as well as the city manager could not afford for this to continue . Hence , the resolution is you must ensure that bids are advertised at least 9 to 12 months before they end because we need to ensure that the proactive forensic assurance exercise is undertaken .”

Extensions to expired tenders are given on a month-to-month basis to allow departments to fast-track and finalize new bids.

“From the extension , Chair , if you look at our extension notices , in some instances , it is on a month-to-month basis . It is not really a blanket approach of saying you will now automatically get the new 800 million as the old bidders . It is a month-to-month where we still give departments an opportunity to fast-track and finalise this process .”

The Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC) evaluates tenders and receives probity reports to assess compliance and irregularities.

“So , the BAC does its evaluation . ... The probity authority is brought in at that point ? ... Yes . ... The probity authority is brought in at that point ? ... Yes . ... Once it is done , it is presented to the BEC . The findings are presented and deliberated at the BEC . They are given an opportunity to make the necessary corrections . Once consensus has been reached between probity team and the BEC , then it is served to the BAC for further consideration .”

Departments have full authority to engage the Chief Audit Executive to put systems in place to fast-track procurement matters where there are delays.

“Departments , if there are delays , have the full authority to engage the Chief Audit Executive to put systems in place to fast-track matters of this nature .”

The probity authority is appointed by the City Manager and Chief Audit Executive.

“Appointed by the City Manager ? ... Yes , and the Chief Audit Executive .”

The Auditor-General relies on third-party confirmations, which are superior to internal reports such as probity reports.

“The Auditor-General relies on a third-party confirmation . This is a third-party confirmation that I would rather place my reliance on than an internal report as well .”

There was a conflict between the findings of the probity report which flagged irregularities in bidder number 2 from Vimtsire Security Services and the BEC report which cleared them, causing the BAC to refer the matter back to the BEC for further confirmation or correction.

“BAC has identified a notable difference between the final probity report and the BEC report . In this case , it was as a result of bidder number 2 Vimtsire Secure Services where that bid , from a probity perspective , said , nope , there are irregularities here . You should not award this . BAC says , no , we have had our interaction with the probity team . We have cleared this . But at BAC , they are not providing us with conclusive evidence that that has been dealt with accordingly . We refer that back for there to either be an official confirmation in the form of an addendum or a confirmation report from probity that , indeed , we had a discussion with BEC . We are now convinced that bidder number 2 from Vimtsire Security Service , for an example , is now compliant and should be awarded . They could have come back , Chair , and said , no , this bidder should not have been awarded . We have maintained our stance there . We did not find , we did not confirm one , two , and three issues , which means the BEC must ensure correction . Probity report , as part of our internal controls , is authoritative in nature .”

The BEC was confident that all non-compliant documents were present and considered the bidder compliant despite original probity concerns.

“In this case , the BEC was confident that all those non-compliant documents were there . They were confident hence they say to BAC , we”

The probity authority flagged that bidder number 2 should not have been recommended because they failed to submit three years audited financials and they do not have a five-tonne truck.

“The probity authority has said this bidder should not have been recommended because they did not submit three years audited financials . And that is one . Two , this bidder should not have been recommended , should not have been recommended because they do not have a five-tonne truck , those two fact-based statements .”

The Bid Adjudication Committee required formal written confirmation from the external legal firm conducting the probity audit to assure that all findings and recommendations were fully addressed by the Bid Evaluation Committee.

“The Bid Adjudication Committee further required that the external legal firm appointed to conduct a probity audit issue a formal written confirmation providing assurance that all findings and recommendations ... have been fully addressed by the Bid Evaluation Committee”

The Bid Evaluation Committee verbally provided assurance they had addressed the probity findings, but the BAC insisted on official written confirmation.

“BEC came and verbally provided this surety. BAC said no, give us an official confirmation from the third party”

Bidder 2 was initially disqualified due to erroneous conclusion by the probity team that audited financial statements for the last three years were not submitted.

“the probity team erroneously concluded that the bidder did not submit audited financial statements for the recent three financial years ... bidder 2 was disqualified”

Subsequently it was discovered that bidder 2 had actually submitted the audited financial statements, leading to their evaluation in Stage 2 and 3 and qualification for award recommendation.

“following further engagement and reassessment ... it was discovered that bidder 2 had submitted the audited financial statements ... we evaluate bidder 2 in respect to Stage 2 and 3 ... bidder 2 qualified to be recommended for the award”

There was confusion and lack of clarity on how the errant decision to disqualify bidder 2 for not having a five-ton truck was reversed, with the BAC accepting the reversal without clear basis.

“it is not clear how the basis for reversing the decision about having a five-ton truck ... the BAC seems to have accepted this as having cleared the thing”

Initially, the probity team did not visit or validate the possession of a five-ton truck by bidder 2 but later confirmed it after the Stage 3 inspection, which was after the bidder was previously disqualified at Stage 1.

“in their earlier report they say they did not even go out ... they did not go out at this time because they were disqualified on that basis ... later went out and confirmed”

The BAC relied on the confirmation from the bid adjudication process review that the mandatory requirement of a five-ton truck had been met by bidder 2, putting their trust in this confirmation as resolving previous conflicts or concerns.

“The BAC placed reliance on this as a confirmation to resolve ... there are areas of concern that was picked up ... the BAC placed reliance on this as a confirmation to resolve”

All procurement processes from start to finish have been followed, and the bidders on board are confirmed as eligible prospective bidders according to the stated step process.

“all processes from A to Z have been followed, that the bidders that we have on board are confirmed indeed as eligible prospective bidders in line with the step process that we just articulated”

The final administrative compliance and mandatory checks for a bid happen before a decision is made, and the BAC chair and members only receive the reports on the morning of the BAC meeting, not before.

“that is the final stage, and at that final stage, all administrative compliance, all mandatory issues, pre-compliance, physical site inspection, they are completed. There is nothing to check at that point. Hence, I am clearly stating in my statement that it was of the mistaken belief that I would be in a process to check and advise on where this process is and how far it is. Due to the delegation of authorities, segregation of duties, the report comes to me on the 4th of September for the first time. Literally, on the morning of the BAC, those are the systems that you put on board. I, as the BAC Chair, nor any of my members in BAC have access to any of those documents except on the morning when we sit at the Bid Adjudication Committee.”

The legally mandated time between bid closing and start of BEC (Bid Evaluation Committee) work is 90 days, but in practice, once members are appointed, committees can start work within 30 days.

“Chair, by law, 90 days. It might be the process that bidders … Soon once members are appointed, the committees have been established, they can commence … Within 30 days.”

The BAC first sees the full set of documents including details of disqualified bidders for the first time only on the morning of the BAC meeting.

“Does what serve at the BAC that you see for the first time, these set of documents or report , does it include information about these were the bidders ? Yes . These were disqualified with the detail of those bidders, and these are the reasons . Is it that kind of information that serves before the BAC ? Yes, Chair, it is. It is the complete pack that is dictated for in the summary of events on paragraph 74.”

As soon as bids are closed, related documents are immediately secured under lock and key and only accessible through official registers and authorized sign-offs before evaluation proceeds.

“as soon as closure is done, documents are stored under lock, safe and key . That is an area that is only accessed through official register . There are officials who sit there and sign of any individual who goes in and out before evaluation proceeds.”

The bid referred to as TMPD02 2016-17 was awarded prior to MR MNISI's appointment within the City of Tshwane and he neither was nor could be involved directly or indirectly with that bid during its original award stage.

“I respectfully point out that the above-mentioned bid was awarded prior to my award within the city - prior to my appointment within the City of Tshwane. I accordingly confirmed that I was not able nor would it have been possible or practical for me to assist either directly or indirectly any bidder in relation to the said bid at the stage of its original award.”

MR MNISI later fully participated in the consideration of extensions of the said bid because a replacement tender had not yet been finalized.

“I do however place on record, Chair, that I later and more fully explained below participated in the consideration of extensions of the said bid . This was as a result of the fact that a replacement tender had not been finalized and put in place at this stage .”

User department officials from Tshwane Metropolitan Police Department make necessary presentations for bid extensions to the BAC, and submissions for extension applications in relation to the relevant contract were prepared and managed by duly authorised representatives of TMPD.

“Officials from TMPD make the necessary presentations, Chair, setting out the reasons why extensions must be made for TMPD 2, 2016 - 17. These presentations are then considered by the BAC after due consideration we will make a recommendation in accordance to the applicable process. ... I state, Chair, for the record that all submission applications in relation to the extension for the relevant contract were prepared, managed by the duly authorised representatives of TMPD in accordance with their respective responsibilities.”

The process for extension of expired bids begins with user departments submitting formal requests to the Bid Adjudication Committee where MR MNISI serves as Chairperson, and the BAC makes recommendations but does not take final decisions; final approval rests with the accounting officer.

“The process, Chair, commences with the user department submitting a formal request for extension to the Bid Adjudication Committee , which I serve as the Chairperson. The Bid Adjudication Committee makes recommendations and does not take any final decisions firstly. Secondly, the recommendations are made by BAC and are not decisions of any specific individual who serve on that committee. ... The final decision in this respect, of course, of approval of any such extensions does rest with the accounting officer.”

On 20 February 2025, Mr Veli Nwandule, an official delegated by TMPD, requested an extension for TMPD02 services at BAC, which was not granted.

“on the 20th of February 2025, an official who is delegated by TMPD comes to BAC, Mr Veli Nwandule, requests for an extension. This extension, Chair, is not granted.”

The request for price escalation is completely out of the purview of BAC.

“as for price escalation, which is something completely out of the purview of BAC.”

The approval for upliftment of funds and additional request for R227 million was outside the purview of BAC and R227 million amount was unclear to BAC; also, failure to re-advertise the tender on time indicated poor planning by BAC.

“the approval for upliftment of funds and an additional request for R227 million was outside the purview of BAC. Thirdly, an amount of R227 million then was not clear to us, Chair. ... We also noted that failure to re-advertise the tender on time indicated a massive element of poor planning from the BAC perspective...”

BAC raised significant exceptions regarding the extension requests, noting that budget issues are not their concern and that additional funds cannot be requested from BAC but must be addressed with the accounting officer or during the budget period.

“BAC raise significant exceptions on these requests that are being brought board. First of all, Chair, budget issues are not considered by BAC. ... You cannot come to BAC and ask for additional funds. That is a process that you need to undertake either with the accounting officer or during the budget period.”

On 27 February, Mr Veli Nwandule, supported by Deputy Chief Umashi Dlamini, came to BAC to clarify previously rejected issues regarding the extension application.

“On the 27th of February. Mr Veli Nwandule comes to BAC, supported by the Deputy Chief of Umashi Dlamini, for a request or to clarify on the issues that have previously been rejected on this particular bid.”

TMPD officials clarified to BAC that their contract was still valid until 28 February 2024 and did not require a request for deviation despite BAC's concern that the contract had expired.

“the previous indications stated that the contract had expired was correct and therefore the report stated that the tender was still valid until 28th of February 2024 and therefore does not require a request for deviation. ... They then clarified to us by providing the SLA that this tender was still valid.”

The amount requested for extension was below the 5 percent mark threshold and within the variation or scope allowed by law.

“The department further confirmed that the amount requested, Chair, was below the 5 percent mark threshold and was within the variation or the scope as allowed by the law.”

Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for all 22 bidders confirmed the contract commencement date as 1 March 2022, despite initial concerns raised by BAC.

“The committee requested that the department to provide the SLAs stipulating the commencement date of the 1st of March for all 22 bidders ... confirming that the contract commenced on the 1st of March 2022.”

BAC noted that extensions cannot be done by a one-man show and that there is an articulate process and system within the city to ensure extension applications are reconsidered and probed for any deficiencies.

“The point of this, Chair, is for me to prove, to show the community the process of extensions, that extensions cannot be done by a one-man show. There are an articulate process and system that have been designed within the city to ensure that extension applications are reconsidered. Also, extension applications that are reconsidered are not just approved, they are intentionally scrutinised and probed for any deficiencies which result to issues of this nature.”

On 26 June and 5 September 2025, Deputy Chief Revo Spies came to BAC requesting extension applications on TMPD tender TMPD022016-2017, which were not standard extension applications but Regulation 6 Supply Chain Management requests and outright deviations to appoint the same bidders.

“there are two instances where the Deputy Chief Revo Spies comes to BAC on the 26th of June 2025 and the 5th of September 2025, requesting for an extension application on the TMPD tender under scrutiny being TMPD022016-2017. ... This does not come as an extension application anymore. It comes as a Regulation 6 Supply Chain Management request. It is an outright deviation to appoint the same bidders.”

BAC did not allow another extension for the tender because the 15 percent variation was depleted and advised the department to put systems in place for advertising and fast-tracking the process; TMPD still required the service resulting in a deviation request which BAC scrutinised and found the procurement process and probity delays were causes but highlighted poor planning and irregular expenditure.

“BAC did not and could not allow another extension on the basis that, firstly, we advised the department to ensure that they put systems in place to advertise the tender and fast-track the appointment process, one. Secondly, the 15 percent variation was depleted...within that service...came to BAC asking for an outright deviation...the deviation report is articulated as due to the reasons of finalising the procurement process and delays in the probity report...However, taking into account the above, there is a huge element of poor planning that will be considered by oversight bodies or auditors like the Auditor General. The BAC then recommends that this will attract Regulation 32, meaning it will be irregular expenditure...It is poor planning. It will be irregular expenditure. It must be investigated as such.”

The irregular expenditure due to the tender process must be investigated and reported to oversight bodies including Municipal Public Accounts Committee, Group Audit and Risk, and disclosed in the city's annual financial statements as such expenditure under Municipal Finance Management Act Section 32.

“It will be irregular expenditure. It must be investigated as such...It must be reported to the Municipal Public Accounts Committee. It must be recorded and referred to Group Audit and Risk for further investigations. And it must be disclosed in the city's annual financial statements as such irregular expenditure...It must be investigated in line with the processes of section 32 of the Municipal Finance Management Act.”

Delays in finalising the tender process meant TMPD requested another extension as Section 36 outside deviation which BAC approved, but deficiencies in supply chain management made the expenditure irregular.

“The reasons why there have been delays and that motivates for this extension is a result of the probity process currently undertaken. It has not been finalised. It is still in the process of being validated. Hence, they came back and they asked for another extension in the form of a section 36 outside deviation. Similarly, BAC approves this and provides a similar recommendation that the service is indeed key. We do not dispute that from the department. However, supply chain management prescripts and the law, there has been deficiencies that have been identified. There is nowhere that we can account to this not being irregular expenditure.”

TMPD representatives repeatedly requested extensions for the tender process between June and November due to delays in processes, with BAC approving but recognizing these as outright deviations attracting irregular expenditure.

“Mr Vusi Mabona, also a delegated official from TMPD, supported by the Deputy Chief Revo Spies, comes to BAC to ask for another extension...tenders still not being finalised due to the various processes that are still being undertaken...The department motivates. They tell BAC that they are aware that it will attract Regulation 32...this is not an extension, it is an outright deviation appointment...it will attract irregular expenditure...we are referring it to the relevant authorities for further investigation...we need to disclose this in the city's annual financial statements.”

The effect of the first two extensions and the deviation appointments was that 22 security companies were appointed to provide contracted and ad hoc services under the tender.

“the effect of the first two extensions and the then deviation appointments, the effect of them was that those security companies, 22 of them, would provide the contracted services, but they could also be appointed to do the adhoc...security services...Yes.”

The process for ad hoc appointments under the tender was that the appointed security companies could provide services as and when required, at prices that were certain and agreed upon, allowing reassignments based on risk assessment.

“This was the same process that we are doing...also an adhoc appointment, meaning as and when...So adhoc is provided on the as and when basis as a result of these service providers having been appointed in 20 whatever their time was...The pricing is certain. So, we appoint on rates, meaning the pricing is certain...risk assessment changes...reassignments are probable and can be done.”

Mr Mnisi denies having influenced or promoted the process of extensions for tender TMPD 01-20-02-2016-17 and only acted as Chairperson of the Bid Adjudication Committee after the relevant report had been formally submitted.

“I did not, whether directly or indirectly, champion, initiate or influence the process of extensions of TMPD 01-20-02-2016-17. At no stage did I take any steps to promote or advance the said extension, nor did I exercise the improper influence in relation to that process. My involvement in the matter was me acting as Chairperson of the Bid Adjudication Committee. This only happened after the relevant report had been formally...”

Mr Mnisi asserts that he did not provide any assistance or influence the cancellation of the tender TMPD3-24/25, stating oversight was maintained with a probity assessment to ensure integrity.

“I did not provide any assistance to any bidder, whether directly or indirectly, nor did I influence any cancellation of the said tender process ... the tender in question was subjected to a probity assessment ... to ensure high integrity, lawfulness, and procedural fairness”

A probity report by an external legal firm revealed material, serious irregularities in the bid process that could not be remedied without compromising legality and integrity.

“a probity report ... revealed material, serious irregularities in the manner in which certain aspects of the bid process had been conducted ... they could not be cured, could not be regularised, nor could they be remedied without compromising the legality and integrity of the process”

The probity report identified 13 issues, including absence of BEC meeting minutes on 29 March 2025 and missing scoresheet for member Mr Tshukudu PMalatji, causing concerns about evaluation quorum and procedural integrity.

“there were a number of issues ... amongst these issues, they conducted a review ... First of all, the BEC scoresheets dated and signed on the 29th of March ... however, there were no minutes to support the assumption that there was a BEC meeting on the 29th ... also no scoresheets for one of the BEC members, Mr Tshukudu PMalatji ... it gave further guidance to BAC that there might have been a quorum issue”

The probity report was provided to the Accounting Officer who initiated a proactive forensic assurance review exercise starting 15 April 2025, completed 23 September 2025.

“an indication that was provided to the Accounting Officer that this tender would undergo proactive forensic assurance review exercise ... The Accounting Officer was notified on the 15th of April 2025 ... completed by Group Audit and Risk by the 23rd of September 2025”

There were no BEC meeting minutes for 29 May 2025, score sheets were backdated, no signed declaration forms on that day, and attendance records showed irregularities, raising suspicion of illegal backdating and failure to provide evidence of member independence.

“score sheets dated 29th May suggested meeting took place that day but there were no declaration forms signed on the same day ... issue of concern ... a massive flag which would not enable us to proceed ... inconsistent and uncurable issues ... illegal process of backdating would need to occur, which is completely against the laws”

The BEC meeting attendance register shows some members signed in but also sent apologies, and one member Mr Thabiso Hlongwane neither signed nor attended, contradicting the minutes and raising quorum concerns.

“four meeting signed in including Mr Reginald Moshangu but yet submitted apology ... no apology recorded for one member Mr Thabiso Hlongwane ... neither listed among attendees nor members who sent apologies ... did not sign attendance register ... confirming deficiencies identified and that no quorum could be proved”

One of the bidders was unfairly disqualified for failing to attend a compulsory briefing session.

“One of the bidders was unfairly disqualified for failing to attend a compulsory briefing session”

The external third party concluded the irregularities in the tender process were material enough to render the process irregular and open the City to litigation.

“the e x t e r n a l t h i r d p a r t y c o n c l u d e s t h a t t h e f i n d i n g s a b o v e c a s t d o u b t i n t h e i n t e g r i t y o f t h e t e n d e r p r o c e s s e m b a r k e d o n b y t h e C i t y w h i l s t t h e y a r e m a t e r i a l e n o u g h t o r e n d e r t h e p r o c e s s i r r e g u l a r a n d o p e n 20 t h e C i t y t o l i t i g a t i o n”

The Bid Evaluation Committee (BEC) incorrectly disqualified 27 bidders and incorrectly qualified 32 bidders that should have been disqualified, casting doubt on the integrity of the tender process.

“B E C i n c o r r e c t l y d i s q u a l i f i e d 2 7 b i d d e r s f o r a d d e n d u m s n o n - c o m p l i a n c e a n d i n c o r r e c t l y q u a l i f i e d 3 2 b i d d e r s t h a t s h o u l d h a v e b e e n d i s q u a l i f i e d”

Issues in pricing schedules and documentation could not be remedied without document recreation, breaching compliance processes, making those irregularities incurable.

“matters w i t h i n t h e p r i c i n g s c h e d u l e t h a t w e r e n o t c l e a r l y e x p l a i n e d ... w h i c h c o u l d n o t e a s i l y b e c u r e d w i t h o u t t h e r e c r e a t i o n o f d o c u m e n t o f s o m e s o r t , w h i c h i s a b r e a c h o f c o m p l i a n c e 20 p r o c e s s e s .”

An Accounting Officer can cancel an invitation to bid due to changed circumstances such as no longer needing goods or services, no funds being available, or no acceptable bids received.

“that as an Accounting Officer may cancel an invitation to bid owing to changed circumstances ... One, the recouled be no longer need for the goods and services to be provided. Two, funds could not be available. Three, there were no acceptable bids that were received.”

The Bid Adjudication Committee recommended that the bid be cancelled due to material irregularities, based on the probity report and relevant circumstances.

“the Bid Adjudication Committee ... recommended that the bid be cancelled ... based on the view that it would not have been appropriate or lawful for the process to proceed in circumstances where material irregularities had been identified”

TMPD may either continue with the current 22 companies despite deviation or choose any other in the market, requiring a new deviation process.

“TMPD ... They could pick out utilize the current existing 27 because the deviation ... They could go out and pick any other individual ... The outcomes and the impact ... are the same ... They will go with the existing 22 companies ... It meant that this tender was cancelled and another deviation process will have to follow ... The decision to embark on the choice of deviation rests with the user department”

There were significant material irregularities that could not be cured, resulting in cancellation of the tender due to those irregularities.

“significant material irregularities that were identified during the process ... results in ... cancellation due to significant material irregularities”

The 2017 award that was irregular ends up being a six-year award to those companies by 2022.

“the 2 0 1 7 a w a r d i n 2 0 2 2 , w h i c h y o u s a i d w a s i r r e g u l a r , e n d s u p b e i n g a s i x - y e a r a w a r d t o t h o s e c o m p a n i e s”

The BEC evaluated the 12 findings, identified which were curable and incurable, then reported to BAC that incurable matters necessitated bid cancellation due to irregularities.

“the BEC went back, evaluated the 12 findings that were received, identified matters that could be cured, identified matters that cannot be cured, came to BAC and said, we cannot cure these matters, hence it must be a cancellation based on irregularities”

The decision to cancel the bid was taken following proper governance and decision-making processes as prescribed within the City Supply Chain Management function.

“To cancel the bid was subsequently considered by the Accounting Officer who accepted and approved the recommendation. The decision to cancel the bid was therefore taken as a result of following proper governance and decision-making processes as prescribed within the City Supply Chain Management function.”

The approach by Mr Calvin Mahlangu to assist was made telephonically, not by email.

“So is that telephonically, because you can say I have never met him and then in the next paragraph I was approached by him. Was that approach email or telephonic? Telephonic.”

The witness has no direct or indirect relationship with Mr Calvin Mahlangu and has never met him in person, but was approached telephonically by him to assist in resolving outstanding payments relating to ad hoc security services rendered by Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd.

“I have no direct or indirect relationship of any nature with Mr Calvin Mahlangu, nor have I ever met him in person. I can, however, confirm on 118 that I was approached by Mr Calvin Mahlangu to assist in resolving outstanding payments relating to ad hoc security services rendered by Gubis 85 Solutions (Pty) Ltd. Save for the 10 office head, I confirm that I have not had any other communications or interactions with Mr Calvin Mahlangu.”

The witness did not share any information relating to tenders of TMPD and did not pay or facilitate payment of any persons referenced in the notice, except for purchasing a gift for Sergeant Nkosi which was not linked to any official act or inducement.

“The answer to this has been catered for in page 30, paragraph 120 for both of these paragraphs and the answer is no. ... I stated that I did not facilitate or arranged any payment to any persons referred to in this notice, nor did I purchase any gift for any such persons. On 1.22, Chairperson, I did purchase a gift for Sergeant Nkosi. I wish to state unequivocally that this gift was not offered as gratification, inducement or a bribe, nor was it linked in any way to any act, official act, favour, benefit, exploitation for preferential treatment.”

Sergeant Nkosi overheard a telephonic conversation between the witness and Mr Calvin Mahlangu complaining about the City owing his company significant outstanding payments and threatening legal action if unresolved.

“Sergeant Nkosi overheard a telephonic conversation between myself and Mr Calvin Mahlangu of Gubis 85 Solutions during which he complained about the City owing his company a significant amount in outstanding payments. He indicated, Chair, that he was threatening legal action against the City as it was contemplated should the matter remain unresolved.”

The witness informed Mr Calvin Mahlangu that Group Financial Services was not in possession of the relevant outstanding claims or documentation and referred him to the relevant user department (TMPD) responsible for security matters.

“I informed Mr Calvin Mahlangu that Group Financial Services was not in the possession of the relevant outstanding claims or documentation and accordingly there is no way we could facilitate with any payment. In the circumstance, I referred him to the relevant user department and the relevant user department in this case was TMPD, which to the best of my knowledge and my understanding was the department responsible for matters of security.”

The witness has a formal professional relationship with Mr Umashi Dhlamini at the City of Tshwane, limited to work-related matters with no personal or business relationship outside of work.

“I wish to state on record, Chair, that Mr Umashi Dhlamini and I have a formal professional relationship in our capacities as colleagues at the City of Tshwane. Our interaction has been confined to work-related matters arising in the ordinary course of our respective duties. I further confirm, Chair, that there is no personal relationship between us beyond that of professional work association. We do not share any business interests, financial arrangements or joint ventures of any kind, nor do we have any common personal interest and any other associations outside that of the workplace.”

The witness formally referred the matter regarding outstanding payments to TMPD and Supply Chain Management for joint resolution, but it was not resolved at that stage due to uncertainty and confusion about the nature of the services described as ad hoc security services.

“I can confirm, Chair, on record that I formally referred this matter to TMPD and to Supply Chain Management to jointly attend to the matter for resolution. However, the matter was obviously not resolved at that stage due to uncertainty and confusion surrounding the nature of these services in question, which were described as ad hoc security services of which both TMPD and SCM at the time claimed not to be aware.”

Gubis Security 85 Solutions started providing security services at Rooilwal Water Treatment under City of Tshwane from 27 May 2024 and have not been paid, continuing to provide services and paying their officers to avoid service disruption.

“We are a black-owned security company which was tasked to provide security services at Rooilwal Water Treatment under City of Tshwane. We started providing services on the 27th May 2024 till to date. Unfortunately, it has not been an easy road for us so far with the City not honouring their end of the bargain by not paying our invoices to date. Despite the failure of the City to pay our services, we have been providing these services to the City and paying our security officers on site in order to avoid service disruption on the site.”

The City is working on a mechanism to resolve the issue of unpaid invoices raised by Gubis 85 Solutions.

“The City is working on a mechanism to resolve the issues raised.”

Gubis 85 Solutions sent emails expressing frustration about non-payment of invoices and non-payment of salaries for security officers.

“Good day. Kindly find the attached letter with regards to our frustrations when it comes to non-payment of invoices. We have also attached a letter from the unions regarding non-payment of salaries for security officers.”

The escalation emails were copied to the City Manager, Chief Operating Officer, Chief of Police, and other senior colleagues, indicating senior leadership awareness of the payment issue.

“The City Manager is cc'd on this communication from the escalation from Gubis 85 Solutions. The Chief Operating Officer is cc'd. The Chief of Police is cc'd and all other colleagues who are within the City.”

Despite escalation of invoice payment issues since 7 February, almost a month later, nothing has been done and the matter remains unresolved.

“Since my escalation of this matter to the relevant colleagues, from the 7th of February, almost a month down the line, nothing has been done. This matter has not been resolved accordingly.”

The Chief Operating Officer directed Mr Mpofu to provide an update regarding the delayed payment issue, citing lack of feedback since referral almost a month ago.

“Mr Mpofu, can you please provide an update on this, as this matter has been referred to you by the CFO almost a month ago and there has been no feedback since that has been provided.”

Mr Tshukudu Malatji reported that all outstanding invoices for January and February 2025, including Gubis 85 invoices, were submitted and are in process for payment.

“All outstanding invoices for the month of January were submitted for further handling. The invoices for February, 025 were also signed and submitted for further handling and payment. These invoices include Gubis 85 invoices for the month of February.”

Mr Tom Ngwenya's office is currently handling the payment process, and he promised to assist with progress updates.

“I personally followed up with TMPD Finance and Administration where I got informed that the process is currently with Mr Tom Ngwenya's office. I contacted Mr Ngwenya who promised to assist in coming back to me with progress.”

Despite previous escalations and assurances, payment delays persist and the matter is escalating towards litigation due to the City's inability to address outstanding invoice payments.

“From this step, the next step is obvious litigation as a result of even the City Manager's office's inability to address the matter in question.”

Invoices have been certified as true and correct by relevant authorities; the question is why payments are delayed despite a 30-day payment policy in the City.

“There was confirmation that the work has been received, the work has been certified as true and correct by the relevant authorities... So the question is, why are invoices not paid? We have got a 30-day policy in the City in terms of making payments.”

Mr Mnisi did not copy Mr Dhlamini in the email communications regarding the unpaid invoice issue, despite questions about his essential role.

“Yes, he is not copied for some reason... No, Chair, I did not copy him in that response.”

Mr Mnisi escalated the unpaid invoice matter to Supply Chain Management and Mr Malatji, responsible for managing asset management issues.

“So when I escalate the matter, I escalate it to Supply Chain Management and Mr Malatji, who was responsible for managing asset management issues.”