By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka says that for the second consecutive year, her office has achieved a clean audit, seen a rise in turnaround time on finalising cases (increasing to 89%), an 87% decline in matters taken on review through the courts, while remedial actions have risen by 67%.
Gcaleka was addressing the media in Pretoria on Thursday, where she outlined findings from a series of investigations conducted by the Public Protector’s office.
She said this demonstrates that the institution continues to play its part in the accountability and administrative justice ecosystem, by helping individuals and communities hold the state accountable.
A clean audit shows good financial management and proper accounting.
She has indicated that she’s increasingly focused her office’s systemic investigations on local government, adding that service delivery failures at the municipal level are central to the report.
Moloto Rail Corridor
The Public Protector found that delays and the non-implementation of the Moloto Rail Corridor Development Project were due to legitimate budget constraints.
Gcaleka was addressing the media in Pretoria on Thursday, where she outlined findings from a series of investigations conducted by the Public Protector’s office.
The investigation followed a complaint lodged by Sam Masangu on behalf of Moloto Corridor Concerned Residents in October 2020.
The complaint alleged that the National Department of Transport had unduly delayed implementation of the project for more than 20 years. It also alleged the misappropriation and misuse of funds, including money spent on feasibility studies.
Masangu also accused the South African National Roads Agency (SANRAL) of unduly delaying the finalisation of the project.
The investigation found that two feasibility studies had been conducted, one in 2007 at a cost of more than R30 million and another in 2012 at a cost of more than R16 million.
Gcaleka said both studies were procedurally compliant with the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA).
She said the second study, commissioned in 2012, was intended to broaden the scope of the project to include multiple transport-oriented development options aimed at modernising the road while improving its safety and sustainability.
“The commissioning of feasibility studies was justified, necessary, and compliant with applicable legal and policy frameworks, including Section 38(1)(a)(i) of the PFMA and Regulation 16 of the Treasury Regulations,” Gcaleka said.
Advocate Nelisiwe Nkabinde explained that the first study dealt only with rail.
After the National Assembly intervened, the second study examined rail and road upgrades together.
“The outcome of that second study then indicated that the road option is more feasible and more economical under the circumstances,” Nkabinde said.
Gcaleka said the rail project was never built “due to affordability constraints”.
National Treasury refused approval because of weak economic justification. The road has since been upgraded, and Gcaleka noted substantial progress.
Nkabinde said the investigation found no criminality or extortion, and she confirmed that any such allegations would be referred to law enforcement agencies.
Gcaleka recommended that the president and the Ministers of Transport and Finance take note of the report. She also called for annual meetings and yearly progress reports to Parliament.
She also recommended that government consider technical and professional expertise already available within the state and universities before commissioning external services during the early stages of infrastructure projects.
Special Investigating Unit (SIU)
The Public Protector has found no irregularities in the recruitment and selection process that led to Leornard Lekgetho appointment as chief operating officer (COO) of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU).
Lekgetho, who served as the SIU’s COO and acting head, was appointed by President Cyril Ramaphosa as the unit’s permanent head with effect from September 1, 2026.
The investigation followed a complaint lodged by Pranesh Maharaj in July 2024, who had been shortlisted for the position.
Maharaj alleged that Lekgetho did not meet the advertised minimum requirement of a relevant postgraduate qualification in management or an equivalent qualification.
He also questioned additional assessments introduced after the interviews, saying candidates had not been informed in the advertisement that the recruitment process would include further stages.
However, the Public Protector found that the requirement expressly allowed for an equivalent qualification and that this provision was applied consistently during the shortlisting process.
The investigation also found that the additional assessments were consistent with the SIU’s recruitment policies and were aimed at assessing candidates’ skills, experience and suitability for the position.
“The SIU’s decision to appoint Mr Lekgetho was lawful, rational, procedurally fair, and properly exercised within the discretion conferred by law and policy,” Gcaleka said.
The Public Protector found that the conduct of SIU officials did not amount to improper conduct or maladministration and considered the matter finalised.
City of Ekurhuleni (COE)
Gcaleka found on Thursday that former Ekurhuleni city manager Imogen Mashazi has committed improper conduct by appointing an official who did not qualify for a senior metro police post.
It centred on the appointment of Ndumiso Gcwabe as deputy chief of Metro Police: Security and Loss Control.
According to Gcaleka, Gcwabe lacked the NQF level 7 qualification the job required. Instead, he held a National Diploma in Policing and certificates in crime prevention.
“We find that Mr Gcwabe did not qualify for the position of Deputy Chief of Metro Police. In the circumstances, we further find that the conduct of the former City Manager, Dr Imogen Mashazi, as Accounting Officer of CoE at the time of appointment of Mr Gcwabe constitutes improper conduct,” Gcaleka said.
She recommended that the appointment be taken on judicial review. However, according to Gcaleka, no remedial action could be taken against Mashazi because she had left the state’s employ.