The Makhado Municipality has downplayed rumours that growing tension between the municipal manager (MM), Mr Sakkie Mutshinyali, and municipal officials and SAMWU (South African Municipal Workers Union) is “forcing” Mutshinyali out of his office.

The source of this growing tension allegedly relates to Mutshinyali's appointing a private company (Tripple Hawks Auditors & Forensic Audit from Polokwane) in October last year to investigate allegations about corruption within the municipality’s finance department regarding expenditure, as well as the appointment of a private security company (VIP Protection Service Provider) in May this year to protect Mutshinyali. In both cases, it is argued, the appointment of these two companies took place without the council’s knowledge, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of rands to the municipality and the taxpayer.

More than once this year, rumours surfaced that Mutshinyali had been suspended because of his actions. In all instances the municipality, by means of its spokesperson Mr Louis Bobodi, denied these claims. At the beginning of June this year, rumours again surfaced that Mutshinyali had been suspended. “The municipal manager is not suspended. He is on vacation leave. He will be back on Monday, June 8,” was Bobodi’s response to a media enquiry sent through on 2 June.

More and more rumours surfaced, however, that Mutshinyali had not asked to take leave but had been put on leave by Mayor David Mutavhatsindi. This, apparently, followed pressure from municipal officials and SAMWU to suspend Mutshinyali, but as Mutshinyali is not a political appointment, the mayor does not have the authority to suspend him.

Another rumour that made its way to the Zoutpansberger was that Mutshinyali’s "protection team" was allegedly costing the municipality and taxpayers R137 000 every two weeks. This after two alleged failed attempts on Mutshinyali’s life in February and March this year. TheZoutpansberger reported on both attacks and, at that stage, it was widely speculated that the alleged attempts on Mutshinyali’s life were related to the private investigation he had launched in October as mentioned above. Following these attacks, VIP Protection Service was appointed to protect Mutshinyali. As far as the Zoutpansberger could determine, VIP Protection Service was appointed by Mayor Mutavhatsindi, without Council’s approval. This also sparked outrage as many wanted to know whether the alleged attacks on Mutshinyali were indeed work-related and would warrant the appointment of a private security company at the expense of the taxpayer.

The Makhado Municipality was asked to give clarity on these rumours and allegations in a detailed media enquiry send through on 15 June. Among the questions asked was whether Mutshinyali had indeed taken voluntary leave or whether he had been placed on forced leave by the mayor; whether the municipality was indeed paying VIP Protection R137 000 every two weeks for Mutshinyali’s protection; if the amount above was incorrect, what amount the municipality had already spent on Mutshinyali’s protection; whether or not the municipality was able to determine that the “attacks” on Mutshinyali’s life were indeed work-related; and whether the appointment of VIP Protection Service had served before Council for approval?

The Zoutpansberger eventually received a one-paragraph response from Bobodi regarding the above questions on 30 June. “No. The MM [municipal manager] took a vacation leave as stated before,” was Bobodi’s response to the question whether Mutshinyali had taken voluntary leave or been forced to take leave. Regarding the moneys paid to VIP Protection Service, Bobodi stated: “The exact and total amount is R300 000  based on progress of investigation and security needs, which was effected in May 2015 and no other payment was ever made.” As for whether the municipality could determine if the attacks on Mutshinyali had been work-related, Bobodi said: “It is a matter that is being investigated and any employee’s life is of vital importance to the municipality.” With regard to whether the appointment of VIP Protection Service was approved by Council, Bobodi’s answer was “It was served before the Council and approved after the appointment due to its urgency.”

It would seem, however, that the meddlesome “questions” regarding the appointment of VIP Protection Service had ruffled a few feathers in Council and that Bobodi had been a bit economical with the truth. Although it is true that Council approved the appointment of VIP Protection Service, Bobodi failed to indicate that this was only done on 18 June during a special council meeting. The meeting was called 24 hours before, following the public holiday on 16 June and their receiving the media enquiry from the Zoutpansberger on 15 June.

The special council meeting left several councillors outraged, especially opposition DA councillors Brian du Plooy, Mpashe Masilo and Albert Mafhala. Their objection to approving the appointment of VIP Protection Service was not noted by Council. “The Speaker overlooked us,” they said. They called for an external investigation into the matter.

There was only one item on the agenda for the Special Council meeting, Item A.88.18.06.15 PROTECTION OF THE MUNICIPAL MANAGER AND THE MAYOR: THREAT TO LIFE INCIDENTS. When this item was considered by the executive committee (EXCO), Mutavhatsindi (as chairperson of the EXCO) and Mutshinyali recused themselves from the meeting. Council then resolved to, as per the recommendation of the EXCO:

1) That note be taken of the report about emergency protection services that had to be arranged for Council’s municipal manager and mayor during March 2015 when his life was threatened due to a casual nexus with his duties as accounting officer;

2) That the action of the mayor to authorise that reputable VIP Protection Service Provider be sourced, be ratified, in view of the special circumstances of the case as recorded in the report with a total cost of R300 900;

3) That it be noted that the procurement of protection services under section 36 of the Supply Chain Management Regulations was reported under separate cover along with other deviations for quarter 3 of 2015/2016; and

4) That a policy on protection and security of officials and councillors be developed.

(The 15 June media enquiry was two-fold. The first part related to the above article. The second part of the questions related to the appointment of Tripple Hawks Auditors & Forensic Audit and the progress made in their investigation into allegations of corruption in the municipality’s finance department. See the accompanying article in this regard).