Tshwane Police Chief continues evidence

Good morning, Mrs. Kakan. Morning, Chair.

Good morning, Commissioner Faroh.

Okay. Good morning to you, Chair, and good morning Commissioner Baloy and Commissioner Kumalo.

Thank you. Yes, Mrs. Skak.

Thank you, Chair. Yesterday when we broke, um, it was, we're going through file five and six with the WhatsApp messages, but essentially I've tried to call the process, understanding that she is not part to those WhatsApps, but I just want to demonstrate, uh, just two points to the witness, and I apologize, we might not be that long as I anticipated. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. Would you please go to your file five still, um, page 177?

I'm sorry. Page?

177.

Thank you. And if you may also open file 6, page 456. Now, yesterday, just to, we went through, um, WhatsApp messages between GOI and 456. We went through the WhatsApp messages between Sergeant Gossi and, um, and, um, Missy, the CFO, your CFO, and the point, I think we agreed that there was a lot of communication about internal matters in relation to them.

That's, that's. And the same thing with your deputy commissioner, uh, who is, um, Umashi Zamini. It's good.

And, and of course, he will come and deal with those in so far as he can.

Now, in these pages, I just want to also point out the same in relation to something more obvious, which is the land invasion tender. And if you go to page 177 of file 5, you will see, and even there, I don't want to go into too much detail, but you will see that there is an, an exchange of WhatsApps. There's an, in the, I think it's the third WhatsApp that is sent by, and he says, "Captain, find below our vehicles for land to be given to." What you see then is that if you go to this other file at 456, file six, it's essentially what you have. Apologies, I think I may have, um, um, it's, it's 440 of the, of the, of the, of the file.

440.

Yes. Yes. Apologies, Chair. It's chat number four. And we established yesterday that what you have is that between, um, Sergeant Goi and your deputy commissioner, Mashi Lamini, um, they, Lamini calls Sergeant Goi captain, it seems as it seems.

What you see is that this message is identical that is sent by your deputy commissioner through to Tumi, but it's sent via, via, it's via St. J. You see that? And the point there is that now you're dealing with this current tender where there are service level agreements that have been signed, and that's that you've got Sergeant Goi interfering.

Very. Correct. Um, and of course, we can't cast suspicions as to what it is, but what we have established within the evidence of this commission is the relationship, at the very least, between Goi and figures like Madala.

Yes, correct.

Now, please close those files because I don't want to go further than that. Or perhaps if we go to 456, or file six, 456, you will also, and of course, you were not involved in this, but I just want to point out the point, which is chat number four as well, which seems to be a list of what is missing in the, in the, in the, in the, in the, in the, in the Gapesia. A bit, it would seem. And it would also seem that it's being interfered with. It's more clear what is required and what is not. And, and that's essentially as far as I can take it with that point. Now, subsequently to this, then there's, is obviously concluding of the service level agreement.

Yes.

Can I ask you to, to release you, chairperson, and the commissioners from those WhatsApps?

Five.

We close five and six.

Yes. All right. Thank you. If I may request the Chair and the commissioners and the witness to please go to file three, page 435.

Three.

Yes. File three. Thank you. Or perhaps let's start at 499. Apologies. 499. Hi. Are you there, Commissioner?

Yes.

And there at 499 is a service level agreement that was concluded between the city and Elshhatai Security Services. And I think, in just the interest of time, that was in relation to this lender, uh, land invasion tender that was pursuant to that.

Correct?

Yes. Yes. That's correct. Now, at the, at page 499, you are identified as the person to sign the agreement or representing the city.

That's correct.

Correct. And yesterday, you did testify that indeed you have the power to, to sign agreements.

Yes, I do. And that obviously involves your department.

That's correct. Um, when you were, you were presented with these agreements, you went through them?

No, I was not presented with these agreements.

Okay. And do you know why?

I was not at work. I was, um, I was on leave.

Okay. So if you go to page 525, there's a signature there, and it says P.S.

Yes, that's correct. He was acting in my stead.

He was acting in your stead.

That's correct.

Okay. So, and obviously, there's this agreement, and I don't intend to go through each of them. There's Gopies, there is Napesia, and all of them. Chair, I don't intend.

The same is replicated in the point.

Is that date correct? The date of signature, 14 January 25. It should be 26.

It should be 26.

It should be 26.

It should be 26 at the top there. That's the correct date. 15 January 2026. But why do you say you were not presented with this agreement?

I was on leave, uh, commissioner.

No, no, I, I, I get that part. If even if you are on leave, and you are Chief of Police, I mean, surely you would delegate to somebody who is acting, and you would be told that the agreements are ready for signature. I can't believe that when you're on leave, uh, people can do as they please, and you come back and you say, "Well, because I was on leave, I wash my hands of what happened." You don't stop being Chief of Police because you're on leave.

Commissioner Kumalo, I'm not saying I'm said that I, I did not sign this. And at that time, when I came back, I was briefed by, uh, deputy commissioner.

But the question is, did you see them before they were signed? I understand that they were signed because this is what happens with written agreements. They go back and forth because you get a document, it is typed, and people look at it to check that it complies with legal requirements, and the terms of the agreement are in accordance with the tender documents, and they generally reflect the services that are to be provided and fees that are to be paid. So the terms of the agreement, and that doesn't happen in a space of a month. There would be a back and forth with drafts being exchanged. The question that was put to you was, this presented to you? It may well be that on the date of signature by P.S., you were on leave, and therefore you could not have signed, but it does not explain what happened before that. Were you aware that there were these draft agreements circulating, what they related to, and that at some point somebody from TMPD has to sign them?

Commissioner Kumalo, I have not seen the service level agreement before it was signed. No draft was sent to me. Nothing was sent to me to, to come back to, to go through. I did not receive it. The only time is when I came back from, um, my leave.

I mean, that, that is a red flag. It's, it's, it's worrying that these things could be happening, and your department is responsible, and but for the leave, you would have had to sign it, and because you were on leave in January 2026, somebody who was acting in your stead signed them, and you only saw them after they were signed. I mean, that, that is a serious red flag for me.

Commissioner, you must know the service level agreement is drawn up by the, between the legal department and the, um, office of the group, uh, um, financial services, which is the CFO. So they actually draw up the service level agreement. Um, that's why the legal department is also obviously with them to make sure, as you say, that it is legally compliant. However, I did not see this, and it's not that I'm abdicating my responsibility. I did not receive the service level agreement before I went on, on leave. That is, that is the fact, and that is the truth.

But at least you would have been aware that this company was going to be appointed, but service level agreements were still being prepared at the office of legal and CFO. That part, you would have been aware of. Oh, are you saying you only became aware that El Shadai has been appointed and there's a service level agreement after it was signed?

Yes, Commissioner Kumalo.

Before that, you were not aware that there's a plan to appoint El Shadai?

No, I was not aware of that. And I think, um, as I said yesterday, when the CFO is coming to this forum, I think those questions should be posed to him. I will prefer if that is the case, because I'm here to tell my side, and I'm here to tell the truth. I have not received the service level agreement beforehand to go through or to peruse. I have not received a list to say, these are the, uh, successful, um, um, service providers. This service level agreement, um, came to the, to the, to the acting, um, commissioner of police, and it was signed, uh, on the, on the date that is, uh, uh, uh, that is there on the page, 14th or 15th of January. And then when I came back, it is, it is handed over. That is, that is the truth, and that is a fact.

Commissioner, perhaps an, an anterior question to this discussion with Commissioner Kumalo is, how does it work? You, you have signed other agreements as Chief of Police?

Or you've never? We, I did not sign, um, because we only had two tenders, and then obviously we have the service animals one, but the security one, uh, uh, remember the security tender was, um, withdrawn and readvertised, and then this was the land invasion one. So I haven't signed the security, uh, level agreement, because that one, as you know, the only one that we are starting now since, um, APSS came back to Metropolis, is this one that we are currently busy with. We, the other one, we were also busy with, however, but that one, as I said, was not approved, and we had to restart.

So, so should I understand your, your explanation to be, since you became Chief of Police in 2023?

2023. Yes.

Yes. You've never had to sign any agreements in that, whatever agreement as head of, as head of police?

Not that I'm, not that can come, come to mind now. Uh, Commissioner Baloy.

Okay.

There's nothing that's coming to mind now.

Okay. So you can't speak about a process. This is how it works normally.

No. No. But there's no, no, um, that I can come to mind, or that there's nothing that anybody has sent, sent the document to me beforehand.

And then, um, uh, uh, like Commissioner Kumalo has now, uh, alluded, and then say, "Here is the document," or "These were the successful, uh, service providers," and then, um, afterwards that I, nothing of that comes to mind. Uh, Commissioner Baloy.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, commissioners. And that's the point that, that becomes problematic, commissioner, which is that, which then makes one wonder about, how do you then fulfill your obligations to manage the department? So if you are none the wiser about the agreements involving millions, um, how do you effectively manage the department, the police department? You see that someone could have that worry about yourself.

I do not agree with that statement. As I said, the processes after Metropolis's involvement stops. It is solely in the department of, of supply chain management, unless we're going to maybe through this commission then chains where there's gaps. If the, if it is not the case that your involvement is there for drawing up SLAs and assisting with the SLAs, and you, and you get a meeting request to be there, and you get the involvement where you must actually, here's the successful bidder, so you can have a question and answer before the service level agreement comes to your table. It cannot be said if you are not being said, you must be involved, or that you are not involved, that you have failed. I do not agree with that statement. I think from this commission, we can maybe say that is a gap, and let us make sure in future, uh, municipalities, you do it the other way around, so that we can't sit with this. But I cannot sit here and agree with something that it said that I, I should have known. If that part, they don't even involve you, if it's a part where group, uh, legal services and group financial services, if that is their role, and we see it as a gap because of what, why we're sitting here, we should then say, let us then, and it will also be my recommendation. Let us then say, until here, yes, we don't want interference from the, the, the subject experts. However, once that process is done, and it becomes that way, the subject experts should also then have a, a type of also checklist, and maybe move forward. So, I will rather say, let us do that, because I cannot sit here and then it said, if my involvement is not there, that I should have. So I do not, uh, accept that, uh, comment, and I will rather say, moving forward, let us make sure that before this is even drawn up, that the involvement of the, um, the department that is going to make use of that goods and services should be also there. So I will prefer that we, moving forward, that that will be then part of the recommendations.

Correct. Thanks, commissioners. The, just for completeness, it's the, the appointment to Commissioner Space, uh, to be in an acting position is found at 435 of the same file. So, in essence, had you not been, I think Commissioner Kumalo was raising that point, had you not been on leave, you were going to sign these agreements.

What I normally do, I do not let people just come and drop things at my office. I can promise you that if I don't have time to read through it, I will not sign it. Because what I picked up, people will know you are on your way out on meetings, because they are in contact with your secretaries and say, "Is the Chief available?" And then if you want to go out by the door, they want to come with the documents. I've picked that up, and I refuse to sign. Even if you say to me, "It's the last day." They'd like to come and say, "This is the last day." Then I said, "You should have planned better. Your lack of, your lack of planning is not my emergency." I would rather read through it, and I always send documents back if I'm not sure, or somebody must come sit with me. I want to ask my questions, because I know once your, your signature is there, you cannot say that I was running out of the door, and this person came to me and say, "You must sign." So I can tell you, I would have gone through the document, and if there were questions, then obviously I would. And if there's no attachments that I want to see, and how did you come to that point, I would have asked those questions. I'm not saying that Deputy Commissioner SP hasn't done it, but I'm just saying, but, um, I would have, maybe I would have gone through the document.

And subsequent.

Sorry, just for the record, um, you referred us to page 435, Mrs. Kak. Um, I just want to place it on record that looking at the letter of appointment there, um, the acting stint was for two days. Am I correct? 15 and 16th January 2026.

It is on this letter, but there's another acting letter from, I think, the 19th of December until the 14th, and then there was the two days. It was extended.

We can provide that. We can provide that letter as well.

So the, the, the two days I'm seeing here.

This is just additional.

Oh, thank you.

Thank you, uh, chairperson.

Thank you. And obviously, do you know, just out of curiosity, why was there a rush to sign this agreement, especially when you are not at the office?

No, I wouldn't know that. It can be a coincidence or.

Coincidence?

It can be because, um, um, but I, I don't want to speculate.

Yes. Yes. Yes. And subsequently, have you familiarized yourself and are happy with the agreements?

Yes, I, I read through it. Um.

And you're happy with them?

I read through the agreement, and, and, and the deputy commissioner, when he, when he, uh, did his handover, he was at that time, when it was, um, um, when it was, um, when he went through it, he was happy with it. So, as I said, that he handed over to me, and then he did explain to me, and then obviously he has to, to tell me what he has signed, what he has done in my absence, so that I can be aware of it.

I'm asking, I'm asking a different question, whether you are happy with them, having gone through them or gotten a briefing from Commissioner Space.

I was satisfied that he has signed and he has checked it, because it came from legal services as well.

Mr. Kak, I wanted to ask you, not, uh, Commissioner Faroh, a question. You said the SLAs's all look the same, so we don't have to go through all of them. My question is, the entities that were appointed, do they mirror the list that Sonosi was exchanging with Jamini and Nissi?

Commissioner, not entirely, but the three entities that would be El Shhat, Les, and later on Kubisa are there.

They are all there.

Correct.

Because he had them, he said, "My preferred, in order of preference," at some point.

And then he listed them.

Correct. So the, the point that I, I concentrate is just a sample being the three entities. Is. And Commissioner Faroh, just to follow up on what Commissioner Kumalo is raising, with hindsight, and obviously knowing the apparent, let me not call it interference, but the apparent interference, you would note, it would raise a red flag that obviously these entities, with hindsight of course, are the, some of them are the ones that were shared with, with, um, Serge and Gos.

As you know, that these WhatsApps is coming, is coming to our attention now.

Correct. Unfortunately, I was not in that WhatsApp group. So, it's come to the attention now. Um, we must remember, there's a supply chain management process where people must comply with certain, um, and there's a checklist. So, I think, as I said again, how they came to that companies, and did they comply, and the evidence if they comply, those things will be with the Chief Financial Officer. So, if he comes to this commission, I think it is better if you, uh, maybe drill into that and maybe question him in that regard, because at the end of the day, the documents and the checks and balances, and make sure that all the companies comply, is part of his portfolio. So, after they've done the checks and balances, obviously they feel that the service level agreement must be drawn up, because these companies has met the requirements. So, if there is, maybe in hindsight, through the WhatsApps that came to our attention, and mine yesterday, and to this morning, there is names there, then obviously that question must be posed to the CFO, who is the person that is, that is part of his portfolio.

And certainly, I think the, they are, what I was just raising as a question was whether to you, it would raise a red flag that you've, you've got someone external that gives the CFO.

Definitely, definitely. I just, no, definitely. I agree with you. As I also yesterday strongly alluded to it, that, um, this is unacceptable. He's not even working for the city of Tshwane. He's not even in the supply chain management, uh, environment of the city of Tshwane. He is a South African Police Service, uh, sergeant. Um, it is very, very worrying that, um, he could give guidance, or he could actually, um, preferred companies. It is unacceptable.

Can I, can I just ask on this? We, we know from your evidence, but also from media reports that we can take note of, that, uh, there's been suspensions, uh, of, of the CFO. We know that Lamini, Deputy Commissioner Lamini, is also on suspension. You've also testified to consequence management processes.

Now, the, the evidence through Sergeant Goi.

Yes.

And some of which you've covered with, with Mrs. Kak, is you've got those three companies. We're talking about this land tender, right? So you've got those, uh, you say, I think he says Elai, and later become, they get awarded these tenders. Now, we know from Sergeant Dosi's evidence that belongs to his brother, according to him, it's a company that belongs to his brother. Uh, we also know from that evidence that, uh, Commissioner Lamini, Deputy Commissioner Lamini, seems to have been involved in advising, uh, about the tender, where he didn't comply, advising, "This is how you fix it. We need this and that to be fixed." That's the evidence that has been presented to us. I give you that as the background to my, to my question. My question is, together with these suspensions that have been publicized,

Yes.

Is there an investigation presently within, within the city and or TMPD that's looking at whether these tenders were properly awarded? As in, for example, did Gapesia meet the requirements for appointment? Does El Shadai meet the requirements for appointment? Are there those kind of investigations happening, or people have just been suspended and we'll see how it plays out?

Um, obviously by my side, Commissioner Baloy, yes. Uh, in terms of the city, I'm sure the city is busy with that investigation as well. Under the GR, uh, group audit and risk, they are busy with it. But by my side, um, like I said yesterday, um, we are busy with all that investigations in terms of TMPD.

So, may, maybe let me limit you to just TMPD then. So, what you're doing in TMPD, you're not just doing the normal disciplinary processes where Piri has been suspended and he will go through a disciplinary hearing? Are you investigating the tenders themselves?

Yes. Yes, I do. I am busy, um, because the information that obviously that I got through my, um, being a witness, I've got enough information, and then also, as the evidence leader has alluded to, um, yes, we are looking at that as well. We are also, um, um, want to look at the, how the, as I said, with the CFO, we, we require that information in terms of, uh, the point system, the documents, um, all of that. We are, we are also looking at. We must, because, um, uh, I cannot just look at the one side. If I want to do consequence management, it's the entire food chain and value chain. And then we obviously, as I said, where there's gaps, we need to make sure, if it is that we exclude it, or it is just known that, uh, um, um, um, actually the department that must make use of the goods and service, we only use by point one to three, but from four to ten, we do that, and eleven, you must just sign. We must then say, there's a gap. It cannot be like that. So, I don't want us always to be after the fact. Uh, we need to make sure we put medicine in place. That's why, Commissioner, uh, Baloy, um, this investigation is, is, is not going to be overnight. However, um, it's not going to be something that we want to drag on for five years, because we're dealing with this on a daily basis.

Yes.

So, yes, definitely the investigation is quite huge and, and, and wide.

So, we can, when I say we, I mean the public.

Yes.

Can, can expect, for example, that if indeed it did not meet the requirements for to be awarded this tender, the public can expect that in time, that contract will be cancelled?

Definitely. Steps will be taken to cancel it and set it aside.

Definitely. Thank you.

Definitely.

And you saw that the SCM policy is very, very clear, of the city of Tshwane, very, very clear. So definitely there will be consequences. I promise you. Well, I mentioned, I should not be misunderstood. I mentioned Gapesia because there was specific evidence, but this applies generally.

Yes. No, to everybody. We need to look into all of them that were successful. If you look at the, um, uh, uh, land invasion, is that it? We need to look at it, and, and, and also to see, like you say, if there's any links. And, and, and, as I said, we are also making use of external, um, other departments to assist us with that. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner.

Commissioner, this, uh, engagement takes me back to a question I asked you yesterday, and, uh, you said that you would deal with it later on in your testimony. I'm not sure that you, you did. If you did, uh, you'll, you'll correct me. Um, the question related to paragraph 7 of your statement, um, when you were dealing with the, that paragraph. Perhaps let me read what you said, which prompted my question. "Over the past weeks, I have come to learn with great shock and dismay on what was apparently taking place in the TMPD. It is not, it would seem, issues of irregularities, but clear systems of siphoning of money and criminal activities." And, uh, when you say that, uh, you became aware over the past weeks, you were obviously referring to what came out at this commission. Am I correct?

Yes. Um, um, um, as I, if you can see there, in the, um, obviously with the, um, stopping of the ADOC, since that time, including the, the commission.

Including what came out here.

Yes. Yes.

Including the commission.

Yes. Uh, my question related to this. I expressed a concern, um, at the fact that, um, but for these recent revelations, it would have been business as usual. And my concern was this: what systems are in place to make sure that, uh, things like these either do not happen at all, or if they do happen, um, uh, they, they are discovered, and action is taken, uh, immediately or soon enough? And that's what you said you would deal with in your engagement with Commissioner Baloy just now. Um, the focus was on what you are going to do as TMPD, what you are going to do from now onwards. My concern is, in a sense, historical, in the sense that, how did we get here? Why is it that these were not discovered much earlier? Why aren't there systems that make sure that, uh, um, if something wrong has happened, it must be discovered soon enough? It must not be purely fortuitous that we become aware of it. There must be systems in place that make sure that one, it either doesn't happen, or if it has happened, it is discovered soon enough.

Jay, I agree with you. And, um, I need to just remind the commission that the APSS only came to me 1st of July 2024, and we've discovered that even prior to that, that, as I said, the investigation is vast. And upon it came to me, we actually became aware of it, and we started the, the type of investigation. And you are correct. We need to look at the history, and historically, in terms of even the previous tender, and even the previous, to look at it to see what happened that time as well, in order for us to make sure what happened that time, what now, and how we can correct it. So, you are correct, Commissioner, uh, uh, um, chairperson, uh, um, that, um, July 2024, a couple of months after that, we had to figure out, and, and, and, and stumbled across things to make sure, handover report was only given a month after I've discovered and stopped, um, um, the ADOC. Um, and also, as, uh, Commissioner Kumalo yesterday also said, in terms of the APSS, it's complex, it's very complex. You deal with tenders, you deal with staff, you deal with sites, sites that you had to do your own assessment. So, I want to really, I, I know now because of this that we have discovered now, it looks like you should have known, but we must not lose sight that we only got AP, and APS has been since 2002. So, the fact that we stumbled across it, something new, we had to immediately, we had to start with a tender, which was already late. We had to immediately figure out everything for ourselves, and it was mid, mid, it was beginning of the final financial year, 1 July 2024. Then you have a couple of months, then you have the festive season. So, all these things are what we discovered. Actually, we made more headway than anybody that was before in that portfolio. So, yes, you are correct, chairperson. We are looking wide, and as I also said, we are in the process of also having a, a workshop with all this information with the relevant role players to see what was, what happened, what we discovered before the commission became, uh, actually here to assist us even more, and how we're going to move forward. So, I really need to also, in terms of my team that was part of it, and, and, and had to figure out how this APSS work, I need to really give them commend them a little bit for what they've done in a short span of time, in what was going on for years. So, I can really guarantee you, we are looking into it, because we can't move forward if we are not going to look at historically, how did it work, and I can guarantee you also, it's very difficult also to get certain information, but we're going to get the information, because there's no way we're going to move forward. And as, as I said yesterday, the ideal will be to build in-house capacity moving forward, and that will be to have not this scenario anymore, moving forward into the future. In those capacity, and then also looking at, rightfully so, after we've built and, and, and assisted where the unit must actually reside. Must it not be with the COO? Then, must it not be with the GSO? But we are, we are up for the challenge. We are there. We're not going to hand over a broken vehicle. We will fix the vehicle, and we will look at historically, what, what went wrong. We want to really look at everything, because we can't start in the middle and we leave behind. There can be people that maybe has moved from the unit, but previously was involved in something. We're even looking into that. If I say that we looked in, we are looking into everything.

Perhaps more a comment than a question, but of course, if you want to say something on on it, you may. It seems to me that, uh, with some of the things that happen during the entire process, um, the people involved in the processes just go along with whatever is, whatever agenda is being pushed. Let's take the example of, uh, Lesia, um, which Mrs. Kakan drew our attention to. There's, um, the email from, I think Mr. Lamini, is it, where he's pointing out the shortcomings of the Gapesia bid. So that should tell the people involved in the procurement process that this is how the Gapesia bid looked.

Yes.

At the time it was submitted. But this is how it looked at the stage of adjudication, which should tell those involved in the process,

That there was a change somewhere in between. That's not even a red flag. It actually tells you that something improper has happened somewhere between submission and adjudication. So that's why I think, uh, yes, some people will actually be involved in criminality, impropriety, uh, bid rigging, etc. But some will not be involved in that, but will be complicit in the sense that they do not actually look for what they should be looking for,

Which makes corruption, bid rigging, etc., easy.

Definitely. As I said, it's just a comment. But.

Definitely. Um, chairperson, we also picked up there was one person that actually, um, because of, you remember you are in, uh, uniform, so if somebody in authority comes, you, you, you're supposed to check certain things. You are spot on with that. It's even that we picked up that you should, irrespective of who comes to you in a position of authority, if it is that you must have A, B, C, D, E in order to do F, you should not, you should not just because a person is an authority. You are 100% correct with that, uh, chairperson. All of those things came to the fore now, and we will have to do consequence management on each and everyone. You cannot use the excuse that somebody in authority came to you, and even if the person says, "I'm going to bring it later," and maybe it never came, so you must do that. We are also looking at those things. Uh, uh, uh, chairperson, you are correct in terms of that.

Mrs. Kakan. Thanks, Chair. Perhaps I've just got two issues, and I think it comes to your, to your point. Um, you say that there are obviously steps that you're going to take. Um, going forward about, and obviously, I think yesterday you were given some homework about what was happening in the department in the police service, I mean, metropolitan police department. Um, and yesterday I did put it to you or probe that there is some difficulty with, or I find some difficulty, but I couldn't probe the point any further about management engagement and having these circumstances, as the Chair puts them, that then enable, um, others to be caught up or otherwise, um, within the department, and one central figure is Commissioner, your Deputy Commissioner. If I may ask you to go to file one, page 93.

File one.

Page 93.

Three. I'm dead. Is it, are, are you fine, Commissioner? Oh, it's that challenge with the file.

Yeah, I'll share with the Chair. I still have the same difficulties yesterday. My 93 is a P suspension letter, but I'll share the minute with the Chair.

I do apologize.

Um, Chair, through you. Mine is the same as Commissioner Baloy. So my, uh, file is also the same as Commissioner Baloy. You got the.

Don't you have a copy that you just take out from somewhere and share with us?

Thank you. Mine is marked, unfortunately.

I think Commissioner Baloy, they've got something against females here. We can pick that up. I'm starting to think that.

I can think that as if it comes to the two of us.

Perhaps, Chair, I can either, we can stand down for the copies to be made, uh, just, um.

Or, or perhaps, why don't you move on to some other point and then we come back to this later? Will that mess up your?

Yes, it should. But it's to the witness more modernist.

Thank you so much.

Thank you. Um, you see that is a precautionary suspension letter from us, and I would.

That's, um.

That's correct.

And you.

Sorry, can I ask why the evidence leaders? Oh, it's there now. It's fine.

Remember the public is also watching. Yes. Thank you. Um, that's your signature at the bottom.

That's correct.

Okay. Could you just take us through how this happens? I find it peculiar, um, about how does it work, and what are the actual allegations? Because one is not clear from what Commissioner Jamin is saying. He says they are serious and damaging allegations.

Is essentially. Apologies.

No, no, continue. Continue.

Yes. He was simply saying that there are serious and damaging circumstances or that warrant for him to be put on, on, on, on precautionary suspension. Could you just explain on that, how it works? If, if you look at the date, this was the 20th of, um, March. Uh, just the end of, um, the 18th of March, uh, um, Deputy Commissioner Glamini's name was mentioned just by the end of, of, of the day. The morning of the 19th, I went to his office, and I said, "There was, there was your name was mentioned yesterday, depending on what is coming out today." Uh, me and him had a conversation that this will be the route to go. What happened then? I engaged with, uh, the HR department, because I wanted to know, "What do you do in a case like this?" Because it's not that I had an investigation, and then in terms of that investigation, it's easier to say, "Based on ABCDE, I'm going to do this." So they said, uh, um, I was then on the, by the festive season launch, busy at, uh, the, the national one, then I was informed that this, he's looking for me on the 20th, and then, um, he's got a document he wants to hand over to me. When I got the document, I wanted to know from HR, "What is the way forward?" And, and, and if you will just allow me, I will just read into record what HR has actually, uh, responded to me. Um, because I wanted to know in this case, uh, what need to do. Then HR said, "Chief, I have perused the policy, and it does not make provision for such a request. It is normally initiated from the side of the employer." Then HR also said, "However, from other documents I perused, it is possible as long as the employer suggests it with reasons, and does not demand the letter from him. It is a request, and the reasons seem valid. I would, however, suggest a cover letter where you can indicate that after consideration of the request and the reasons, you support the request." So that I received from HR. What I want to do, I wanted it to be procedurally correct from the start. That is why I seek advice from HR, how to go about it. So the letter you will see on 93, he did write where requested, and then as per HR, on the, on page number 94, I then did that cover letter. Uh, although I signed that, and I signed it, you will see on page 1995 is my signature. So that is how this came about.

For the record, please tell us where you were reading from just now.

That is, I'm reading from.

The advice, the advice from HR.

Yes. And, and I will submit, I will also submit it, uh, with my supplementary. Um, yeah, chairperson, for the commission, how this came about.

Thank you. Thank you.

Just, just for the record, at page 93, that's, um, Deputy Commissioner Lamin's request to be placed on suspension.

That's correct.

Okay.

That's correct, Commissioner Baloy.

Okay.

That's correct.

So, when you say you supported the request, you, you mean you accepted that there were valid reasons for him to be placed on.

Suspect? Definitely. I accepted it. Uh, Commissioner Baloy, I also on the 19th already, the morning, early the morning, I went to him and said, because it was just by the end of, of, of, of the 18th of March, uh, his name was mentioned, and it was more into context on the 19th, and I did inform him in person. Whatever comes out now today, that obviously then on the 20th, um, um, um, there will be, uh, type of, uh, uh, uh, action will be taken. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Just for completeness, I mean, I think if you compare that, and maybe the circumstances are different, that with the letter for, for Inspector Piri, where there are specifics, um, just maybe for the record, what, when, when he says serious and damaging allegations, I think he's covering the nature of the allegations. Are you able to share exactly your understanding or of your discussion as to what it is that he was concerned about? Was it corruption? Was it?

It was obviously the allegations against him, uh, uh, in terms of the 19th of March was obviously that, uh, uh, um, possible, like you said, interference, etc. So that was the nature of, of, of the discussion.

So, so it was around the issues of interference and.

100%.

And are those, they are not written anywhere in so far as that is concerned?

It's part of the investigation.

Part of the investigation. Okay.

Yes. It's part of the investigation.

All right. Commissioners, I think it's, um, the next part would have been the APSS, but another witness with more detail will come and deal with it, and I think I'm unlikely to get, uh, more from the witness on on the topic.

All right. All right. Any, any other topic to deal with then, or is this the end?

This is it. It's just, it was just one of the APC essays, but I think it's better that we deal with.

It be dealt with by the other. And I don't think I'm agree with that.

Thank you. With this.

Thank you.

All right.

Commissioner Faroh. Good. Good morning again. I just want to get clarity from you. Uh, you, you must understand that this commission has a limited, uh, duration within which to do its work, and its terms of reference are limited.

And we, we have a few investigators and a few evidence leaders.

Tshwane and TMPD are big institutions.

Yes.

You mentioned 3,200 or.

3,600.

3,600 officers within, uh, TMPD. It's unlikely that we, as the commission, will cover all of them. So, it's in that context that I want to ask these questions that I have to ask. What, besides other than the security services, what are the other services that are procured by TMPD through the tender system, and where you, as Chief of Police, or your predecessors, have had to sign an SLA?

I'm sure, um, commissioner, is the uniform, the uniform tender.

Uniform.

And then also the service animals, because you need to, the feed and the, the vet services, etc. And also the, the, the, if I look at it,

I'm assuming tech, the machines that your office use to track speed and drink speed equipment.

100%.

And then ticket collection. The.

No, that is Arto that we have.

Is it ART?

We, unfortunately, in Johannesburg, Arto is already with us for a very, very long time.

So, there are no service providers that collect on behalf of the city of T. I've got my own, um, back office.

And then healthcare. You're not using Mr. Matala's company to test your officers when they are sick.

No, they've got medical aid.

Fitness.

Fitness is done by, uh, my Inos, um, academy.

So, it's not Medicare 24.

No, we, we don't need, um, Mr. Mala for that.

All right. Now, I will put it no higher than this, because there must still be a determination on this. But it would appear that in relation to the tenders that we have looked at, that the SCM system within Tshwane and TMPD is compromised. What is your comment on that?

I agree. So, your policy, it's great that you have a written policy, but it's clear that people are not complying with it and are finding ways to go around it and to get their preferred service providers to be appointed, even when they don't qualify to be appointed. And the example, Chair, made is a case in point.

Commissioner Kumalo, definitely I agree, because, um, we wouldn't have been sitting here if it wasn't compromised. So, I agree with you 150%.

My worry is that the commission has so far only looked at the security services. What assurance can you give the commission and the public, the South Africans, that in their capital city, in one of the biggest metros in the country, in relation to these other services you've mentioned, seven, you've mentioned uniform, animals, tech, uh, ticket collection, we can scratch out, you said healthcare is, uh, internal, but in relation to those five, can you give South Africans the assurance that there was no infiltration by criminals who have hijacked the system, and they are making millions, if not billions, out of taxpayers' money, and nobody's paying attention to it? Can you give the country the assurance that that is being looked at, and you are comfortable that there are no issues there?

Commissioner Kumalo, as I said, we are going to look, not only into these two tenders that has been identified or flagged by the commission. We are looking at the entire, everything that you've mentioned that's got, even if it's, um, remember some of those were already awarded, or some of them are already in place. We, this investigation is not going to stop now, and it's only because there's a, um, as you said, you've got a terms.

of reference when it comes to the commission. Everything needs to be looked at when it comes to this. And the and the other thing that I'm looking at also is all these services. Can we have it in house? That is my next question. Is it possible that I can maybe appoint a vet for the service animals? Is the amount of service animals of such amount that I can do it? Is the care that they need of such amount that I can do it? I'm looking at all of those things. Is it necessary that we must have all these service providers or can I build in-house capacity? So the word for me is in-house capacity. Then this, this all these things will disappear. So those are the things that I can also looking at.

In terms of uh the the the the the other tenders, this going to be part of the the terms of reference for from my side is bigger than yours. Um um Commissioner Kumalo, I unfortunately I have to now mine must be bigger. I cannot just say okay let us look at the two. I need to look at everything and also to see those that are implicated. How far are they implicated in this regard? I cannot just look into the two. I need to look at how far and how long have you been busy uh with with in this regard. So that is also part of of of my scope in terms of um the investigation that we are looking at. Yes, we are looking at this through now but I have to look at and then all the staff there. If all the staff are compromised, unfortunately I will have to start from a clean slate. I will have to start from a clean slate. So um Commissioner Kumalo, that is my answer that I I cannot just look into let us look at nine and 10 but we will not start from one. We I have to look at the whole whole value chain and I I did already said that but we first starting now with this and then we also looking back into the into all the others as well.

>> Are you able to create positions within the TMPD or would you have to seek permission from someone else?

>> I will be able to um um um chairperson. We are busy looking at the micro structure at the moment. Uh, so I am looking at um I even put um I want two legal services within my office. Uh uh I've already uh recruited two very young and and um metro police officers that got their they they studied and they've got it and and and I've given them like small things to be the liaison between the legal department of the of the of the city of Tswane and my one to look at litigation to look at um uh uh um if you go to court prepare yourself to go to court that we don't lose cases look at u um issues look at trends are you making mistake on the sums or is it deliberate? So we are already starting with that and I've given them that. So yes, the answer is yes, I can do that.

>> All right. I'm asking that in the context of uh your response to Commissioner Kumalo that for example, you want to take out of um the the need for procurement um the the appointment for example of vets.

>> Yes.

>> For your for your animals. Um if for example there will be a huge saving instead of going out to tender if there will be a saving if you have your own vets and you do not have to seek someone else's permission to to make appointments. Why not? Because then you are outside of all this corruption bid rigging and all of the things I referred to to earlier. Of course the appointment of vets is just one example. I'm sure when you sit down you you would be able to to remove from the procurement process a whole lot of other services. I I was surprised when we went through the the WhatsApp chats here to see that uh there are even uh tenders for the delivery of refuge bags. When when I grew up, someone employed by the municipality would just throw that in >> throw it into the yard and you've got your refuge bag and the municipality did not have to issue a tender for that. I I just find some of these things mind-boggling. The the again that's just one example. If one sits down, a whole lot more could be removed from the tender system. But I guess it also requires political decisions, political will and so on. So some of these things may be outside of your scope of uh or your peer or functions.

>> Commissioner, what you can and if I just take the vet services as example, you train the metro police officer to additional that is on the mounted patrol unit. You just enhance his skills. You don't need to have a vet on standby. That can be done. I'm just using the example of being a vet. You are on the unit. You know exactly. You love horses because obviously you will have to you know uh um what to do. So we can just enhance your skills.

>> Thank you.

>> Mrs. Skakan, you you had indicated that that's it. We are done. Thanks we ch >> Thank you commissioner. Thank you very much. You are excused.

>> Thank you so much chairperson. Thank you so much commissioners also for assisting us to see the gaps and also that I would like to any any progress that we make even if the commission is not it's concluded that we still I would like to still report on all the things that I said is going to happen. I don't want it to just be a talk. So, and then to say that um I obviously will know where to submit to say that I've done this now, we've done this now, we picked up this and we're busy with that in an investigation even long after commission has concluded. I would really like to have that homework as well. Thank you commissioner so much.

>> Thank you. Um, I I'd like to say um that section 217 of the constitution um was included in the constitution for the benefit of us all that is South Africans. But what organs of state have done is to turn it on its head >> and actually use it against us. That's very unfortunate. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you so much.

>> Uh do we do we agenda >> so as to make the switch?

>> Yes chair. Um and just sort out the files. Um what I was thinking chair is that it's perhaps we can take an early tea break instead h and then come back um with a new witness. 10 past 11. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Yes. Uh, good morning, Mr. Musitti.

>> Good morning, chair. Good morning, commissioners.

>> Thank you.

>> Yes.

>> Yes. Um, chair, we have um, Deputy Commissioner Sean Bhaz from the TMPD to assist us as as a witness for today. Um chair before you saw you saw in the witness um just maybe to give context so that we understand from which angle he's coming from the commission would have had evidence from um commissioner Spee especially in relation to the tender 2016 2017 but the chair will remember that his evidence was limited to his arrival at the TMPD which was in March 2025 going forward. Um now the relevance of this particular witness is that before Mr. Spe took over in March he was the caretaker in what we call now the APSS unit or department. So for at least period of 8 months he would have been the person responsible for this and most of the issues that we are battling with uh relating to this commission uh would have happened during his tenure as a caretaker of of that unit. So his evidence it it has to be treated with that caution that immediately after February then speech would have taken over and he spoke to what he could to the commission chair. Um so that's just the context I need to give to the commission so that we we know why he's here.

>> All right. Thank you Miss Mos. Thank you. Will uh the witness be swearing or affirming?

>> Affirming.

>> Thank good morning Paul.

>> Yes.

>> Do you affirm Oh, please uh please switch on your the both mics. Both mics >> on now.

>> Yes. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Do you affirm that the evidence you're going to give is the truth? The whole truth. Nothing but the truth.

>> I do affirm that.

>> Thank you. Yes, Mr. Musigi.

>> Thank you, Chair. Um, Commissioner Bhaz, um, in front of you, you should have two files almost identical. Um, I want us to go through those files so that we can, um, get rid of the housekeeping issues. Now, if you go to the first file, you will see on the spine um, it will say um, Mr. Bh statement and annexures. That's correct.

>> Yes.

>> Yes. Now, the first page will be an index and then if you flip over that index. Um, can you identify the document there?

>> Just say again, apologies.

>> So, the first page is an index and then if you flip over that page, can you identify the document there? What is written there in the middle?

>> Yeah, it's the witness statement of myself.

>> Yes. And then um can you go to the last page which is page six of that statement. Um, now do you confirm that this statement is your statement?

>> I do confirm that.

>> Do you stand by the contents thereof?

>> Yes.

>> And then uh deputy commissioner do you confirm that the signature on page six is your signature?

>> It's my signature.

>> Thank you. Um commissioners uh at this point just to note that I think commissioner Kumalo's bundles are not signed the statements um we will sort them out um at the end of the of the hearing but commissioner Balo and the chairperson's statements or witness statements should be duly signed.

>> but the content is the same.

>> the content is exactly the same.

>> commissioner Kumalo's.

>> yes.

>> all right.

>> the one that we've just looked at is signed.

>> well the night did a stellar job. Thank you. just just to to find out the six page statement um has its content not been incorporated into the longer statement the 15page statement.

>> it it has been.

>> it has all right.

>> it has been chosen.

>> so basically we should work with the 15page statement.

>> in an ideal situation I would have said let's do away with it or the first file. But out of abundance of caution because I also received a second file.

>> in case things went missing.

>> I I would want to keep a chair person.

>> Ideally would have said let's do away with it.

>> Okay.

>> But for the better part of of the witness evidence, we'll be focusing on the duly incorporated statement. That's correct. Thank you.

>> Thank you. Thank you. Please continue then.

>> Thank you, Mr. BH. Then can we move to the second file? something important uh which uh we forgot. Um deputy commissioner uh let's let's have your names on record please your full full names.

>> Yes my.

>> do you want to state your full names?

>> Yeah, I I will commissioner my all my names is Sean Ian Edward Eugene and my surname is Bullface.

>> Thank you.

>> Thank you. Now on the second file you'll see on the spine it will say supplementary statement of Sean Ian Edward Eugene Bhaz and then if you the first page it's an index and then um if you go on the third page on the first page it's an index and the second page it's a table of contents and the trim lines there you'll see that that is your statement. Can you confirm that this is your statement?

>> Uh, Commissioner Bes.

>> I can confirm.

>> Yes. Can you go then to page 15 of that statement? Um, do you stand by the contents of the statement?

>> I do.

>> Thank you. And then you lastly confirm the signature appearing on page 15 of that statement.

>> That's my signature.

>> Thank you. Um, Commissioner Bhazes, for the better part of our engagement, we will be focusing on this particular file. If we need to go to the first file, I would I would draw that to your attention. So, keep this one closer and perhaps let's start on page two of the file right in front of you. Um, you have already put your names on record. Can you then h start with the introduction part at paragraph one of of that statement and and read that into record. Um as as we discussed earlier where you need to elaborate you can elaborate uh where we need to interject we interject especially the commissioners if they need some clarity they will do so as you go through your your statement. So please do not be alarmed when they interject to to ask clarity seeking questions. I might often also do. So let's start at paragraph one then.

>> Noted. Thank you commissioners. Um I am an adult male South African citizen and the deputy chief of police for training and innovation in the city of Tuani Metropolitan Police Department which is known as teamd. Having assumed this role on 1 June 2024, I was recommended by a panel consisting of the chief of police and other senior city officials. The facts deposed to herein are within my personal knowledge and are to the best of my belief both true and correct. Safe where context indicates other.

>> Thank you. Uh we can move to paragraph three under the topic of your educational and career uh background.

>> Oh deputy commissioner the save where context indicates otherwise suggests that uh what you say may not be true and correct depending on context.

>> No but no I'm sure I'm sure that's not what you meant. Uh, I suspect it must be the lawyers who let you down there. Lawyer language.

>> Thank you. Thank you, Deputy Commissioner. Thank you, commissioners. Um, educational and career background. I'm a career traffic officer/metro police officer since 1992. I started my career as a traffic officer in the then Pretoria municipality. The traffic department then evolved into the metro police department. I am still employed by the city of Tuani as a metro police officer. In total, I have 34 years of experience in the municipality. I have a career related ITO3ear national diploma and a ITO4 higher diploma. I have a valid top secret security clearance certificate, excuse me, which will expire in December 2026. I am in the process of starting the vetting process again.

>> Um, Commissioner, let me just stop you there. Can you explain um what you mean by what is the purpose of this top uh secret security clearance certificate and the process it takes and whom is expected um to undertake or go through that process. Uh keep in mind that a witness came before this commission from a different municipality and gave evidence that in fact there is a requirement or a directive under that department that uh high ranking officials ought to do the vetting process for the processes for the purposes of maintaining this. So what we what I need you to at least uh inform us in the commission is uh the processes involved whom according to you in the TMPD is required to go undergo this process to obtain the clearance certificate.

>> Thank you. I will do that. Commissioners, um, let me start first by indicating it's not a lawful requirement yet in the city, although it should be. I do believe um, with the security committee in place, it will be a recommendation and a premise for the city to start from uh, ensuring high level of security aligned to the miss document that's approved and implemented and also adopted by council in the city of Tswane. I can't recall the date. So those bases or building blocks are in place but as I indicated it's not policy yet although all high level positions in the city of Tswane when advertised it's now a requirement within the advertised that you avail yourself for vetting purposes for security clearance in the metro police itself. Um I am a deputy chief of police. It is imperative that your senior management of a metro police should be must be vetted. Um if I had a way to force it through I would as I'm also the chief of staff which I will explain late later. But it is cumbersome for me to think and I won't mention names that certain senior officials refuse to get themselves vetted. I immediately availed myself for vetting because it's required of me in my position when I deal with sensitive information not only internally in the department but also in the city of Tswane but also on IGR levels that I can deal with this documents procedurally and lawfully in a correct way. I gladly submit it myself for this vetting process and so must all other senior officials. Some do, some don't, but that's a matter that we are still addressing within the department and in the city.

>> RGR levels.

>> Excuse me. Commissioner.

>> said also in RGR levels. What is that?

>> We in IGR intergovernmental relations. We work a lot with sensitive meeting sensitive material. So not all of it but some of the information especially if it relates uh to um maybe a national state that we find ourselves and there's sensitive information you need to deal with that according to the MIS document. So vetting is very important. Deputy Commissioner, when you say some some officials refuse to be to be vetted, are we talking the general vetting or the the top secret uh vetting? Because my understanding is there's a there's a difference. There's the vetting that all staff members or or all officers law law officers in TMPD would be subjected to and my understanding sorry of the evidence of the chief of police was that uh annually there is vetting of all officers and that is conducted every year and I thought that's different from your top secret.

>> I can explain explain that commissioner.

>> please.

>> Um what the chief of police was referencing to if I understand your statement correctly is the security clearance. It's also commonly known as vetting but it's not a full vetting. It's just security clearance. That process is ongoing on a yearly basis where we check for criminal and illicit records against members within the department and certain members in the city when so requested by the city manager. The vetting I'm referring to is a full vetting done by in our case as a municipality by state security agency and it is a part lifestyle audit uh financial check proper vetting your whole history all your girlfriends all your boyfriends all your ex-wives all those things they check it all and then you're either cleared or you're not cleared.

>> and that's the one that you say it's not yet required by law.

>> Yes.

>> Is that the one you're referring to?

>> It it's it's not in formal policy yet by the city, but it should be.

>> Okay. That's what I mean. Yes.

>> Yes.

>> Okay.

>> So, you and I are cleared. Uh, Commissioner Bles.

>> I'm cleared of all all all of those things.

>> You and I are cleared.

>> Both of us? Yes, we are cleared. Yes, Commissioner. So maybe the rest of the room must leave now.

>> Um, Commissioner Bes, are you aware of any steps or measures that the city has taken at least in future to ensure that um this uh vetting is not an issue or it's not raised as an issue by the incumbent um officials.

>> Yes. Um as indicated in adverts now for senior positions it is a requirement that you avail yourself for vetting. Um on lower position positions it would be for security clearance or to check for criminal records. Um those adverts are public knowledge. You would see that. Um so it's open to the public. And then the other portion that I just touched on it is the job of the security committee which has been established. Is it in full swing, full working? I'm not 100% sure. I'm not um 100% sure of of the doings of the security committee at the moment, but they do sit from time to time. And part of their function would be to advise the city to put in policy in place that certain levels and certain positions depending on the type of position and what you do what's your functionality in those positions. For an example, if you work in the finance office or the supply chain management processes, you should be properly vetted. Properly properly vetted and then also senior management um whatever is deemed senior and then you can get different types of vetting. Not everyone will be vetted top secret. In my capacity, I need top secret. um another person in another position in senior management might only need secret or something like that.

>> Thank you. Uh commissioner, um you don't have to mention the names. I think those who will come will ask them the same question and if there are reasons why they haven't been vetted, they will they will explain themselves. Um, can we then move on to the next um topic which is your responsibilities as the deputy um chief of police that will be at paragraph five of your statement.

>> Thank you commissioners. uh responsibilities as a deputy chief of police. Paragraph 5 as the deputy chief training and innovation are mainly responsible for the TMPD academy where we train metro police officers, traffic wardens, other officials as per our academy curriculum. I am further responsible for police innovation which include research, analytics and information management for the department. Paragraph six. Additional to the above position, I am also responsible for the work and functioning of the staff officer, which in you might know it as a chief of staff, but it's a it's a semi-military terminology staff officer or chief of staff to the chief of police. I fulfilled that role because the position is vacant at the moment. The position is currently on a brigadier level on the approved structure. Paragraph seven, my responsibilities here include one, although the position on the approved structure is on a brigadier level, I am functioning on a deputy chief level. Two, oversight on the chief office of the chief of police. Apologies. Three, strategic level coordination within the department. Four, high level administration. Five, high level IGR specifically within government, SLA, SAPS at all. Six, drafting of specific departmental documents such as SOPs, directives, official letters for internal which is the city and external purposes. Seven, represent the chief of police at EXCO, Mako, section 79 committees, high level external meetings, forums and or events. Paragraph 8.

>> Commissioner, before you go there, can you just uh inform the commission this position of chief of staff? Um how long has it been vacant for? Do do you know?

>> This position has been vacant for a very long time. Um previously I acted in this position officially, but then it was on a deputy chief level. The structure was then subsequently changed and put on a incorrectly on a brigadier level. The new structure that has been developed for the department proposed structure that still needs to go for approval. It has been put back on a deputy chief level where it should be. Um it's a high stressful position the right hand person to the chief of police as indicated by by some of the functions that I have already mentioned. Um we have over time in the city a lot of vacant positions. We have had in the metro police many vacant positions for a long period of time since the chief of police Yolanda Farro has been appointed. I believe it was October 23 I think. So she immediately lobbied the city and the city manager to ensure that at least critical positions and high level positions are being filled. Subsequently, the department has filled numerous positions. We still in a position where we have put forward critical vacancies that are now very close to advertisement level subject always to final approval by the city and available budget. But these are funded vacancies. One of the positions that we hope to fill would be this position of chief of staff because it's a critical position.

>> Thank you uh commissioner. I think you're about to move on to paragraph um 8.

>> Yes.

>> Yes.

>> Commissioners, paragraph 8. I'm further responsible for the management and coordination of unfair labor practices arbitrations at the South African Local Government Bargaining Council SGBC. This includes one attending step three grievances and this is grievances as per the COOT collective agreement on behalf of the department/ chief of police. Two, attending conciliation when required. Three, attending consultations with internal role players and appointed legal representation in preparation for the bargaining council and four attend or coordinate the actual arbitration at bargaining council and or CCMA. Um thank you uh commissioner. Can we move on then to the next topic uh which involves your further responsibility again? Um now we're talking about the section deals with your acting state as a category services. Can you take us through that?

>> I can. It's number D. My acting stint as caretaker of asset protection and security service paragraph 9 commissioners I was the caretaker for asset protection and security services known as APSS for the period 1 July 2024 to 28th February 2025 as the divisional head in brackets deputy chief post was vacant the function was transferred from the office of the city manager back to the TMP as from 1 July 2024. Paragraph 10. This position was ultimately taken up by the appointed deputy chief Revo Spee on one March 2025. Paragraph 11. As the caretaker of APSS, I did high level management and oversight over the division. Paragraph 12. Upon assuming this task, I had to deal with a relocation of the APSS from the Office of the City Manager to the TMPD. I must hasten to state that when the APS transfer was done, I was not provided with a handover report as one would expect. I am aware however that a handover and I call say it in brackets report was ultimately emailed to the chief of police by Miss Peri Marota where I was also copied on the email on 10 April 2025. Now that is 9 10 months later and I've already given over or handed over the function to deputy chief Spee but continuing commissioners on paragraph 13 the email is attached to chief Yolanda Farro's statement which I attach as an annexure SB1 which I will refer to paragraph 14. During my testimony, I will point out from the handover report that on what I agree with and what I disagree with in relation to the following subtopics 141 the background to the transfer 142 human resources related matters and 14.3 budget and procurement related matters. 15. When I received the transfer of the APSS, I was aware of the tender in question comprised of the watchman component and the ad hoc component. Paragraph 16. We in brackets the deputy commissioners and chief of police had monthly budget meetings and APSS budget performance was mentioned slash discussed. During my stint, we dealt with ad hoc individually and provided services only with the necessary approvals including documentation.

>> Deputy Commissioner, can you just explain what do you mean where you say that you dealt with ad hoc individually? As the tenders commissioners make provision for ad hoc services, we would receive a request from a service delivery department that they need security services at a specific place which is not part and parcel of the normal day-to-day, week to week, month-to-month deployment. Then we would assess that request basically by doing a security assessment to review the situation to determine whether this is a legitimate request and then we must sort out the budget thereof. You will find later and I think it was also mentioned by deputy commissioner Spee and the chief of police Miss Farro that we were on a continuous basis underbudgeted for the function. So the yearly budget allocated on a regular basis for security services were not sufficient. So it would have been improper for us to approve any ad hoc site without looking into it. If a service delivery department then a request, we do an assessment. If we agree with them, then we determine the type of security that needs to be placed or put in place and then they need to provide us with a GL or the service delivery component within the city falling mainly under the COO would have to look for money. Last resort would be to approach the CFO to ensure that there is money for this, whether it will be available immediately or whether that will be adjusted during the budget process from implementing an approved budget right through upliftment of funds right through the adjustment budget. So that at the end of the year your books balance and you don't sit with unauthorized expenditure. So that's how I did myself and the chief of police did dealt with ad hoc sites in that manner.

>> Yeah. Just so I understand properly. So you have a budget for watchmen services. I think that's what it's called. That's that's what's under >> we call it watchman services for the security services. Yes. So you you've got that budget. Does that budget also save the ad hoc appointments or uh ad hoc appointments funded by the service units or the your clients? Basically >> if the uh madame commissioner if the budget is sufficient which it was never and that's clear in our financial planning and statements of the city then it would have covered ad hoc as well but due to the limited funds available for a financial year if it's not an ad hoc service that has already been identified and has then become almost a semi-permanent situation then no you would not have funds available in that budget you would have to look for additional funds as I have already explained that is how it was.

>> and and the final approval for that scenario where you have to find additional funds >> yes >> uh um because this is not one of those that have almost become permanent now. Uh where does it lie? Does it lie with the CFO or it lies in the TMPD? The final approval of that kind of request.

>> Such final approval will not lie within the TMPD unless it is covered with the approved budget. The chief of police in her position as the group head or the head of the department has certain authorities under whether it's automatically delegated per legislation or procedure and protocol or whether it's purely from the MFMA. So she can manage her own budget that's been approved and allocated. So if it falls without that budget, there's a process where we like I'll use the example of upliftment of funds. A document is drafted by the department recommended by the chief of police. Then it goes through the processes recommended by the CFO and it's finally approved by the accounting officer which is the city manager. So in such cases the city manager would sign off on upliftment of funds. The CFO I am not 100% sure to where his authority stretches but I do believe he has the authority in our case it's a he Mr. Mani has the authority and I speak under correction to work within the budget that has been approved for the city. He can allocate and reallocate certain funding. Whether all of that must be signed off by the city manager or not, I'm not sure.

>> Thank you. Can can you please go back to paragraph 11 of your statement and just clarify that and please also explain to us what is the size of the APSS? How many people are in that division and who has authority in relation to signing of documents like for example if an invoice comes in from a security company who authorizes it for approval and also who has authority in terms of issuing of work or additional sites or ad hoc uh security services that have to be provided because when you Say I did high level management and oversight. It can mean different things to many people. So just explain it the way you understand it.

>> Noted commissioner. I can elaborate on that. What is meant by high level management oversight over the division? Um I'm sure you would appreciate from my testimony already given. Uh, I have a full-time job position as the deputy chief training and innovation, which is a full-time position. Then I've got another full-time job um as the chief of staff. Then I've got a part-time job in coordinating step three grievances and arbitration matters in a in a department of about 5,000 people. You can imagine how many cases I need to deal with uh on behalf of the department. So my high level management and oversight over APSS probably took about 15 or 20% of my energy and time to just ensure that from the onset where we received this function without a proper handover as is foot stewards back to the department. My main aim was to on a high level to management to understand what this big thing entails. What is this big thing that I'm dealing with now? Um how many sites do we have in the city? Is it a true reflection of what we have? How many sites are priority? Why are they priority? How many sites do we cover? We don't even cover I think we cover less than half of all our sites but I I believe deputy chief Spee might have given much more information on that so I won't repeat that and then also to ensure that the day-to-day running which is done by director Malachi and his team um is is just over there's oversight on that so I didn't have hands-on experience on most of the matters. Some of the ad hoc sites that were referred to us as an example, I made sure because it would cause additional expenditure that I went on site personally with the team to determine what the status is. One of such sites would be Kipkhat um waterworks where a contractor finalized their duties. No planning was made prior to that for security. We just got the information through to my office that within a month's time or so um this company is going to vacate. They done with the project. Now we must secure that. And if we didn't secure that, there could have been damage or vandalism into the millions. So as a city, as a department, we were basically forced to do so. And then we followed that process that I've already explained. So my high level management and oversight was very limited. And I had no reason to mistrust at that time director Malachi seemingly on paper and what I know from him then he was an experienced senior manager in security. He had support not much but he had support and they ran that division. The amount of people in that division I can't go level to level but it's it's it's approximately just shy of 1,300 security guards on contract still not even fully absorbed into the city with all the benefits but I believe deputy Spee might have addressed that also I'm not sure um and then um some level of supervision and some level of management. And then you got to uh Dr. Malik, no I forgot his name. I'll get to his name just now. And Mr. Mashlongu and director um Malachi and part of the function in those middle levels or junior levels. We had teams that supposed to do obviously also the checkups at the different security sites to ensure that the contract that was awarded a 2.9 billion rand contract um is managed correctly and if a security company indicates that they for argument sake place four people security guards at the site that that actually happens. So I had no um at that stage mistrust in the system and wanted to ensure that they run with the day-to-day running of this division and running the contract on the sideline. We immediately had to start as I said with the fact finding information.

>> I don't Commissioner Bles I don't want you to go too far ahead because it may be that in your statement >> you're still coming to these things >> to some of it. Yes.

>> So maybe uh just deal with the role you played in the allocation and invoices the approval >> and then the rest I think the evidence leader will lead you through your statement.

>> Thank you. At a certain stage um in my stint as the caretaker, I required um director Malachi to provide once invoices have been signed signed by the operational component and then signed off by himself. He had to bring those invoices to me for co-signing. So he would approve the invoice after all the checks have been done and I would co-sign. That was just a management mechanism to ensure that um on paper there's nothing untoward the allocation of ad hoc sites. It's not a written down process but it was the practice that at least I had in place that my office needs to be informed of ad hoc sites like that explanation I gave about Kipkhat and others because of the possible operational impact and I am talking about that later but I can just say this it had to be brought to my attention because of operational, financial and contractual impact. So never did I give the impression or the instruction to director Malachi or his management team that they have a free reign or a card blanche pertaining to the allocation of sites because you have to work within a budget. you have to work according to your priority plan and the sites that you have to secure. So if you then do your own thing, we we're not going to stick to those to those things. You commissioner, you say that you would approve because on paper um everything would um appear to be proper. Did I understand you correctly?

>> Yes. Um.

>> yeah. now. Yes. Um on the ad hoc appointments, did you not notice that uh there was a disproportionate allocation to for example an entity called Gubis 85. I think it's a PTY LTD not a CC. Yes. GBIS 85. Did you not notice that it got a disproportionate number of allocations compared to the rest of the entities? Its allocations were far higher >> than those of other entities. I'm asking this in the context of your testimony that on paper everything looked proper. Um that may well have been so but it should have or rather alarm bells should have rung when this entity's name keeps popping up popping up popping up whenever there are ad hoc allocations. Thank you, Commissioner. Look, I did not in the time that the invoices came to me for co-signing, I did not pick up anything immediately and I didn't have any mistrust at that time. However, and I do give evidence about this later when the director of MAS manage management asset management management admin support director Nandulle he's also responsible for finances when he indicated that there could be some irregularity with invoices at that stage Um the the finance section has indicated both to me as the caretaker and to director Malachi that they will have to follow a certain financial procedure which then became the procedure they needed to follow not bringing invoices back to me for co-signing. So that then stopped and that financial procedure that was implemented by the financial section was then followed and then subsequently the director of MS Wandle picked up the irregularity because they will be in a better position to pick up on this because they have the contracts, the SLAs's, the monthly expenditure. And if there's any further expenditure than what would have been the baseline from previous months or allocated to a certain service provider, they they would pick it up and subsequently they did pick up but I do give evidence about that a bit later. Um Commissioner Bes um at paragraph 13 we do mention a report which I want us to have a look at. Um you will see that on the very file that you have that report uh would appear as the very first document it will say uh number one just after the the index to the annexures.

>> Yes.

>> Yes. Now, uh the chief of police uh Yolanda Farro testified that when she received an instruction that there has to be a transition uh of the APSS from the city manager's office to the TMPD's office that she tasked you to oversee that process. Um with that in mind, um she testified that there there was a report That's something that also you touched on that report was meant to facilitate um the transitional period of of of of that department. Would you accept that ideally you would have been at least the beneficiary of this report to assist you with the the transition?

>> Yes, definitely.

>> Yes. And um Commissioner Farro also testified that she received this report. Unfortunately, somehow um 9 months later and this report came from uh a lady called Pady Marota. Are you aware of that?

>> Yes, I am.

>> In fact, you should be aware because you were copied on that on that email.

>> That is correct.

>> Yes. And the the correct date would have been the 10th of um April 2025.

>> That's correct.

>> And lastly on that score you would have at least at that stage when this report came to your knowledge you would have ceased acting or at least being a caretaker of of the SP.

>> That is correct. I already provided a full handover in writing in the month of March. Yes. to deput to the newly appointed deputy chief Spee.

>> Yes. But I want us to have a look at this report because it was meant to benefit you or at least to assist you in the in the transitional period. Um we did say in your statement that we want to touch base on some I think three topics. Um you you will see that on top um for for the record. Can you just read the at least for the benefit of the commission the title of that document?

>> Um the title of this document and it's from the office of the city manager commissioners uh reports on the transfer of asset property protection services unit from the office of the city manager to the metro police department.

>> And then can you move to the purpose of of that document or at least the report?

>> The purpose of this report is to transfer the asset property protection unit function from the office of the city manager to the metro police department with immediate effect.

>> And then can you move into the background of the background mentioned on that docu document?

>> I can the background paragraph number three. The executive mayor issued a letter dated 15th April 2021 titled placement of asset protection function and personnel in city manager office. The said letter stated the following. The implementation of the processes regarding the absorption of security guards is a critical deliverable for this administration. Extensive consultation and discussions have taken place on this matter to ensure it occurs seamlessly. It is for this reason that I took the decision to have this process placed and administered out of the city manager's office through the department led by Mr. Nava Ple. Furthermore, it is critical that the current asset protection function and personnel that have been identified who are based at the Tswane Metro Police Department TMPD are moved to the office of the city manager to report under Mr. Pai with effect of from 30 March 2021. Uh just there commissioner um what do you understand uh by this initial move and paying attention to what is mentioned on the very first sentence of of what was supposed to be a letter of the 15th of April 2021 just to give us context of what your understanding is.

>> Yeah. Um firstly I was not involved in this process at all. Um and then that first sentence the implementation of the process regarding the absorption of security guards is a critical deliverable and so forth. My understanding of this is we have had I don't know the time frame but I think it's from 2019 onwards we've had this council resolution that mentioned absorption of security guards and there was a total mentioned etc etc I don't have the information in front front of me. But the absorption means that the security personnel that is in your service through a contract, whether that is a certain time period contract or a month-to-month contract or service delivery contracts that you have in place. When you do an AB absorption, you look at bringing those people, those security guards into the employment of the city. They then become fully fledged employees. That is that is how I understand the term absorption. and with with your with your limited knowledge as you said you are not involved in this process but what I'm tapping into it's your experience as you said that you have 34 years into into at least working in the city of of of Tswane what what is the situation now with the with the absorption if any of the of the security personnel.

>> thank you I believe we have.

>> do do you do you mean Mr. Migi at in 2021 or after reabsorption to TMPD more >> what stage what stage are you referring to? um Commissioner Bhaz more more more directly to after when when when the unit was handed back because it seems to us that the purpose then was part of it was the absorption and then now when it was handed back what is the situation I mean the more pointed question would be was that done.

>> the purpose as I understand was the transfer of the function so um the question of the absorption ion followed more that purpose. So the same people who were doing the function within the TMP PD then get absorbed within the office of the city manager but the purpose being more the transfer of the function as I understand it. part of the question would would would relate uh to to the debate that has.

been going on as to I suppose there was a debate or at least there has been a debate as to the pros and cons of outsourcing and absorbing some of the the security functions into the city.

Yes, thank you commissioners. I can speak to that. Um, my belief is that from this time and I'll come to the part where the function has been moved back to the 20 Metro Police Department, but from this time, 15 April 21 up to the time that the function was moved back to the Metro Police Department, not much has moved in a direction of full absorption of these security guards.

Since the appointment of Deputy Chief Piss, there has been a real movement. Um, I do know for a fact, I've sat in some of the meetings, there has been a consultative process between um Deputy Chief Speaks, the department, and Group Human Capital Management and political leaders and leaders of the city to fast-track this process. And there is a plan in place that has been adopted by council. I can't speak to it, I don't have all the information, but that this absorption process is now moving forward. This will mean that certain benefits will come in at a certain time and other benefits will come in at another time. So that process is ongoing. I hope that touches or answers the questions.

Uh, thank you, uh, Commissioner Bes. Can you then read into the record the last paragraph of um, point three under the background? The last paragraph states, commissioners, the instruction by the executive mayor for the asset protection services unit to be transferred from Tuani Metro Police Department to the office of the city manager was implemented as directed. The transfer included the movement of staff reporting under asset protection services unit and cost center 4923 for the budget and expenditure management of the unit. And then most importantly for us, would you move to the next page under the topic human resource related and and just deal with that, what is at paragraph 4.1.1?

Do you want me to read it?

Read into the record and then we can we can just debate what what that meant.

Noted. 4.1.1 under human resources related matters. The subheading is staff and organizational structure. The organizational structure of the asset protection services unit was not amended during the transfer of the asset protection services unit from 20 Metro Police Department to the office of the city manager. Therefore, the transfer of the asset protection services unit back from the office of the city manager to Swani Metro Police Department will not affect the organizational structure of both departments. The asset protection services approved structure consists of 4,16. Of this, there are 31 officials, official employees, there's spelling mistakes there, apologies, on a permanent basis and a further, 287 contracted security officers. I think this ties with the question that was raised by Commissioner Kumalo earlier on.

Can you then explain to us on on practical levels what did this mean, especially when you have to deal with the human resource and in terms of what you were you were receiving now as part of your responsibilities?

Yes, I can.

Maybe before you you do that, the the math, the mathematics here doesn't seem to add up. You have 31 officials on a permanent base, and 1287 contracted security officers. And yet in the first sentence, you say there was four, 4,16.

I can explain that, commissioner. I'll make it part of my explanation. Firstly, if commissioners, if I received this document in time for my caretakership, I would have not agreed in fully with the statement made here. You can't just say something and then it becomes the truth. It doesn't work that way. So, just to say that the structure is moved from one place to from one uh reporting channel to another reporting channel and there's no implication or no difference doesn't just make it the truth or doesn't make it correct or doesn't make it practical. Let me explain. Let me first explain then, madam, what you have brought up and then I'll carry on with the rest of the explanation why I don't agree with this. It makes provision in the statement at the end that the structure, and they make reference to the approved structure, consists of 4,16. So the structure they're referring to is the organizational structure of APSS. Those are the boxes, as you all know. You've got your divisional lead, all the different levels, and so forth, all the way down to the bottom level, bottom levels where you will find, 287 contracted sec security officers. So I don't have a problem with with those figures at that time because I can't verify it. I'm assuming it's correct. The 4,16 is still the approved structure, but most of those positions are vacant. That's why the mathematical, the mathematics will not make sense. But then to transfer an approved structure, in this case, 4,16, to the Metro Police and make an indication that there is no implication or an assumption is incorrect. It is not the practice of a municipality, nor a department such as the Metro Police Department, to have an elaborate structure with vacancies on it. And it's clear that in the time period from 21 April, from April 2021, let me get the date right, 15 April 2021, up to the point where this function was transferred back to the Metro Police, that there was no, I can't say no, I don't know, there was the, there wasn't a serious attempt and project in place, plan in place to fill the vacancies of this approved structure of 4,16. Now, this is moved back to the Metro Police. Now the Metro Police sit with all these additional vacancies. That's the first thing. Most of these vacancies will then be unfunded. Why? Because there wouldn't automatically be a budget in place to fill it. You've got funded vacancies on the one hand and unfunded vacancies. If you then look externally, when the AG looks at a municipality and at our different organizational structure, macro, micro, the AG would in indicate to us and has that you can't continuously for years on end sit with so many vacant positions. Either fill the positions or remove the vacancies because it becomes an audit query. So that is where the problem comes in for the department. Hence, we've started a process, and I'm in the middle of that process. That's one of the functions I do as the Chief of Staff. I do organizational design and coordinate that process within the department. The structure that we have received, yes, approved at that time, still approved because it's still on the structure, approved structure, is not a feasible structure for the Metro Police. It's not implementable. It's not practical. It's not funded. We are restructuring that process totally, and it will probably be a lesser number because we are not in a financial situation, not the department, not the city, to fill 4,000 positions. I hope that gives clarity to your questions.

What I'm, I'm, I'm struggling to comprehend. Um, Commissioner Bh says that is this, you are already inundated with two and a half posts or positions. And just on the human resource uh element, and and given what you just discussed now with the with the commission, would you say this was the best decision to add this uh transition to your tasks?

Look, sir, commissioners, I think it was the best decision under the circumstances. I don't want to sound arrogant, but the Chief of Police looked at this and looked at her situation with her top management at that stage and what is available within the team and determined that I would the best be the best suited candidate to deal with this. And I'm going to leave it at that. Um, was it the best decision to move this function back to Tatswuani Metro Police? No, it, well, you didn't ask a question about it, so I'm not going to elaborate, but I don't think it was a a very uh very good decision by the city to do so. Let me pause there.

Maybe let me let me ask the question differently. Is it possible? Would it have been possible to uh assign this task to other deputy commissioners? And and perhaps you be direct to say someone like Deputy Commissioner Umashi Tamini. Would he have been, would that have been possible as well?

It would have been possible for the Chief of Police to do so. But if you stand, understand a policing environment or any semi-military environment, when when you find yourself in such a situation, let's call it semi-crisis management, where the chief needs to take control of something and it's unsure what will come out of it, and it's an interim situation because we already expected as a department to appoint a Deputy Chief round about October 24 onwards, between October and December, but you know, with recruitment processes, um, I'm not sure exactly what happened there, but it wasn't uh forthcoming, and then the appointment only came in March the next year. It would be typical for a Chief of Police um to give such a function because it's interim, to the Chief of Staff. If it was more on a semi-permanent basis, which we didn't know at that time, she could have made another decision and given it to another Deputy Chief. We were under the impression it will be anything between three, four, five, maybe six months, but it ended up being eight months. So that's that, that is my view.

My my concern was that you seem to have been overloaded, but I I accept that answer. Um, can we then deal with, because we're dealing with the human resource element, can we deal with the the budget and the procurement element of this move? And that would be, if you can just pick it up from uh 4.2 of of that report.

I can, commissioners. 4.2 is the heading, budget and procurement related matters. 4.2.1, appointed security service providers. The city appointed 22 security service providers through tender TMPD2-2016/ well, it's supposed to be a slash.17 to supply the physical security (brackets guarding services) to protect the property, assets, and personnel of the city of Tuan for a period of 3 years with effect from 1 February 2022. 2. The monthly service contract for the appointed service providers amounts to 50 million, which equates to 600 million per financial year. On the next page, on top, commissioners, the security services service providers provided a total of 2559 security guards at 545 sites who operate at the Sira grade Crading level to safeguard the infrastructure assets of the city against theft and vandalism. Do you want me to continue, sir?

Yes, because it's still related to the the budget.

Yeah. For commissioners, 4.2.2, 2023-24 adjustment budget. The operational budget allocation for asset protection services was increased by 305,611,361 rand from 489,374,219 rand 15 to 794,985,580 rand. This was due to a request for additional funding requests submitted to Group Financial Services for watchman services. The original operational budget allocation for watchman services was 245 million for 2023-24 financial year, which was not enough to provide the guarding services through the appointed service providers. A shortfall of 305,611,361 rand was indicated. In response to this, the budget for watchman services was increased by the indicated shortfall amount to 550,611,361 rand. The 2023-24 capital budget allocation remained unchanged with an amount of 2 million rand under WBS level percentage dash 9.80100 and then there's a L or I P R1 W for infrastructure asset protection. The budget provided is for the incorporation of electronic security system. However, the procurement is on the specification level.

Should I continue with the indicative budget?

I I don't think so. Um, before you even go there, um, I need you to go back um, just to have a proper understanding of of what you were inheriting essentially. Um, because if you look at at least what is glaring is that there was a clear shortfall already. Um, what what is what what would have been the impact of this um when when it came to you? I I accept that this document obviously became

Yeah.

to your, only came to your knowledge after the fact.

Yeah.

Look, firstly, senior management in the city must all do a Municipal Financial Management Act. I think it's a INQ6 level course and it's expected of senior management to know, understand, plan, and proper execute budgets. So when I was instructed to be the caretaker of this function, I knew what the budget was for the financial year. Remember now, we're talking the 24-25 financial year because the function was moved to us 1st July 2024. Correct. If we, when we then looked at the historic information pertaining to this budget, it was a clear indication to both me and the Chief of Police, and I don't want to speak on her behalf, but we work very closely together, that the budgets of the previous financial years were insufficient on on a regular basis, if not at all times, which caused whoever was dealing with it, excuse me, to follow certain processes to ensure there is funds allocated to ensure that services can be delivered through the financial year. I did exactly the same in the first three months. I would determine what would be the actual expenditure. Thereafter, I could do a projection for the remainder 9 months because you do also in finances in a municipality work with your monthly cost, but quarterly cost, and quarter 1, quarter 2, quarter 3, quarter 4. By quarter 1, you have enough information, three months plus baseline from the previous year plus historic information to make proper projections for the rest of the financial year to ensure that service delivery does happen. We had the 22 companies. They provided services at certain infrastructure sites and properties of the city. And then once you determine in your projection that you are going to have a shortfall, it was clear to me that that there was a regular short budget, budgeting process. Whether that was deliberate, whether that was a financial technique to deal with cash flow, I I'm not, I'm not a CFO. I don't know. But it was cumbersome for us to notice again that this financial year that I was the caretaker or part of it, that um, we have under budget. So then we would, and which we did, we would look at the finances and we will draft a document that is called the upliftment of funds. So a document is drafted to indicate that this is the expenditure, this is the projected expenditure, we're going to have a shortfall um of this, that, and the next thing. If it, if you do it properly in the first 3 months and do your calculations and your projections, you can go with such a document to the city and it can be it can be looked at. If you don't do this, you're going to find yourself at the adjustment budget process. Now, the adjustment budget process is is exactly what it states. It's the adjustment of your approved budget. You can't legally procedurally come and ask for more money in an adjustment budget. So if you don't do your work and you come to the adjustment budget only and ask for additional funds for watchman services, then it means the CFO in the city will have to find funds somewhere else within the approved budget and allocate it to watchman services. So that is what I was grappling with, and we went the route of early financial detection to determine we're going to have a shortfall. We started the process of upliftment, and that upliftment process was subsequently approved. It's recommended by the Chief of Police. It is recommended by the CFO. It is signed off and approved by the accounting officer.

And um, commissioner, just to understand this, only is it only relates to the ad to the watchman service, this budget, not not the ad hoc services?

This relates to the total budget for watchman services and all information known to you. If additional ad hoc services comes in, it would not have been included in that because you cannot do upliftment for funds or adjust your budget on may it must be factual information. The books must balance. It must be available to be audited to be clear cut that this is the finances allocated for watchman services and expended accordingly. So no ad hoc services, unknown ad hoc services would not have been covered by that.

Um, thank you, uh, commissioner. Would would you say having considered this report, say if you had it when you were being given the task of handing over in a transitional period, would you say would have you have benefited from from this report? If it came to you on time?

I can say I would have partly benefited. But this, in my view, is not a good handover report because it dwells on information that's readily available to anyone if you if you go look for it. I would have expected a handover report indicating to us as a department this plus further historic information on the budget. Why was the budget um done the way it was done? Why was it short budgeted for? What was the reasons? And what what are the information? Where's the information on all the sites? The sites that have been deemed critical, the sites that are not critical. Um, the sites that we don't cover at all. What has been done in regards to filling the structure? What has been done in regards to human resources, the absorption? It doesn't really touch on that. So I find big holes in this report in hindsight, but it is what it is, as you know, I did not receive this report. We were in the dark and we dealt with it on an ongoing basis.

Maybe lastly, on on the issue of the report or the handing over process. Did you at any stage ask for a handover report or a handover meetings from the city manager's office, uh, it being the city manager or the group head Maraua, at any stage of of the handing over?

Look, it was understood by us that we were supposed to get a handover report. Um, I don't have documentation in front of me like emails and that, but we did have one specific meeting um with the MMC for Community Safety. I will have to go check my records on on that exact date and time where we had Mr. Nava Pale and his support team, Mr. Malachi and his team, myself, I believe the Chief of Police was also there, where it was agreed upon that the all the information would be made available to us and in writing, emails, reports at a certain time, and that wasn't forthcoming. Um, I didn't, perhaps in hindsight, made enough of a follow-up, but if you've thrown in a deep end with such a thing, you find your way. And that's what we did. We we started sourcing the information ourselves. We looked at at what we had in front of us, and we were very busy um starting the new tender as well because we had to immediately, I think we started in August, immediately started with a new tender because the current tender was to expire soon, and it's a quite a process in the city to start a new tender. So, yes, um, I know about that one specific meeting. There could have been some emails as well. I'm I'm not confident um to say exactly what, how many, or what it was. Yeah.

Yes.

I want Deputy Chief, I want to take you back to your response to the second last question by Mr. Musigi. Um, I just want to make sure that I understood you. Did you mean that um, there is no budget whatsoever for ad hoc uh security services?

Yes. Look, as I explained before, Commissioner, if ad hoc has come in already and it's now part of the operationalization on a daily, monthly basis, then that would have been counted in and worked in. Look, this was maybe unplanned for, but now it's part and parcel of the operations. That would have been covered by the budget.

But something that may arise from point onwards, that's not budgeted for whatsoever?

No.

Thank you. Yes, Mr. Migi.

Uh, thank you, uh, Commissioner Bes. Um, and just understand this is no attack on you. That the difficulty we have um is that if the handover was mismanaged or was botched to begin with, and and you were left to be on autopilot and you had to find your way. You know, we need to understand because ultimately, we know, we now know that there were challenges that came with this transition when things happened without without even your knowledge. And we we trying to find out exactly where the problem might be. And this is, like I said, there's no attack on you, but it's a, it's just trying to understand. Remember, as as the commission, as we said, we don't even know, and the question was posed to you, we don't even know why this unit was initially moved, and it's not even clear why it was moved back again. But when that is done, the handover process is not done in a way that, as as you testify, right, in the most one would have said acceptable manner to allow you to do what you're supposed to do. And and it's really on on that score that I I keep on asking you this question to say, h did you make sure that you do your best as well to make sure that you are given a proper handover?

Look, um, once the ugly things come out, it's it it's not so easy to say you've done your best because you you scrutinize yourself and you think to yourself, what could you have done better? So, I'm a very hard person on myself. Have we done the best? No, I don't think we have. Could we have done much better? Yes, we could definitely have done better. Could I personally have done more? I should have. Um, and I stand for what I've done and what I haven't done. I'm an honest person. Um, but it is clear looking back now at what has transpired that there are elements within the city and in our department that uses the processes and things in place. They used that as a mechanism for their corruption and for their ill-doings. We were used as decent, law-abiding, loyal officials. Both me, the Chief of Police, other officials, we were used because it happened under our nose. And it's shameful. Um, we could have done better. But it comes again to you trust people. You don't want to enter into a space with an immediate mistrust. But if there would have been any form of indication to us, to me, I could have maybe put in more measures in place to ensure that um the system is very tight and that that wrong things can't creep through. I I think that's all I can say about that.

Um, thank you, commissioner. Deputy Commissioner, can I just just to make sure that I understand the import of what you're saying? Are you saying that the mo the movement of APSS from the office of the city manager to TMPD, that in itself? Is that what you're referring to when you say you were used? Um, and had you known better, you would have responded better. Is that that relocation that you're complaining about as you being used and taken advantage of?

Uh, Madame Commissioner, not necessarily, but that could be the case. I don't know.

Yes.

Um, I'm I'm I'm referring to once the move was done to the department.

Yes.

And the day-to-day running of the division, which was handled by Director Malachi and his team in that day-to-day running.

Under our noses.

Yes.

Things happened and we in that we were used.

Okay, I understand. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Uh, thank you, Commissioner. Can we then go to what we say the uglies? Can we, we now know that you it did inherit as part of the transition uh this tender 02-2016-2017. Can we, can we deal with that? Um, it's from paragraph 17 of your of your statement, commissioner.

Thank you, commissioners. Paragraph 17 under E, tender TMPD02-2016-17. I inherited the above tender with the transfer of APSS. In this tender, the city appointed 22 security service providers to supply the physical security (brackets guarding services) to protect the property, asset, and personnel of the city of TWani for a period of 3 years with effect from March 2022. Paragraph 18, the 20

Commissioner, we we've, I think we do have the names of the companies, the 22 companies on record. Can you then go to paragraph 19?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Paragraph 19. I had to oversee the implementation of this tender going forward until such time that the new Deputy Commissioner was appointed to take over. Onto the next page, 20, paragraph 20. To reiterate the context of the tender, the above tender for the supply of physical security to protect the property, assets, and personnel of the Twani Metropolitan Municipality originated from a request to advertise, which is a tar, t a tender issued by Mr. Tsukuru Malachi, Director Protection Services, on 8th July 2020, 2016, co-signed by the then Deputy Chief of Police, Specialized Services, Mr. RR Mashl, and approved on 19th July 2016 by the then Chief of Police, KS Nubeni, the late KS Nubini. May his soul rest in peace. The Tar and specifications are attached as an SB2 to Mr. Revo speech statement, and I need to not attach the same year here in the 21. The background to the tender has been dealt with sufficiently by witness um, Deputy Revo Spee and Chief Yolanda Farro, which I agree with and do not repeat.

Yes, carry on under the topic of uploading of purchase orders between January 2025 and February 2026.

Thank you. Uh, commissioners, paragraph 22 under F. I have come to learn that the Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Gareth Mani, and Deputy Commissioner Umarid Lamini communicated with each other on 5th March 2025 by sending messages through Sergeant Fi NSI in relation to the creation of purchase orders for ad hoc security services. Paragraph 23. The purchase orders created out of this process were registered on the TMPD system only on the following day, 6th March 2025. These included purchase orders for ATO services, ostensibly procured from goobers 85 solutions pty limited in the aggregate amount of 13,635,333 rand 60s (brackets, it gives the number without fat. It's 11,856,6381.14 plus VAT). A spreadsheet listing these purchase orders is attached as an extra SB3. All of these amounts were paid to Gooies 85 Pty Limited. Paragraph 24. Though these purchase orders were created and loaded on 5th and 6th March 2025 after my acting stint as caretaker of APSS, some of these purchase orders orders refers to work and services allegedly provided during my tenure as caretaker. 25. I am aware that Commissioner Revo SP already pointed the obvious skewed allocation of work favoring Gooby's 85 solutions pty limited. Paragraph 26. I reiterated that I never gave permission nor was I aware of such allocation of work to Gubies 85 solutions PTY Limited during the time in question, and in particular January 2025, 25 February 2025, or to any other company.

Commissioner Bes, is that not itself irregular that purchase orders are only created many months after the work is done? Is the practice note that in order to allocate work to somebody, a purchase order has to be created? Why is it here, for example, that on the 6th of March, you've got purchase orders uh created and loaded on the system, but the work in some instances was done the previous year in 2024?

Um, commissioner, I'm not a financial expert, but um, I'm not 100% sure about that process. I would assume that once the sites have been allocated to a service provider, you would receive an invoice. Then the invoice in the department will go to the financial section. A purchase order would be created, and then I believe it goes to supply chain management to the buyers to do something, and then payment from the CFO's office.

So the purchase order is created after the invoice.

I'm under correction, but I do think so. I'm not sure.

Isn't that a problem? Because my understanding of procurement is a purchase order is an indication of the goods and services that you would have ordered. And it will give you an indication of how many people, what is the price, and what is going to be deployed. And that prepares you then for when the work is done, the invoice that is issued will match the purchase order, and you verify. So you you compare one with the other and you say, these are the goods and services that I've asked for, they were provided, the invoice matches the purchase order, then I can make the payment. But if if you get a purchase order after the invoice and many months after the work is done, what what service did you procure and what did you use to procure the service?

I I see your sentiment there, Commissioner. Um, we have to also keep in mind that this is an approved contract, approved service providers, and ad hoc services were then allocated to a service provider. In this case, seemingly irregular, but let's say for argument's sake, it wasn't. And in an approved contract with an approved budget, and then it's invoiced, and then it then it goes to the department financial section for the further processing um, and that includes the purchase order. But as I say, I'm not in a position to to speak on finances that that much. The CFO will be able to clarify that in detail, and even um, Deputy Commissioner Lamini, who's in charge of our financial overall, in charge of the financial section in the department.

But it worries me because you say at some point before the process was changed, you were responsible for co-signing invoices after Director Malaji had approved them. So if if you are not aware of the process and we need to get answers from the CFO, it worries me because it means that people who are approving and co-signing invoices running into millions, I mean, this is 13.6 million, are not aware what the process is and they are just signing and people are being paid public funds without understanding the process. It's a concern for me.

Noted.

Um, Commissioner Boles, are you then saying in response to the question by Commissioner Kumaro, as and I use the word loosely, as the head of the of the department, as the APSS unit, you you played no role. What role did you play? Let me put that. What role did you play when ultimately it comes to uh the processing and uh the payments uh of of the service rendered, especially on the ad hoc basis?

Yes. Um, once the operational part is concluded, let's say um documents are provided, invoices are are generated from the service provider and it comes through APSS, it goes to the financial section within the department. Once it's there, I do not play an another role there. There's a financial process that they follow that has to be in line with the MFMA, supply, supply chain management procedures of the city, etc., etc. So I don't play a role how it's put on the system, on the, we as a city use a SAP system. I don't play a role how it moves from the finance section to supply chain management, and I don't play a role how it moves from supply chain management to the CFO and his office for actual payment. I can, as a senior official, make inquiries about late payments, why this has not been done, was all invoices submitted, those kind of things, but not not physically part of that financial process.

I know you say somewhat further on in the statement that you had no involvement. You were not informed about the allocation the allocation of these ad hoc sites.

Um, your your internal operating procedures, they don't require that you should be informed when there's a request for ADOC services so that you can approve or even it's just for noting. Don't your operating operating procedures require that?

It is required. It's not a, it's not a written down standing uh operating procedure SOP. Well, it should be, but it, it wasn't at that stage. But as mentioned before, in some other remarks I made earlier, is when there's an operational impact, financial impact, and contract impact, I must, as the head, as the overseer of APSS, I must be informed because although Director Malachi runs the that unit or section division, he runs it basically ally in totality, day-to-day running, managing the contract. If it starts affecting the budget, he doesn't sit in the top management budget meeting between the Deputy Chiefs and the Chief of Police to determine what the status is of the budget, the expenditure, what we must do with upliftment of funds, what we must do with the adjustment budget, etc. So it was clear in our communications, in our meetings, in the way we worked, that this information should have come to my office because prior in 2024, once again, Kipkhat is a very good example. We were informed, I was informed about the ad hoc requirements. It was looked into, it was investigated, it was allocated, funds were made available for that. Whether there was good planning or not, that's another matter. That's the internal issues of a municipality. So there's no ways that the management of APSS could have thought there's no need for the head, the the overseer, the Deputy Chief, not to inform him about these ATO services which will have a severe effect on our budget and operational um implications. So yes, ma'am.

Commissioner, just maybe let's let let me understand it from a different angle. It is correct that you wouldn't, as part of your job, be involved in confirming that the actual warm bodies were actually uh placed uh by service providers as as per invoice. That would not be part of your job.

Definitely not. That would be part and parcel of the management and instructions by Director Malachi. And I did mention it earlier as well about the mid-level people that were supposed to go and check up on the service provider. We call it contract management to ensure that they actually do what they say they do because if they don't, there's a penalty clause that must be implemented. Um, that's part and parcel of the contract and the SLAs between us as the city and these service providers. So it would be their function.

Yes. Um, so you are not involved on that level, on on confirming the warm bodies were actually deployed. Uh, but also you're not involved um in the final leg where the processes, the payment processes are engaged. And I'm, I'm, we're trying to to understand then your oversight role, um, where does it start, where does it end? And is it by design, which is something that this commission might have to speak to when it makes recommendations, or is it something that had to do with you perhaps being overwhelmed uh by two and a half posts that you already engaged with? Or are there any other factors that maybe we need to consider that led to this difficulty? What's your comment?

Yeah, look, in hindsight, I would say it's a combination of some of those factors, and it was a flawed process. I understand when the commissioner raised the serious concerns about not knowing the actual financial processes, how it unfolds, and uh, if one look at it, standing back and look at it like you now, looking at it holistically with a bird's eye view, um, you need to be more hands-on, especially if you're, staff is not in place, your systems are not in place, you don't have all the resources. As Deputy Chief Piss is, and as he uh continues to involve himself more and more into um, this space and putting systems in place and instructions and so forth, more information is coming out, and it's managed in a much better way. So I would believe yes, a combination of those things, but definitely flawed from my side. Oversight should have included um the complete process till it leaves the financial office when it goes to supply chain management. Whether that would have stopped irregularities, I doubt it. But look, if you have to fall on your sword for not doing enough, you have to fall on your sword.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, can we then move um to the next topic which deals with, I think we touched on it a bit. Um, the allocation of

I'm just looking at time. Uh, maybe let me ask my question and then it will take us to lunch because I see you have two minutes. If you're starting a new topic, it's going to compromise it. Uh, just out of interest, Commissioner Bles, did the Auditor General raise any issues in the 24-25 financial year about the ad hoc security services? Was there any finding in relation to those? Do you know?

I can't recall, Commissioner, but I can't say with certainty. Um, I'll have to, I would have to check. Once again, a CFO would be able to immediately answer that, but I can't recall. I don't think so, but I'm not sure.

And how does it work with your departments? Uh, is there an internal audit that audits individual departments and then you submit your reports for the full audit of the city, or is TMPD audited individually? How does it work exactly?

We have internal audits in the city. It falls under the Group Audit and Risk department, and they have the internal auditors. They work, they do internal audits as they see fit in all departments. They do further internal audits if there's a pre-indication by the AG that there's something untoward or something that they've picked up irregular in a department or in multiple departments. They also advise on a high level uh what procedures and systems to be and policies to have in place to ensure that we don't necessarily um cause our own demise by by causing unnecessary audit findings. Then in the department, in the Metro Police Department, we have a very small component that looks that works closely with the internal auditors, but also looks internally to educate, to coordinate, and to to manage um audit possible audit issues and to ensure that management is aware of where there could be issues and where management action plans must come into place to ensure that we rectify matters. So those are the processes in place.

And will you check for us to see if they did not flag this issue of APS ad hoc security services?

I will check in the break. I will, I'll see if I can find that information.

You you may have to do it in a in a supplementary statement. I don't want you to just say I checked this is what they said because remember this must be evidence before the commission.

We will do so, commissioner, definitely.

All right. Thank you. Let us adjourn and resume at uh 2 p.m.

Yes, Mr. Musigi.

Thank you, commissioners. Um, Commissioner Boles, we are right towards the end of your statement. We are about to start with the topic um, allocation of sites to goobies. That will be at paragraph 27 of your statement. Would you please pick it up from there then?

I will. Thank you, commissioners. Paragraph 27. Given the issues raised in the Madlonga Commission of Inquiry, I need to point out that the very next level under me while I was the caretaker of APSS was Director Tukuru Malachi, who managed the APSS function from a management point of view and the day-to-day running of the function, including management of the security contract in place. Paragraph 28. Regarding the allocation of sites, Director Malachi was required to inform me of any such site allocation to any of the service providers due to operational, financial, and possibly contractual implications. Paragraph 29. While acting as the caretaker of APSS as described above, specifically during January and February 20125, I was not approached nor made aware of any ad hoc allocation of sites to any security company, including Gubies 85 solutions pty ltd, or any other service provider. In particular, I was not privy to the allocation of additional at oxides to GUI's 85 solutions pty ltd, as a result, I would not and I do not know the number of sites allegedly alloc allocated to goobies 85 solutions pty limited, nor the value of the services provided by goobies 85 solutions pty limited, safe to what has been already been presented to the commission through the evidence of Commissioner Revo Spece. Paragraph 30. However, I was not consulted by Director Malachi, nor by the then Senior Superintendent, now Colonel Dr. K Miklaba, nor by the then Inspector, now Superintendent/Major Leu Kungpiri, about the allocation of sites in question. Paragraph 31. I reiterate that I have later become aware that during my time, sites were allocated to goobies 85 solutions pty ltd and others without my knowledge and or involvement. I deal with this in detail below.

Thank you, commissioner. You may proceed uh under the next topic uh delegation of authority and attached um responsibilities.

Thank you, commissioners. Um, H, delegation of authority and attached responsibilities. Paragraph 32. As indicated above, it has come to my knowledge recently that the then Inspector PY allocated numerous sites to one of the service providers, Gubies 85 Solutions, Pty Ltd. The schedule of sites allocated to Gubies 85 pty ltd during January 2025 is attached as annex SB4, notification for deployment letter signed by Mr. Alpiri. Paragraph 33. Inspector Piri was an inspector asset protection services. In such a position, he does not ordinarily have the necessary powers and or delegation to allocate sites to any service provider.

Before you proceed, the as inspector asset protection services, what are his functions and and responsibilities or powers even?

On that level? Madame Commissioner, and in the attachment where we look at the job description of a generic inspector, it is a low-level supervision position. So I would then assume that he would have exercised super visionary, visionary um role over junior personnel. Not, it's not a management position, it's an entry level supervisory level.

But supervising the juniors, that is supervising what functions do they perform? I mean, I I assume he doesn't supervise across the board in the TMP PD or even in the APSS. There are certain functions that are performed by the juniors that he's supervising.

Yeah, I don't know his exact functions in APSS or what his functions was at that time, but it would have coincided with that level. So if, if a supervisory role on that level, he would have had to exercise um those powers over junior members, and that would have then um included security guards. Um, but I don't have his actual functions of APSS in front of me.

Maybe let me ask the question differently. The the powers to allocate uh sites to service providers. Is that a power that is reserved for management level?

Yes.

Okay. Thank you. And you say he wasn't managing that. Thank you.

Commissioner B. Now that you've seen this document in uh SB4,

It is 42 allocations over a space of two months, running into millions of rands, allocated to one company. Now that you've seen this, so you can just have a quick look at it from page 67 to 109 of file one. Now that you've seen it, what do you have to say about it?

Commissioner, it is clear that it's irregular and it was completely illegal to do so. And that the person that allocated those sites, Mr. Perry implicated, had no authority to do so. I believe he will be in front of the commission soon to answer to to those things. Um, as indicated before, the day-to-day running and management of APSS and management of the contract was the duly the function of Director Tukuru Malachi, and could have never been delegated in my view to such a junior person to allocate sites, and never was these sites um indicated to me, and I became knowledgeable of that after the after the fact. I don't want to state this as a fact yet because we're still investigating and we still to hear from the other witnesses, but looking at this, it shows me how easy it is for outsiders to capture a municipality and basically have a blank check as far as municipalities funds are concerned, because there's no supervision. Somebody who's not authorized to send security guards to sites in a space of a month, from the 14th of January until 13th February 2025, it's a space of a month. He signs this, and it's 42 of them, and the money involved is millions of rands. It's not thousands. It's millions of rand funds.

I agree with you. I totally.

So somebody must account for this. I totally agree with you, and if I may comment on that. Uh, yes, as I said, I totally agree with you, and someone must account, or many, or whoever needs to account. And I remind you of what the Chief of Police also mentioned, that these things must be further investigated and will be investigated to determine um what needs to happen. But you are 100% correct. Thank you. Um, Commissioner Bhaz, can you then continue? I think you were dealing with paragraph 34, which will deal with a summary of an extra SB4. So, could you continue then from um 84 downwards?

I can do that. Thank you, commissioners. Um, paragraph 34. It is clear from an SB4 mentioned above that Mr. Piri is a signatory, issued notifications, notification letters to the directors of Gubies 85 solutions pty ltd in terms of which team PD purportedly allocated various sites to 85 to goo solutions pty ltd for the provision of security services. Such notification letters can be summarized as follows. 34.1 The first batch was issued on 14 January 2025, effective from 15 January 2025. 34.2 The second batch was issued on 21 January 2025, effective on the same day. 34.3 The third batch was issued on 13th February 2025, effective from 15 February 2025. And 34.4 Each notification letter mentioned the name of the allocated site, number of security officers to be deployed, number of patrol vehicles, and monthly.

Thank you, Commissioner. You may proceed uh under the next topic uh delegation of authority and attached um responsibilities.

Thank you, commissioners. Um, H, delegation of authority and attached responsibilities. Paragraph 32. As indicated above, it has come to my knowledge recently that the then Inspector PY allocated numerous sites to one of the service providers, Gubies 85 Solutions, Pty Ltd. The schedule of sites allocated to Gubies 85 pty ltd during January 2025 is attached as annex SB4, notification for deployment letter signed by Mr. Alpiri. Paragraph 33. Inspector Piri was an inspector asset protection services. In such a position, he does not ordinarily have the necessary powers and or delegation to allocate sites to any service provider. Paragraph 34. Before you proceed, the as inspector asset protection services, what are his functions and and responsibilities or powers even?

On that level? Madame Commissioner, and in the attachment where we look at the job description of a generic inspector, it is a low-level supervision position. So I would then assume that he would have exercised super visionary, visionary um role over junior personnel. Not, it's not a management position, it's an entry level supervisory level.

But supervising the juniors, that is supervising what functions do they perform? I mean, I I assume he doesn't supervise across the board in the TMP PD or even in the APSS. There are certain functions that are performed by the juniors that he's supervising.

Yeah, I don't know his exact functions in APSS or what his functions was at that time, but it would have coincided with that level. So if, if a supervisory role on that level, he would have had to exercise um those powers over junior members, and that would have then um included security guards. Um, but I don't have his actual functions of APSS in front of me.

Maybe let me ask the question differently. The the powers to allocate uh sites to service providers. Is that a power that is reserved for management level?

Yes.

Okay. Thank you. And you say he wasn't managing that. Thank you.

Commissioner B. Now that you've seen this document in uh SB4,

It is 42 allocations over a space of two months, running into millions of rands, allocated to one company. Now that you've seen this, so you can just have a quick look at it from page 67 to 109 of file one. Now that you've seen it, what do you have to say about it?

Commissioner, it is clear that it's irregular and it was completely illegal to do so. And that the person that allocated those sites, Mr. Perry implicated, had no authority to do so. I believe he will be in front of the commission soon to answer to to those things. Um, as indicated before, the day-to-day running and management of APSS and management of the contract was the duly the function of Director Tukuru Malachi, and could have never been delegated in my view to such a junior person to allocate sites, and never was these sites um indicated to me, and I became knowledgeable of that after the after the fact. I don't want to state this as a fact yet because we're still investigating and we still to hear from the other witnesses, but looking at this, it shows me how easy it is for outsiders to capture a municipality and basically have a blank check as far as municipalities funds are concerned, because there's no supervision. Somebody who's not authorized to send security guards to sites in a space of a month, from the 14th of January until 13th February 2025, it's a space of a month. He signs this, and it's 42 of them, and the money involved is millions of rands. It's not thousands. It's millions of rand funds.

I agree with you. I totally.

So somebody must account for this. I totally agree with you, and if I may comment on that. Uh, yes, as I said, I totally agree with you, and someone must account, or many, or whoever needs to account. And I remind you of what the Chief of Police also mentioned, that these things must be further investigated and will be investigated to determine um what needs to happen. But you are 100% correct. Thank you. Um, Commissioner Bhaz, can you then continue? I think you were dealing with paragraph 34, which will deal with a summary of an extra SB4. So, could you continue then from um 84 downwards?

I can do that. Thank you, commissioners. Um, paragraph 34. It is clear from an SB4 mentioned above that Mr. Piri is a signatory, issued notifications, notification letters to the directors of Gubies 85 solutions pty ltd in terms of which team PD purportedly allocated various sites to 85 to goo solutions pty ltd for the provision of security services. Such notification letters can be summarized as follows. 34.1 The first batch was issued on 14 January 2025, effective from 15 January 2025. 34.2 The second batch was issued on 21 January 2025, effective on the same day. 34.3 The third batch was issued on 13th February 2025, effective from 15 February 2025. And 34.4 Each notification letter mentioned the name of the allocated site, number of security officers to be deployed, number of patrol vehicles, and monthly.

cost per site. Then, um, paragraph 35 continues. It would then appear that during the period of 14 January to 13 February 2025, Inspector Piri allocated 40 sites to Gubies 85 Solutions Pty Ltd to the value of 14,15,520 rand 89. The schedule of invoices by Gubies 85 Solutions Pty Ltd during the set time is reflected in annexure SB5 attached above.

>> Commissioner, I counted 42, so maybe my counting is incorrect, but 67 to 109 gave me 42. So, um, it might explain the other two. Um, this one might be attributed to, uh, to Mishave Commission.

>> Can we add to your statement then that, uh, the sites allocated to GBIS were 42, and out of that 42, Piri was responsible for 40? I think that's a more accurate statement.

>> Yes, we can do so. Thank you, Commissioner.

>> Thank you, Commissioner.

>> Apologies for that. Um, paragraph 36. I repeat that during January 2025 to February 2025, as the caretaker, I never allocated these sites to Gubies 85 Solutions Pty Limited, nor did I instruct Inspector Perry to do so, nor did I give him permission or the delegated authority for him to do so.

Paragraph 37.

>> Before you do that, the, the reporting line. So you, you are the caretaker, >> and then who, who is on a daily basis? I think you say Malachi.

>> Malachi is the director, the manager over the whole function. Yes.

>> Okay. So would it be correct to say that he would have had, if, if you did not delegate or give Piri this power, Malachi would have had to be the next person to have given him, assuming that Malaji had that power, um, in the first place?

>> He would have, he would have been the one that delegates him or that gives him the power to do this.

>> Yes. Correct.

>> Okay.

>> Yeah.

>> Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner.

Paragraph 37. In my view, Inspector Piri did not have the power or authority to allocate sites to security service providers. The allocation of sites would have been the function of APSS management, specifically Director Malachi, who was the director in charge of APSS function to allocate such sites.

Just to be clear, if, if Malachi, Director Malachi, were the one that had authorized these, these allocations of ad hoc services, would you take issue and, and not so much about budget issues, but the exercise of that power? Would you say he didn't have that power, or even if he had that power, he could still have needed my approval? Would you have raised issue with that?

>> I would have a serious issue with that.

>> And the issue would be what? What would be the complaint?

>> The issue would be that he is busy allocating operational responsibilities to service providers that might or will have a serious impact on your daily operations, your budget allocations, and contract management. And the fact that he doesn't inform his management of his actions, which is expected of him to do so. So that will be a serious issue, and that would be an issue for further internal investigation and possible, um, disciplinary steps.

I guess what I'm asking is, was this, is this a matter that was within his powers to do? He may well have been, let's say, reckless at best to carry on doing it and exhausting the budget as it turned out to be, and he may have had a misstep, assuming all is innocent, a misstep not to inform you when he should have informed you. So I'm putting those as innocent facts. If that were so, uh, would he have a good answer to say, but this was a matter that's within my powers? I could do this. I could allocate, um, ad hoc, ad hoc services or deployments without reference to, to my superior.

>> I believe it is in his powers to allocate such sites, but I don't believe it is proper for him to do it in isolation from the department and as his direct supervisor. And because of what I've explained before, the implications of such allocations or what might happen, it would have been his duty to at least consult and report to, to top management. But as he was the day-to-day, the manager managing the whole process plus the contract, it would be in his ambit to allocate sites.

Maybe, maybe finally, if, if these allocations were made within budget, and they, there was no picture that we have now, which is, uh, Gubies being favored, appears to have been favored because they got the, the, the chunk or the bulk of these allocations. If those were not issues, let's say there was fair distribution amongst Goobies, Trio, Triotic, I think is the other, >> Triotic, >> Triotic, and there's another company, a third company whose name I don't remember. If there had been a fair distribution and all of that was done within budget, the watchman services budget, you would not have an issue that he made those allocations, uh, if, would you have an issue if he made those allocations and did not inform you or seek your approval, even?

>> I would still have a serious issue with him.

>> Okay.

>> And look into the issue, either if it was an innocent mistake, rectify it, put a management principle in place. If it was done deliberately and it can be proven, I would take up disciplinary steps against, um, him as the manager because, um, the adding on of additional sites, whether, let's say for argument as you state, Madame Commissioner, that it would have still been in budget and all of that, >> and fair distribution. It, it places an additional burden on that division and on the operational capacity, and it could in future lead to further challenges such as miscommunications, such as non-transparency, maybe even AG findings. Um, it, in my logical thinking, it would be improper for any manager in any organization in any type of work to allocate additional operational responsibilities with financial implications, even though there's budget, and not inform the organization itself, and in that case, it is the next line of of of supervision.

>> Yes. Because it defeats the purpose of the collaboration we have as departments and heads of departments and senior personnel of departments with service delivery departments to ensure that for the right reasons, ad hoc services are allocated to water, electricity, or whatever the case might be, and that would have then been in the dark. Okay. Thank you.

>> Um, Deputy Chief, where do we find provision, um, for Mr. Malaji's power to make the allocations?

>> Commissioner, this is in the, it stems from the level that he occupies. He's, he's the director, the highest ranking official in APSS. He's responsible for, and it was commonly known, as we received the function back from the city manager. It was commonly known and understood that Director Maji was the man, the person that ran APSS, that managed the day-to-day running, managed the contract. So if you are asking, was there a specific document >> pinning this down?

>> Yes. Exactly.

>> There is no such document, but it was commonly known and commonly expected. And if you also look, which I don't have in front of me, but if you look at his job profile and job description, it would clearly indicate management responsibilities to that of APSS.

Thank you.

>> Thank you, Chair. Chair would have also noticed from, from the documents that initiated this entire um tender, that Malachi would have been the person, a contact person through and through, and a custodian, so to speak, of this document from the very first advertisement. Uh, but it might well be that it will, it will be conversed with him tomorrow when he comes, in terms of the legislative powers where he sources that power to to allocate. Uh, but it has been common call that he has been the ultimate responsible person, even when this function has moved between different units.

Now, um, Commissioner Bhazes, just to round off the point, as was canvassed with you by Commissioner Baloy, uh, the commission this morning had um, a couple of service level agreements, uh, that were signed by Commissioner uh Spece. But it was very clear that in those documents, it was very clear on the face of it that um, he was signing on behalf of um, of uh, Commissioner Farro. So it was clear that it is a delegated power.

Now I want you to have a look at page 67 of of of the panel in front of you. It's one of the notification for deployment, keeping in mind what I've just said to you. Now, this is just one of of the of the notices signed by uh, Mr. Piri. And my question to you is that, on the face of it, prima facie, does it appear that the power that was exercised there was delegated power >> through your commissioners?

>> Please, please repeat that, Mr. Miri.

>> Uh, the, the position to, to Commissioner BH is this, the signature there of Mr. Perry, does it, prima facie, appear to be a signature exercised as someone who has been delegated the power through somebody.

>> And Chair, I have said juxtaposed to the SLA that we saw this morning, where it was very clear that the person designated for that position to sign those SLA, it was very clear it was uh, Farro, but the signature would have been for, for Spece, if, if >> the, during, during a time when um, Deputy Chief Spece was acting >> indeed so >> so in that acting capacity, he, he was effectively the chief.

>> So, yeah. Yeah. Yes. But even when they were signed, it was clear that even then he was still acting through under delegation, that two-day extension that he, he received as, as the chief. And, and that's a question really, I'm, I'm, well, the proposition I'm putting to um, Commissioner Bh to say, on the face of it, >> does it appear that >> Deputy, Deputy Chief, do you know or don't you that Mr. Piri had a delegated power to sign these, uh, documents from 67 all the way to the last one, excluding the two signed by Dr. Mi, by the doctor >> Mishawi, yes?

>> Thank you, Commissioner. Um, let me answer this in different parts. Firstly, uh, Mr. Alpiri, I can with confidence say he didn't have delegated powers because he couldn't have had delegated powers. If Director Malachi delegated authority downwards, he would have delegated to Mr. Mashlangu, who is the immediate level under him. It's like me. I'm a Deputy Chief of Police. I cannot delegate my authority and accountability to an inspector working in my office. It's, it's, it cannot happen. It would be illegal. It would, it will be nonsensical. It would not be valid.

>> Yes. Yes. Yes. Continue. Continue.

>> Thank you. So if I look at the face value of this document, there's no indicated indication on this document that Mr. Perry is acting on a delegated authority because it's not stated in the document. Secondly, it is signed in his own information signature and level as an inspector. So this document is irregular.

>> And on what you said on delegation, there are instances where some functionaries do not even have the power to delegate.

>> Exactly.

>> Thank you. Yes, Mr. Musi.

>> Thank you, Commissioner. Um, I think we had paragraph 39, 38 in fact, of of your statement with reference to Dr. Can you pick it up from there then?

>> Excuse me. Paragraph 38. I point out that as part of annexure SB5, referred to above, there are two notification letters that were signed by Dr. K Marlaba, Senior Superintendent APSS. 39. Perhaps, just to keep in mind a question by by both the Chair and and Commissioner Baloi, would you still have the same difficulty with uh, Dr. Marik having signed at least those two notices, the same problems you had with, uh, Mr. The Peri?

>> I would have exactly the same comments and the same challenge and the same disregard. It, it, it's, it's irregular. Totally irregular.

>> You can continue. Thank you.

>> Thank you. 39. It would appear that Dr. K Marlaba allocated two sites to Gubies 85 Solutions Pty Ltd through notification letters dated 21 January 2025 and 20 January 2020, 2025 respectively. These notification letters deployed 24 security officers per site, two patrol vehicles for one site, and one patrol vehicle for another site. The total value attached to these allocated sites was 1,60,345 rand 2 per month.

Then 40. I emphasized that while acting as caretaker, I did not authorize Dr. K Marlaba to allocate the two sites to Gubies 85 Solutions Pty Ltd, nor did Dr. K Marlaba have authority to allocate sites because such authority lies with the Director APSS, Mr. Malachi. At no stage has Mr. Malachi informed me that he gave permission for the allocation of these sites and or that he delegated the allocation of sites to Mr. Piri and to Dr. K Marlaba.

41.

>> Uh, before you go there, can we then quickly um, go to an annexure SB5, which is on page 110? Are you there, Commissioner?

>> I am.

>> Yes. Um, you, you would see that that document there on top, it says, Summary of sites allocated to Goobies by uh, Piri. And it mentions the source of, of this table. What, what really I want to ask from you, and we can benefit probably from your from your knowledge. You would notice that, especially on page one, except for the first two, all of these notices are dated the same day. And with all of them, the effective date being the 15th of um, so they are drafted on the 14th, and the effective date being the 15th of of January. And then the next column, you'll see that it's a number of personnel deployed, and then the patrol vehicles, and then the amounts per allocation.

>> Yes.

>> My question to you, and it goes on to page two as well, is this plausible? This type of allocation done by one person essentially in one day, and especially going to these, these amounts, is it plausible?

>> Look, on the, look, on the first glance of this document, uh, summary document of these allocations, it looks, uh, irregular. But I'm not saying that it's impossible to have an emergency situation within the city and you have to make a very quick decision of allocating of sites. But then you would follow the procedure that I have mentioned before a few times. The example was the Kipkhat scenario, but it could even be an immediate emergency. You could have, for argument's sake, a piece of infrastructure of the city and, um, outside perimeter of such infrastructure received extensive damage from a nature incident, and you must now allocate. Then, if, if Director Malachi would phone me at home and say, "Duty Chief, we've got this situation. It's urgent. We need to allocate four security officers to such and such a infrastructure due to this." And then I can give verbal um permission, and the paperwork can follow tomorrow, and we, and the procedures would would follow correctly. But to do it in this way, allocating sites by a junior person, and there's no further communication on a high level or an assessment done or a pre-approval done. That's why I say, when you look at it, at the look of it, it looks irregular. And we now know this is irregular. I hope that answers your question.

>> I think my question is a bit more pointed than that. The question is really, the question is this, this allocation, it, it compared to your example of one incident. This, this what we have here is a situation where deployment cuts across all, almost all the regions in Pretoria on the same day. You will see, I know you've mentioned Tembisa, there's Mopani, there's Karina, there's Valhalla, there's Centurion, there's Rietfontein, there's Eldoraigne. It cuts across, hence I'm saying, is it plausible, all, all in one day, if, if we accept that ad hoc, it's supposed to be for that exact purpose?

>> It doesn't seem possible to me. It's impossible. It, it, it doesn't make sense. I cannot get my mind around this. Um, I can't think of a scenario where this could be possible.

>> Just ask to, to get to the point where Inspector Piri issues that deployment letter. He doesn't, he surely doesn't make the decision himself that this site requires um deployment. There has to be a request.

>> Yes.

>> From who? Who, who? From which, is it a department? Is it a unit that generates that request, which he would then execute?

>> Normally, Madame Commissioner, such a request would come from the service delivery department.

>> Okay.

>> Be that water works, electricity, or whatever the case may be.

>> Okay. So, so if, if this is done properly, this deployment, you, if it was done properly, yes, it would have been generated by that service, uh, department, and you would expect to find a record of a request for a deployment to a site.

>> Definitely, madam.

>> Yeah.

>> Um, everyone in the city, at least on management, senior management level, knew at that stage that Metro Police is the custodian of APSS. It was common knowledge that I was the caretaker. They have access to the Chief of Police. In such a case, the department would internally resolve it with its own group heads and cluster heads, and such a request would come through either director, directly to Director Malachi. But I would have been copied by the department, and so the Chief of Police, and so the COO, and so maybe the office of the City Manager and the CFO, because there could be financial implications, like with Kipkhat and other examples. So this is totally, totally irregular, unauthorized, not following any standard communication procedure or authority or delegation or any of those.

>> Okay.

>> Whatsoever.

>> Is it correct, this proposition, that at the, at the very least, you would expect that there was a request to Director Malachi? Let's say you were not copied and all the other people, but, uh, because Inspector Piri is not his position is not to receive those kind of requests, they are not directed to him.

>> Definitely not.

>> Okay. So it would have been directed to Director Malachi, and then, assuming all is done properly, he then says to Piri, "You go ahead and issue the deployment letter." If that were done properly. But at the very least, you expect a request to Director.

>> 100% correct.

>> Okay. Thank you.

>> I want to, uh, just follow up on this document on page 110. Just have a look at it. It's the same document we are looking at. It runs to page 112, and that's where you have the total figure of 14 million, which also appears on page 10, paragraph 35 of your statement. And my problem with this is that your statement does not reflect the actual amount paid to Goobies arising from this allocation letters. Because if you look at the allocation letters, let's take the one on page 67, for example. Please go to page 67. What they do is they give you the effective date of the allocation and the deployment, and then they give you the total monthly rate, which in that case, you see is 46,000. Do you see that?

>> I do.

>> So it seems to me that what you have done is you've calculated the grand total in all these 42 allocation letters, and that's how you arrive at your 14 million.

>> I have to assume that is correct.

>> And let me tell you what my problem with that is. We know that these allocations were only stopped at the end of June.

>> Yes.

>> So you must multiply that by five, another five months, to get to the actual figure. So what will assist us is actually proof of payment to Goobies arising from these allocation letters, because then we can know how much Gubies was paid. It may be that it is 14 million, but it could be as high as 60 million, because what you have done here with your calculations is that you've just taken the grand total in the 42 allocation letters, and that grand total gives us 14 million.

>> But that's only for one month. That's not for the full, uh, full period when these services were, the ad hoc services were were provided. I understand your, your concern and your, your question. Uh, Commissioner, I'm giving evidence only on this portion. So what you are asking can be given, but most probably from a supplementary statement by Deputy Commissioner Space.

>> Yeah. Because, because what you gave us in paragraph 35, read with these two documents, including the one on page 112.

>> Yes.

>> It's not the full picture.

>> I agree. Totally agree. Yes.

>> It's just for that period of time that >> it's for one month. That's what it is.

>> That is 100%.

>> Let me take you to pages 111 and 112. Uh, Deputy Chief, at 111, you will see, um, on the right margin, um, there are two entries, um, that say Madi Shaba signed this notification latter, not later as in L A T. So there are two of those in entries, one after the other. Do you know what, what this means? If you've dealt with, uh, with it, please forgive me.

>> Do you know what this means?

>> If I understand your question correctly, Commissioner, these are the two, I assume these are the two by Dr. >> Mavis. Yes. Yes. Yes.

>> But, but what I'm asking is, uh, Madisha signed this notification letter. What does that mean? I'm not sure this was prepared. Chair, >> I can, I can, I can assist as to what that means. Chair. Um, >> yes. >> Perhaps the easiest way, if, if the commissioners have the first file with them, and the easiest reference I can make, it's on page 22.

>> I think >> so. That's not where we have a collection of all these with the ones signed by Dr. Mishaba somewhere in the middle.

>> No, no, no.

>> Something else altogether.

>> It's, it's, it's specific to the question. Latter >> to the, just a minute.

>> So the first file, page 22.

>> Mr. Miki, the same file, page 84.

>> Yes.

>> And 85. Yes, that's correct. And, and really, the latter part, Chair, perhaps it's not even for the witness to answer. Um, it's, it's really what is apparent there, Chair, is that you will see that the notice on the top right is dated 21 January, um, and then when you >> 2025.

>> 2025.

>> And then you'll see that it will say, "Notification for redeployment." Then this correspondence letter serves as a notification for deployment at Red Front, Red Flag Nature Reserve, effective from 21 January 2025 at 6 a.m. on a month-to-month basis. Now, Chair, you will see that in the bottom right, this is where the question is answered, um, the date there by both M, Dr. and Kumar, not this Kumalo, will be the 20th. So that will explain, I think they wanted to say the dates don't match because this date would have been, so this letter would have been signed a day before it was produced, if, if this notice is anything to go by.

>> There's a 21st January at the top, and, uh, against the signatures at the bottom, there's 20 January 20. Indeed.

>> It's something a mess that we, we don't know what to make of them. I don't think this witness will will assist us as well what to make of.

>> Is it not the effective date?

>> Of the deployment? Because if you read "Notification for deployment," and then the second sentence after that, "effective date from." So it seems to me that those dates reflect not the date when the letter was produced, but the effective date of the deployment.

>> I, I accept that. But for the top part, Commissioner Kumalo, of the letter, which is 21st, that's where the anomaly comes, and then it distorts, uh, the effective date of the 21st. And I don't think anything, for now, at least for this witness, will turn on that. But >> it, it might well be that it, it's something to make of at a later stage. But that, that's that normally, that is noted on the, on the, on the table, Chair. Um, um, yeah, I still find it vague.

>> It is. It is true.

>> All right. Anyway, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Migi. I, I said I was taking the Deputy Chief to pages 111 and 112. So, I noticed right at the end that, uh, what I assume is a reference to what was signed by Dr. Marisa was subtracted from the from the total. Um, maybe there's an explanation in plain sight, but, uh, do you want to tell me why this would have been, this would have been subtracted?

>> The document, Commissioner, gives the total value in the red part at the end of the column, >> which is just over 15 million rand. Then it showcases then the deduction of the two that was signed by Miklaba, which is just over a million rand, and it comes to that 14 million. Because the heading of this document at page 110, on top, would be a summary of sites allocated to GBIS by Piri. So this, then gives the total picture of Piri, and then we know the total picture of >> so, or they are subject because for that >> or because the two do not relate to Mr. >> it's not about the entire or the full total.

All right. Okay. Thank you.

>> And, um, Commissioner Bhazes, while, while we are there, the commission um, knows that um, Mr. Peri has been, uh, placed on, um, suspension.

>> Yes.

>> And he's facing a disciplinary hearing in relation to this. Uh, what do you have? What do we know about Mr. Mishaba for this 1 million?

>> I know it's part of an investigation, but that's all I know. I'm not privy to the details of that investigation. I'm not involved with it myself. As far as I know, he's not on suspension at this stage, but it's part of an investigation.

>> Thank you.

>> Thank you, Commissioner Bh. Um, we were going to paragraph 41 of your statement.

>> Can I continue?

>> Please.

>> Thank you, Commissioners. I continue at paragraph 41. In summary, an inspector in the APSS cannot allocate services worth millions of rands to service providers under the Municipal Financial Management Act number 56 of 2003, also known as the MFMA, and Local Government Municipal Systems Act number 32 of 2000, without proper delegation and adherence to procurement protocols. I refer to annexure SB6, job description of a Warrant Officer, Regional Policing, which is a generic job description for a Warrant Officer (in brackets Inspector). It's the same level within the department. Mr. Alpiri functioned on this level, but I have given um further explanation on that already. In any case, I'll continue with 42. Apologies, Commissioners. Similarly, a Senior Superintendent in the APSS cannot allocate services with millions of rands to service providers without specific delegated authority to to do so. I further refer to annexure S SP7, job description of a Senior Superintendent, Regional Policing, which is a generic job description for the level Dr. C. Marlaba functioned on this level. 43. It is therefore my view from the above that Gubby Solutions Pty Ltd was improperly allocated sites between January 2025 and February 2025. 44. At this point, let me refer the commission to email correspondence between myself, Director Malachi, and Director Wandle (in brackets Director Management and Admin Support). I further refer to annexure SB8.

>> Perhaps, let's, let's go there, Commissioner B.

>> Maybe, as you do that, if you just again explain who is Director Wandle and how does he fit in in the department.

>> Thank you, Madame Commissioner. Director Nandulle is, as indicated in my statement, the Director for Mass Management Administration Support. In this directorate, you find a finance section. So he's overall responsible for finance and the departmental budget, under the supervision of Deputy Police Commissioner Lamini.

>> Okay. On page 124, Commissioners, that is Manager SB8.

>> Um, Commissioner Bh, just to follow the correct um timeline of these emails, I think you should start on page 128.

>> 128.

>> Yes. You'll see that at the bottom there, and that will be the email from yourself, uh, sent on Wednesday, 2nd of October, at 11:26. Then we'll follow that timeline.

>> Okay. So you will read that from 128 and flip over to 129. 128 to 129. Then we'll go, uh, >> no problem. >> In terms of the timelines. Yeah.

>> Thank you, Commissioners. Uh, on page 128, at the bottom, it's an email from myself, sent on Wednesday, 2 October 2024, at 11:26 in the morning, to Director Vin Wandle, and in the same line to Sukuru P. Malachi, and I CC Deputy Police Commissioner Lamini, Mr. Jetro Cele, who is also in the finance section, the COP, Mr. Reginald Mashlangu from APSS, Mr. Dr. Elvis K. Miklaba, Winnie B. Mashlangu, who also works in that office by APSS. Then the next people are my support staff, Kuzette Fosvan, and Ken Fono. The subject was or is: APSS non-payment of service providers. Importance: High. Director Wandle, and in brackets underneath, Director Malachi, please urgently advise on the slow in (brackets non/non-payment of security service providers. What are the issues and how can we urgently resolve it? Your immediate attention to this will be highly appreciated. Kindest regards, by myself.

>> So do you want me to continue?

>> Yes. Then a response to your email would follow at. So it's on page 127. Um, you will see at the bottom there, a response from Valley Yandul at on the same day at 13:02.

>> Yes.

>> Um, I think you can skip the designation of the email and go to the content.

>> Yeah, it was sent to everyone.

>> Yes.

>> That was already mentioned. Thank you, Commissioners. In that email, page 127, at the bottom, Director Wandull responds to all of us, and to, to me and all of us. Good day, Deputy. Good day, Deputy Police. We only need to adhere to some little procedures. I have reported to the unit, the asset protection (brackets), that I'm sitting with 35 variable requisitions in my SAP inbox. I also indicated that on each requisition, no SLA, no letter of appointment, no invoices were attached on the system. In brackets, something very strange. In attempting to bring a quick solution, I requested that the SLA letter of appointment be attached on the system or hand-delivered to my office. With I also requested that the original invoices be handed hand-delivered to my office without success. Instead, the invoices were sent via email, apparently at the instruction of the Director Protection Services. Further to unprofessional conduct, the service provider were told the Metro Police cost center owner does not want to pay them. I am still waiting for the original invoices to be hand-delivered as per the promise of the ladies I spoke to, which is (in brackets Winnie and Ul). Hope the above is found in order. Country regards, Vin Wandle. And then, um, if you follow the sequence, you will then have to go to page 126. Um, you will see that at, in the middle of that page, there's a response from one to Guru Malaji at 15:20. Uh, he now responds to Dakan. Can you take it from there, please?

>> I can. Thank you, Commissioners. Um, the response is on Wednesday, 2 October 2024, 15:20, from Sukuru Malachi to Mr. Wandle and the rest of us are CC'd. Hi, Director Nandulle. Thank you very much for the email below. I think you would agree with me that asset protection is responsible for the management of this contract. To this end, any documentation relating to the management of this contract must be kept safe by my office for ease of reference and response to all sorts of inquiries. This, this documents would include, but not limited to, to a copy of contract, the SLA, and monthly invoices. The reason being that the documents are central to the effective management of the project audits, which are carried out or conducted frequently by both internal and external institutions. Full stop. Therefore, I would like to humbly request that you return the original documents after use for recordkeeping. Your cooperation in this regard will be highly appreciated. Kindest regards, Sukuru Malachi. And then lastly, on the email chain, then you will need to go to page 124. This will be the last email from Vin Wandle, and you will see that email starts on top of the page, and the time there, it's 18:09 in the evening.

>> Could you just take it from there from the body of the language he responds to direct?

>> Thank you, Commissioners. On page 124, from the top, from Nandul to Tukuru Malachi. Evening, Director Malachi. I here with acknowledge receipt of your original invoices after a long and unnecessary delay. Thanks to the patient messenger I sent to your offices. I confirmed that I only received 22 invoices for the month of August 2024. Your email here under is rather shocking. The asset protection unit is not a new service to the TMPD. It has just been returned, and my expectation was that we were going to have a seamless process in executing our duties, and a smooth transition would unfold. It is not news to you that our department has its own finance section, which is responsible for all finance matters of the department, including, but not limited to, the management of contracts and procurement administration, and the administration of the budget. Take note of the following important basics for your attention on contracts. One, the team has the contract management subsection, which administers all departmental contracts and ensures their safekeeping. As courtesy to the client division, copies are made on a request and given to whoever makes such a request. I will request that you spearhead handling over the letters of the appointment of the service level agreements for each service provider to the TMPD contract management subsection (in brackets Vousy Mabora) for your convenience. It follows, Commissioners, on the next page, page 125, on top, on monthly invoices. One temporary finance has one central point of processing all contracted services invoices, and there shall be no confusion/parallel activities elsewhere. Point two, the responsibility of the client division (in brackets, asset protection) is to receive the invoice, verify the service against the billed amount, sign it off, and send that original invoice to the departmental finance. And Commissioners, you will recall that I previously spoke about this when you asked me when did I stop co-signing invoices when this process was implemented. Um, it's just confirmation of that. Remember that as a line division, you are an overseer of one of the services in of the TMPD. Three, the responsibility of the finance section of the department is to create a requisition for each original invoice received. Four, a received original invoice will be signed by the cost center owner or his nominee before any processing can be done. The requisition creator, SAO-procurement services, verifies the contents before requisition is created. Five, the cost center owner will then release requisitions on the system upon satisfaction that all the necessary documents were received and attached on the system. Six, on a lighter note, original invoices belong to a person who pays. We keep a record of such at one central point. Copies will be made for you upon request. Seven. I therefore expect your cooperation regarding the above going forward. Then there is a subheading, notable. It's supposed to be anomalies, but anomalies, anomalies. It starts with a dash. 13 requisitions have been created by yourselves to the tune of 8,282,682 rand 19 without invoices, and yet you expected me to blindly release these requisitions. Only you can provide a better explanation to your supervisor and the Chief of Police on those, and I will be given and I will be given a go-ahead to release as the cost center owner upon clarity. Lastly, a lie was spread that I want to have a meeting with service providers before I release their payments. A second lie was circulated that I am refusing to release their payments, and you have done everything on your side, whereas you deliberately forgot to inform the service provider that you were refusing to bring the documents that would enable payments for them. I hope it is the last time I'm treated with that level of unprofessionalism. Hope the above is found in order. Kind regards, Finanul.

>> Thank you. Um, Commissioner, that's quite a loaded, uh, exchange of emails. Uh, because your question was quite, or at least your email was quite simple to say, why is there slow or no payment of service providers? And what you get is this strong exchange of emails between, at least appears to be Valin Wandulla and Sukuru Malaji. What do you make of this to, to your initial, uh, question?

>> Yes, initially I just wanted to have clarity on what is the issue. But I'm extremely glad it unfolded the way it unfolded because in a subsequent email, I don't know if it's part of this bundle somewhere, but in a subsequent email, uh, I instructed, um, Mr. Malachi to adhere to the financial se, financial section's, uh, procedure, and that was the instruction. So, um, yes, at first I didn't expect it, but as I say, it was an eye-opener and it initiated the process clearly defined so by the finance section. Seeing that director, as indicated in his correspondence, he's the cost center owner that releases the funds for this payment, and that he's actually saying to Director Malachi that he's refusing to release payments if not all procedures are followed and documents are handed in as per his explanation, which immediately, um, became the system in place to ensure that this is done procedurally correct. And I must mention that director was correct to say that this is not a new service. Basically, if I can paraphrase, in the Metro Police, APSS has been returned back to Metro Police, and it's common knowledge that Metro Police, not like other departments, have their own financial section because we do deal with contracts and service providers like the watchman services and others. I think what, what's concerning to me, uh, Commissioner Bes, is that we, we don't seem to be dealing with the problem of Peri only in January 2025 or February. So on this phenomenon of not submitting invoices and all relevant documents, it seems to have existed at least when you look at this email, as, as it's discussed, as early as October 2024, and this has nothing to do with Peri, at least on the face of this exchange. What do you make of that, Commissioner?

>> I am of the same view. I've even got my own suspicions that there could have been a longstanding process of manipulating whatever systems is in place or lack of systems for that matter. Whether that was for financial gain or for corruption, I, I don't want to be the person that uses hearsay and accuses people without evidence. But I refer again to what Chief of Police Farro said in her witnessing here at the commission, that all these things will be looked at and must be looked at. Um, it could be, let me use my words carefully, it could be that the systemic rot and corruption has been going on for quite some time, even before the function was returned to the Metro Police, right under our own noses. And yes, I remember exactly the frustration illustrated by the commissioners about why, why wasn't more done? Why didn't we pick up on that? And, and, and we hear the sentiment. We don't have proper answers on those. We, we did fail in that. We, I agree. Uh, we could have done better, but we are here now with this before us, and we have to deal with what we have, and this will definitely be part of that further investigation.

>> Thank you, uh, Commissioner. Um, Commissioner Bhaz, I think we've just dealt with, with those emails. We've dealt with paragraph 45 and 46. So perhaps you can just take it, pick it up from paragraph 47 instead.

>> Um, before, before you do that, in, in these email exchanges, what is set out is their process. That's what, um, Tangan, Mr. Wandle, is doing, setting out the process.

>> Yes, madam. So, so in respect of the problematic, uh, payments, that is to Goobies, because we have these email, WhatsApp exchanges where Mr. Nissi is involved in, uh, processes of invoices, must now be uploaded. There must be an upliftment of the amounts that must be paid, and eventually, um, even Deputy Commissioner Lamini is involved in it, right? And eventually, somebody says, "Yes, all sorted, payments will be made." If it's done properly, or when, when Mr. Malachi does come to testify, which, which he will do, and Mr. NI testifies, we should expect that this payment process that is lined out by Mr. Wandle would have been complied with. The documents should be there.

>> It, it should have.

>> For payment eventually to be released.

>> Yes.

>> Okay.

>> Yeah, definitely. Otherwise, the finance section director, Juan Dull, or his colleagues, would have reported back to me in the time span when I was the caretaker that, did, although they waited, but it was eventually followed, they would have reported back to me that it wasn't followed, then I could have intervened. So I have to assume that it was followed correctly from that point onwards. Exactly how they manipulated to that, I'm not sure.

>> But that will come out, most probably, in other evidence before you.

>> Now, director does not define a role for the Chief Financial Officer in this approval >> yes >> of payments matrix. Where does the CFO feature?

>> The CFO doesn't fit into this process.

>> Yes.

>> This process is the same process that, uh, that the Commissioner asked about, do I know the financial process?

>> And I'm not very well-versed in this, but, but this is the process that is followed within the department when it relates, well, there's processes for all types of finances, but when it relates to contract management.

>> So, as Director Wandle explained it here in that document, this is the process followed in the department. From there, it goes to Supply Chain Management.

>> I see.

>> And from there to the CFO for payment. So the CFO comes into that process.

>> Okay. Thank you.

>> So, just remind me, which page, which um >> we on page >> paragraph >> page 12. So we're on paragraph 47.

>> 47.

>> Yes.

>> Thank you, Commissioners. Paragraph 47. On 28th February 2025, the City Manager sent an extension letter to Gubies 85 Solution Pty Ltd. This is attached here to as annexure SB9. The to next page, the total amount paid under T M D 2016/17 to all service providers since inception, March 20 (in brackets, March 22 to the end of January 2026), is 2 billion 923,467 rand 84, and that is written again in brackets there, approximately 730,857,460 rand per year. This much is also confirmed in Commissioner Revosp's statement.

>> Chair, perhaps, just to, to be fair, that this extension letter was also sent to the other 21, uh, service providers. It was not exclusive to, to Goobies. Um, the only question I have, uh, for you, uh, Commissioner Bhaz, in this regard is that, were you involved in any of the processes, uh, dealing with the extension of, of the standard? Because this letter is dated 28th of February, and it's a time that you would have been a caretaker. Were you ever involved in those processes?

>> I was involved in communication and supply of information, even, um, letters, reports, documentation to the City and to the CFO, and also to the BIC in regards to the extension of the contract. Yes.

>> All right. And, and maybe also, just for completeness and just so that there's no confusion, sorry, that this extension, it's the extension, not of the ad hoc services, but of the, of the contract itself.

>> Of the security contract, the bigger security contract. Yes.

>> Thank you. Because the new, um, tender could have not come into place, then as per the MFMA, you have to extend it in a certain procedural manner, which we've done.

>> Yes. And maybe lastly, in that letter of extension, um, and this is, I'm not asking, I just want you to confirm if I'm correct, page 131, there is a number of people there who are copied. I suppose one of them is, uh, Mr. Kane Bofu in Supply Chain Management. You recognize that name at 131?

>> Page 131.

>> Yeah, there are a number of names there of people that are copied. And at number four, >> you've got Kane Bofu.

>> Yeah, he's a senior person in the supply chain management process of the City of Tshwane.

>> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, uh, Commissioner Paul. Um, can we then, um, move to the last, at least the second last topic before the remarks, at closing remarks. It's the topic dealing with requests for additional funding. That is paragraph 48. Can you take it from there, please?

>> Thank you. Paragraph 48. I'm aware that to ensure that the team Perry can meet its financial obligations during the extension period, a request was made to uplift an amount of 91 million for the 24/25 funds for security services, specifically to pay for the invoices submitted by the service providers for the period of May to June 2025. I attach this letter of request as annexure SB10. The request is recommended by the CFO Gareth Mani and the Chief of Police Commissioner YRC Farro, and approved by the City Manager, Mr. J Mler.

>> Um, Chair, this letter, we, it was dealt with by Commissioner Space. Um, I, if my memory serves me well, it might have been dealt with by Commissioner Farro as well. So I don't think there's a need for this witness to go there, especially given that it was during June time where he had stopped being the caretaker, but at least to accept for the point that he will make later on, two paragraphs later, why he needs to speak to this, to make reference to this letter.

>> Um, can you then continue to paragraph 49, Commissioner Bes?

>> Thank you, Commissioners. Paragraph 49. On or about 12th March 2025, I was copied on an email from Deputy Commissioner.

Lamini, which stated that the deployment of ad hoc security guards had grown exponentially and indicated that an extra 37 sites were added in January 2025 with a further six sites added in February 2025, in total 43 sites. A copy of the mail and the annexes is attached as an SB11.

Um chair, I think the similar comment applies that Commissioner Spece dealt with this letter before the commissioners. We not need to go there. Um Commissioner Bhayes, can you then move to the next paragraph?

>> Paragraph 50. Commissioners. But I later realized that in fact the initial request for the additional funding emanated from a WhatsApp message I received from the chief financial officer, Mr. Gareth Manisi, sent to me on 25 February 2025. I quote the message below. It's inverted commas and italics.

25 February 2025 from Gareth Mani. He says, "Good afternoon DC. Please assist with loading the approval for budget upliftment. The team needs to upload with the budget team in order to upload payment." And then it says forwarded and in brackets in italics again it says request for additional funds to be made available.

Paragraph 51. The message is attached as an SB12 here too.

>> Can we then go to that WhatsApp message please?

>> SB12.

>> It's page 143.

>> Yes, I'm there.

>> Yes. Can you take us through that exchange? Uh, who are the participants in that conversation?

>> Yes, I am. This is a WhatsApp message commissioners on page 141, 143, sorry. It is from the CFO Gareth Manissi to me.

>> So, absolutely. You you took a screenshot from your phone?

>> Yeah, I took a screenshot from my phone.

>> Thank you.

>> Then it says here, "Good afternoon." The the first messages are other messages. Good afternoon DC. Please assist with loading the approval for budget upliftment. The team needs to upload with the budget team in order to enable payment. Then there was a forwarded um document, request for additional funds to be made available. So that is an actual attachment, a document.

>> Deputy Commissioner, what what is this concept of budget upliftment? I've I've never encountered it before. What what does it mean and what happens there?

>> It's a term that we, madame commissioner, that we use um in the city in the department. It is when you realize, and I spoke about this earlier, when you realize early in the financial year that you are running out of funds for a certain function to complete that you write a memo or report to the city manager, but via your group head, CFO, etcetera, to indicate that you do not have enough funds and please um, I'm explaining it from my own experience. I'm not again a financial specialist. um where you explain to the city that you need so much funds and you give explanation why and motivation to complete the task or whatever you're busy with and then the CFO, upon approval, the CFO will uplift funds, meaning he will make funds available.

>> In this in this WhatsApp exchanges, um, "Good afternoon DC." This is addressed to you?

>> To me.

>> By?

>> Mani, CFO.

>> Okay. And then, okay. So where it says, "Thanks DC, will expedite tomorrow." Who's speaking? I'm just trying to make sense of this sequence of communication.

>> That that's not part of that this communication that I see.

>> I I'll have to go back in my records to see what that was part of.

>> Okay. All right. But but the only reference relevant part here in this page, the only relevant WhatsApp message is this one. "Good afternoon DC" to you.

>> Yes. Plus the forwarded uh attachment, which is the actual document about the upliftment.

>> Okay. Thank you.

>> Yes.

>> So you say um the CFO Mr. Muni would be the one who actually releases funds, but now he wants you to initiate the process so that he may then release funds, or correct me if I'm misunderstanding this.

>> Commissioner, let me explain the upliftment permission for uplift.

>> The upliftment permission was already done.

>> Okay.

>> So, he's requesting me to load that information. Once again, I just referred all of that to Deputy Chief Clamini and the Finance Office because they know what to do with it.

>> When you say it had already been done, who had done it and at what stage was it? I want to understand the need for you to do something, whatever the something was.

>> Then we'll do we, sorry commissioner, do we have that document on on file, the upliftment document?

>> Sir?

>> Would it be the same document?

>> Um?

>> Am I allowed to consult my phone?

>> Yes. Yes, you may.

>> Yes. Yes.

>> Is it not the same document on 132?

>> 132.

>> Yeah.

>> Let me see quickly.

>> It It might not be when you look at the dates, but um, that that's that's the closest I can come to assisting you, but it it doesn't look like it anyway. I think it's the same one. I just want to check if you give me a second. This is it can't be the same one because um, the chairs seem to date early in 2025 and uh, this document at 132 is dated 30 June 2025.

>> 25 February. 20 25 February. Commissioners. Um, I cannot open that downloaded that that document that was forwarded to me because it's obviously out of time. So I will have to, if it's not on file, I'll have to I would be able to make a supplementary statement to that because I do have it on my computer. So what I've done, once I received this message from the CFO plus the document, I forwarded to Deputy Chief Lamini, Deputy Police Commissioner Lamini, I CC'd the Chief of Police, CFO, and whomever relevant people, and I've actually quoted the message verbatim, plus I added that document, and I sent it to Deputy Police Commissioner Lamini to say he needs to action this.

>> Is this is this what you say had been done already?

>> Is that what is that what you what you are referring to now?

>> I believe so because when you do upliftment, it's not a process started. You are in consultation with the CFO, but it's not a process started by the CFO. It's a process you start in the department. So we would consult with the CFO and then we start an upliftment process by writing a document, whether it's a C9 report, which is a typical system we use in the city department, or a memo, and this is addressed to the city manager, and then we explain why, why, and then the whole process explained, and then the chief recommends, CFO recommends, it goes to the city manager, and it's signed off. I would make a deduction because why would the CFO be asking me to upload the information if it's not something that has already been done?

>> Yeah.

>> So, he's obviously waiting for that approved report or memo to be uploaded through our finance section somehow, somewhere.

>> Mhm.

>> So that he can then release funds.

>> Release funds. Okay. So basically you are saying it was still winding its way within the?

>> Still in process.

>> Within the TMPD.

>> Yes.

>> So that's why he's saying, "Oh, please do it." All right. All right. But then it would also mean from the process that you're describing, the point at which the CFO becomes involved, it would mean that this WhatsApp message from him, somebody in your department has alerted him. Your your internal departmental processes are not yet complete. That's why uh, it's he doesn't see this information on the system. So someone in your department must have informed him that this is happening, but it is it is still holding because of you.

>> That that is possible, madam. Um, or it it could have been that um, that he knows the processes is is almost in completion because he recommended and he's now waiting for us because once once a document has been signed off, the chief of police recommends, CFO recommends, city manager signs off, because the document is originated in the Metro Police, the document returns to the Metro Police.

>> He would know that he signed because he signed and that it's probably gone via the city manager for signature and is now returning to the Metro Police. So, it's either that or someone is alerting him. It's still lying by us and we we're hanging on to the document and not processing it, but I'm speculating.

>> Yes. Yes. Thank you.

>> Um, Commissioner Bh, so that we we we don't conflate issues, um, can you go to page 134?

>> 134.

>> Yes.

>> Yes.

>> Now, this is an email from um, Deputy Commissioner Umari. I want you to read into the record the very last paragraph of that uh, email.

>> Okay. Thank you, commissioners. The last par paragraph of this email states further that, "You explore the possibility of engaging the requesting sister department and to persuade them to engage the CFO to approve or make funds available for ad hoc duties. That upon approval and a availability of this set funds, the necessary journal be made accordingly so that our budget is not overburdened." Um, so you will see the subject of that email says, "Ad hoc duties versus available budget for APS," and that email would have been sent on the 12th of March. So what I where I need you to balance us um, Commissioner Bes, is that there is this text um from the CFO, and then you said you forwarded all of that as a package with the annexure to uh, Commissioner Deputy Commissioner Umari Lamini.

>> Yes.

>> And then two weeks later, he sends this email uh where you see at the end there is a request to be made or someone to requested to persuade the CFO to approve or make funds available. Are the two interlinked or the the SMS, the WhatsApp and the email?

>> I would not be able to say with confidence. Yes. But it could be. It could definitely be. Um, if I look at it from the little that we have before us, it is it's clear to me that there is a request for more funds the whole time. And there's one thing to ask for upliftment of a budget to deal with the finances of the contract. Now this is additional to that, and it is because it mentions ad hoc services. So someone increased ad hoc services as we've seen irregularly, and now there is a further asking for funds for the ad hoc services for the payment thereof. So how it links specifically or how far it's integrated, I cannot say, but it seems that way.

>> Why or how would um, Deputy Commissioner Jamini become involved in this to to a point where he's got this kind of information and he's sending this email to Deputy Commissioner Space? What what's his involvement in terms of position in a matter like this?

>> Look, the Deputy Commissioner Lamini is the divisional head of support and administrative systems, and the finance section falls within that. Um, how much influence he has over the finance section or does he have or doesn't he have, I I don't know. I I don't have any evidence or personal information to that, so I would not know um what happens, what could have happened. And what happens on an ongoing basis within the Metro Police Department is that let's say there's an issue at the finance section, they will elevate a matter to Deputy Police Commissioner Lamini, and he will then consult or collaborate with the other deputy chiefs, either directly or in what we call uh, executive management meeting, EMM, short. Then something is brought to the table, we discuss it there, we make a decision, and we move on. So I'm not sure what happened here and what is um, the precursor to this, but on a quick view, it looks to me like whether this is related to irregular ad hoc and future ad hoc and monies and all that, let's park that for one. It looks to me on the eye that he is now consulting with deputy chief piece to ensure that sister departments, and I must assume he's referring to where service delivery requests would come from, that they make funds available so that these services can be paid and we don't overburden the budget. That's on a quick eye view. That's what I can say.

>> Maybe maybe lastly on this, the as as you you are the overseer or the caretaker of the APSS in January and February?

>> That's correct, ma'am.

>> When this is being in cared, I would, and correct me if I'm wrong, I would I would expect that you would have been informed about this. You should have been informed about this problem of additional sites having been added and so many as he says in this email um, and the effect of it on the budget, that you would be informed before Deputy Commissioner is informed because you are the caretaker at that time, you're the person responsible for that function. Is that is that a fair uh assessment?

>> That would be a fair assessment. I believe I am copied in most of these communications from the onset. Um, but your assessment makes sense that because I was the caretaker, it happened under my watch to inform me to to determine if I know anything about it or what can I say about it. So that is a fair assessment.

>> Thank you. So you are now copied on this email. It's still early March. It doesn't seem like you did anything about it because in this email they're not just talking about the issue of ad hoc. They also mentioned that in the January month, 30 sites were added, in February six sites were added. I don't see anywhere where you say who authorized this. I never authorized this. How come I was not told about this?

>> Yes. Um, the emails of 12th March, there was a flurry of emails. By the time I saw the flurry of emails, it was already at a point where the chief has already given instruction to Deputy Chief SP to address the matter. We consulted one another, but verbally. I didn't respond to the email. It was it was overtaken already by events. So you wouldn't see any response from me in on the 12th March flurry of emails.

>> Yeah. But the instruction to speech is that ad hoc services must be cancelled.

>> Yes.

>> It does not talk to what was added in January and February and who added it and why, where did they get authority to do that, which is your issue. Spece's issue is cancel all ad hoc services.

>> Yes.

>> And he sends the email. They ask for an official letter. He sends it at the end of June. You are saying while you were the head of this division,

>> Exercising supervisory authority.

>> These two things happened in January. 30 sites that you know nothing of were added. In February, six sites that you know nothing of were added.

>> Correct.

>> You must account for what happened in the past, not what Spece is going to do going forward. How come you didn't say to those below you, I want a full report on this. Who authorized this? How did it happen? I mean, the fact that Spece only knows about the allocations, specifically the ones to GIS. He becomes aware when he sends the official letter in June,

>> And Gubies then shows him all these documents, that's later in the year. But you in March know that sites have been added and people who added them did not have authority and they did not consult you, but you don't seem to have taken that up with either Malaji or any of the people below him.

>> No, I have not. Um, at that period of time, as you know yourself, commissioners, I was not anymore the caretaker. Spece has taken over. So all the functionality of possible investigations, even even though it's invoices coming from the previous months, he looked into that. He gave evidence to that. I'm not sure if that is part of the investigation that was done. I believe so. And then later the information came out as to exactly what transpired. But I I I take your point. I understand.

>> My point is that it happened under the your watch, and you seem to have washed your hands and said, "Oh, because Peace is there now, he will deal with it. It's no longer my problem."

>> It's unfortunate that it seems that way, but I I hear your view.

>> Do you understand my question?

>> I understand, Commissioner.

>> Perhaps just to to add on that uh, Commissioner Bhazes, um, you did testify earlier on that you you prepared a hand over report to SPE. Would that report have included uh, this information about the allocation as per email by um, Commissioner Umashi Tamini?

>> No, it would not and it did not. Um, it it covered basically the information collected up to late February, towards end of February. But at that stage um, I didn't know about any of the ATO sites, so it's not part of the report. The report, I can't remember exactly when it was hand over handed over, I think it was the second week or third week of March, but it would have concluded with with the information that I had up to end of February only. New information that surfaced in March um would have been dealt with with um, Deputy Chief Space. I have to I have to just stress to the commissioners that we from the onset that Deputy Police Commissioner Piece was appointed, there was an ongoing consultative process between the Chief of Police, myself, and Deputy Chief Spee on an ongoing basis. Many many many uh cons uh consultative processes where we sat, spoke about things, looked at strategies, gave feedback, uh advised him where to look, what to do, uh as he was still new to the city. So it was not just a case where the chief or me or others just washed our hands and stood back. Um, I know it comes across that way, but um, it's it's definitely not the case.

>> Okay. Thank you. Perhaps I missed your your answer um as to the question. Why did you forward the request by the CFO Mr. Mesi to Mr. Lamini? I think I might have missed that.

>> For the simple reason that any financial matters must go through his division. So even though as the staff officer, I write certain documents with financial implications and it's signed off by the chief of police and maybe even checked, I'm using an example, maybe even checked by Deputy Police Commissioner Lamini. Um, when those documents are returned and when it must come into effect, the financial part of it, it will go to Deputy Chief Clamidi and to the finance office. So it had to go there.

>> And did you support the upliftment of the budget or the request for additional funding, if if the two concepts are not confused? Did you support that?

>> I supported the upliftment of funds for security services because as mentioned earlier in my testimony um, the the shortfalls every year on the budget process for security services was a common thing that we've experienced. So we we knew from the onset that we're going to have to ask for additional funds and ask for upliftment funds or go through the adjustment budget and and secure funds that way. So yes, I fully supported the upliftment of funds. I did not support and still do not support the asking for additional funds for ad hoc services because I've explained in detail a few times now that although in my stint there wasn't a written process, now there is a request must come from a department, there must be a process, everyone that's supposed to know should know, then a decision is made, then the money is allocated from wherever, whether it's from a client department or whether it's from our budget, etcetera, etcetera. So I don't support that and I still don't support it.

>> Thank you. Um, chair, we are done. The last paragraph. It's really up to Mr. piece uh, Commissioner Bles, um, to make any closing remarks um, over and above what is stated at is paragraph uh, 54 of the statement.

>> Thank you, commissioners. I would I I'm I'm grateful for the opportunity to make a closing remark. I think it's important that you know and understand my views of all of this. So I'm reading from my statement, paragraph 54. "I am appalled at the corruption taking place in the city of Tuan and for that matter at most municipalities and government departments. We are public servants and it is expected of us to be loyal, ethical and serve our people. I will continue to be a good and honest public servant. May God help me. May God help us all." Thank you.

>> Mr. Mosigiri, is that it from your side?

>> That's it, sir. Thank you.

>> Thank you, Deputy Chief. Thank you very much for?

>> Thank you, Commissioners.

>> You are excused. Um, let us adjourn and resume at 9:30 tomorrow.