Leaked report reveals irregularities at 317 Currie Road development

ETHEKWINI Municipality faces allegations of suppressing a 36-page report, completed in December 2015 by the City Integrity and Investigative Unit (CIIU) on alleged irregularities surrounding the development at 317 Currie Road.

This building was the object of a Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) matter in which a Durban High Court order requiring the demolition of the building was overturned. The appeal was granted in in May 2017.

Noseweek broke the news of the reportedly suppressed report last week.

The report had been signed off by Mbuso Ngcobo, head of the CIIU and the City refused to make it public despite being requested to do so in terms of the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA).

The report was leaked to the media and is in possession of Berea Mail.

It reveals that, at the time of SCA proceedings, the municipality was fully aware that at least six senior employees who contributed to approving the development had been investigated and found guilty of dereliction of duty and failing to perform their in-office functions.

The CIIU investigation was sparked by a complaint from Advocate Tayob ‘Pops’ Aboobaker.

He alleged the municipality failed to follow procedures and policies when they approved the development.

It was Aboobaker who submitted a PAIA application for the report in 2018, however this was turned down.

The report revealed that:

• The demolition of the original house was irregular in that the house was older than 60 years when the applicant lodged the demolition application in December 2008. The applicant should also have applied to the province’s heritage foundation, Amafa for permission to demolish the building before submitting an application for demolition to the municipality.

• The application was not properly processed through the Joint Advisory Committee (JAC), a body designed by the municipality to achieve consistency and quality in approving plans.

• The rezoning of 317 Currie Road from General Residential 1 to General Residential 5 was irregular as incorrect legislation was used – the Planning Development Act was used instead of the relevant Town Planning Ordinance. As a result, not all owners and occupiers of land located within 100 metres of the property were notified of the rezoning.

• The required notices were not served on nearby residents for the rezoning application.

ALSO READ: The ongoing saga of 317 Currie Road 

The report named the officials found to have violated the Code of Conduct for Municipal Staff Members and recommended that they be charged. Three officials named in the report no longer work for the city.

Noseweek claimed that the City could find itself in a compromised position if allegations that it misled the SCA are found to be true.

Berea Mail approached an independent attorney for comment who agreed that if an individual misleads a court it could lead to a decision being overturned.

“ If – hypothetically speaking – someone misleads a court, they could even be charged with perjury,” she said.

In response to queries by Noseweek to eThekwini Municipality, city spokesperson Msawakhe Mayisela stated that the municipality never sought to appeal against a finding declaring the approval process illegal.

He claimed that the media misunderstood the issue and that the appeal was against the ordered demolition of the construction at 317 Currie Road.

He further held that the City had no duty to disclose the report to the SCA or the public as “it was immaterial to the issues that were before the SCA.”

He said CIIU reports were meant to be internal control documents issued to relevant stakeholders within the municipality, and matters between the municipality and its employees were treated confidentially.

ALSO READ: War on town planning issues not over, say civic activists

Commenting on the findings of the report, Aboobaker said he felt the contents of the report exposed the machinations of town planning officials and the complicity of the municipality in suppressing the contents of the report.

Aboobaker was of the view that the report, had it been made public at the time of the SCA hearing, may have made a material difference to the outcome of the case.

“The municipality as an arm of government was duty bound to release the contents of the report to the public. It appears that the municipality was complicit in concealing conduct indicative of corruption within the town planning department of the municipality. The corruption appears to be deeply embedded and a number of individuals appear to be involved.” He said that the suggestion that the report was supposed to be an ‘internal control document’ misled the public. How can it ever be that if I am the complainant the results of the investigations are not released to me?”

He said the municipality had submitted to the SCA that the irregularities leading to the initial demolition order were of a ‘far lower order of severity’ and that there was ‘no evidence that the municipality had acted in a biased or fraudulent manner.’ During the court proceedings, it was also submitted on behalf of the municipality that there was no evidence of ‘bad faith fraud or corruption’ on the part of their municipal officials.

“Given the incriminating contents of the CIIU report these submissions were clearly not correct and I find it amazing that Mr Mayisela can say that there was no duty of disclosure of the report to the SCA. Government officials are constitutionally bound in carrying out their duties to observe the rule of law and to promote the spirit, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights. Democratic values embedded in the constitution of impartiality, acting fairly, equitably and without bias should always be the benchmark which directs the activities of municipal officials. In this case the municipal officials have done exactly the opposite. The law must take its course and those responsible must be held to account civilly and criminally,” he said.

Save Our Berea’s Kevin Dunkley and Cheryl Johnson said they were astonished by the municipality’s spokesperson stating on record that the City had ‘no duty to disclose this integrity report to the SCA.’

“Either he is unaware of the law or he is being downright disingenuous. One of the officials named and blamed in the report is equally astonished to find himself portrayed as the villain of the piece. He vehemently denies all culpability and claims he was never approached by the Integrity Unit to put forward his version of events. The question on everyone’s lips is why this report was suppressed – presumably deliberately so. If the report had been submitted as evidence in the Appeals Court, the outcome most likely would have been the opposite. In light of this new vital evidence, we believe the next step is to get the Appeal Court ruling overturned. We also believe the municipality owes the ratepayers an explanation as to why it decided not to act more harshly on the recommendations of its own Integrity Unit to censure the officials concerned.”

Do you want to receive news alerts via WhatsApp? Send us a WhatsApp message (not an sms) with your name and surname to 060 532 5535.

You can also join the conversation on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

PLEASE NOTE: If you have signed up for our news alerts you need to save the Berea Mail WhatsApp number as a contact to your phone, otherwise you will not receive our alerts