Johannesburg Mayor Mpho Phalatse during a press conference held at the DA offices in Bruma, 10 October 2022. Picture: Neil McCartney / The Citizen
Joburg mayor Mpho Phalatse may land up in hot water despite a measure of back-pedalling and fact ironing yesterday.
It came to light she had instructed the appointment of a specific service provider this year, but did so “erroneously”.
Mayors are not permitted to commission service providers. The appointment of contractors is up to the administration.
A letter from Phalatse to acting Joburg city manager Tehan Ehlers on 6 May explicitly instructed him to appoint forensic investigators Nexus as independent investigators into alleged misconduct by former acting city manager Floyd Brink.
This came after an initial ENS investigation found instances of noncompliance to procurement processes with the procurement of CCTV systems and other public safety apparatus.
Phalatse said at the time that the council had authorised her to appoint an investigating firm.
Her initial instruction to Ehlers quoted a council resolution: “[Council] Authorises the executive mayor to ensure the initial instruction, at an independent investigator be appointed to investigate the allegations of misconduct against the acting city manager [Mr F Brink], uncovered in the ENS investigation into noncompliance with procurement processes for portable hand-held communication devices and CCTV equipment for the public safety department.”
And while Phalatse retracted the letter seven days after first sending it to Ehlers, she probably should have fact-checked the law before sending it in the first place. She wrote: “The letter (6 May) was based on an erroneous interpretation of the council resolution that ‘authorised’ the executive mayor ‘to ensure that an independent investigator be appointed’.”
In the 13 May letter, Phalatse also admitted that she may be “overreaching” and advised the city manager that he should appoint any provider he wished.
In her statement yesterday, Phalatse’s spokesperson maintained: “It was the mayor’s view that the independence of the investigation could best be achieved by another organ of state, namely the SIU.
“They have been more effective at combating corruption at the city. However, they could not work without a presidential proclamation.”
The statement also noted: “Upon further consultation it was agreed that it was for the administration to roll out the process, with the executive mayor playing an oversight role.”
A senior DA provincial representative suggested to Saturday Citizen that Phalatse may not have been familiar with the Municipal Finance Act, given her background in healthcare, not politics.
What is concerning is that Phalatse referred to the previous use of Nexus’ forensic services by the council via a law firm, MJS Attorneys.
The firm is on an approved panel of service providers, but it raises questions about whether or not Nexus was an approved supplier at the time.
The question should be asked whether their appointment would have had to circumnavigate potential procurement stumbling blocks by appointing Nexus through an already approved third party like a law firm.
Phalatse’s spokesperson said: “The mayor had been advised that Nexus is used routinely by the SIU. She was also advised that they had been used by the city, via MJS attorneys, who are on the city’s panel. The legal panel has long been suspected as being infiltrated with firms that act in league with corrupt officials.”
ALSO READ: City of Joburg drama far from over as Mpho Phalatse faces another no confidence motion
Download our app and read this and other great stories on the move. Available for Android and iOS.
