Unisa deputy vice-principal faces discipline over dubious R1m contract decision

An investigation carried out by the Public Protector investigation team has revealed that the University of South Africa’s Vice-Principal: Operations and Facilities, Matsiababa Motebele, acted improperly by both initiating and approving his own memorandum for appointing Johannes Peu Matlala, a retired Unisa employee (who reached age 65 in March 2023), to be reappointed on a one-year fixed-term contract as Manager: Physical Security Gauteng, Protection Services with a salary close to R1-million annually, short of the R1.4-million he was earning before retirement.

The Public Protector, Advocate Kholeka Gcaleka, confirmed the severity of the breach.

“The allegation that Matlala was irregularly appointed on a fixed-term contract to the position of Manager: Physical Security Gauteng, Protection Services, is substantiated,” the report stated.

This revelation originates from a complaint lodged on 23 May 2024 by Advocate Anton Alberts, a member of the Freedom Front Plus (FF Plus), on behalf of a whistleblower who sought protection and advice during the investigative process.

What happened?

In early January 2024, Unisa appointed Matlala on a fixed-term contract for one year after he had already reached the mandatory retirement age. The investigation found that this appointment breached several of Unisa’s internal policies and its Conditions of Employment. Specifically, Section H.2 of Unisa’s Conditions of Employment states that contracts “will not be extended beyond the age 65”. Having reached this age in March 2023, Matlala was no longer eligible for such a contract.

According to the investigation, Motebele acted as both the initiator and the sole approver of the contract, effectively bypassing standard checks and balances. The report highlighted that this dual role contravenes Section 195(1)(a) and (b) of the Constitution regarding professional ethics and impartial public administration, as well as Clause 10.8 of the Unisa Delegations of Authority.

“Mr Motebele failed to promote and maintain a high standard of professional ethics, accountability and transparency as required by section 195(1)(a)(f) and (g) of the Constitution during the fixed-term appointment of Mr Matlala... Accordingly, the conduct of Mr Motebele in this regard constitutes improper conduct as envisaged in section 182(1)(a) of the Constitution and maladministration,” said Gcaleka in the report.

Even Unisa’s own HR department admitted in the investigation that having the requester and approver be the same person was a “potential governance risk”.

The investigation further revealed a litany of administrative oversights. The application form for the contract remained unsigned by Matlala and failed to list any of his qualifications. Furthermore, the university failed to confirm whether a permanent employee was available to perform the duties before hiring an external contractor, a mandatory step under university prescripts. No other signatories recommended or approved the memorandum – just Motebele.

Motebele defends appointment

When questioned by investigators regarding his authority to unilaterally approve the contract, Motebele defended his actions by citing urgent operational needs.

“Due to the threat posed by Construction Mafias at the Sunnyside Campus and the fact that there were no P6 Managers at the time in Sunnyside and due to capacity challenges, Matlala was therefore given the contract to ensure that the risk of prevention of damage to property outweighed the procedural considerations,” Motebele argued. The resulting contract provided Matlala with an annual salary of R986,226, following his pre-retirement earnings of approximately R1.4-million.

Public Protector gives order

Following these findings, Advocate Gcaleka has ordered Vice-Chancellor Professor Puleng LenkaBula to take appropriate corrective action against Motebele within 60 days for his non-compliance with institutional prescripts. Additionally, the University must submit a formal action plan to the Public Protector within 30 calendar days detailing the implementation of these remedial measures.

Alberts told Daily Maverick that he welcomed the report.

“I do think that the Public Protector performed well during this investigation, and they deserve to be congratulated. They acted without fear and favour in terms of their recommendations, ensuring appropriate action by Unisa in the circumstances,” Alberts said.

He added: “Whenever appointments take place, it must be performed to ensure the ability of the state to deliver services as per the standards required by the Constitution. This means the persons who qualify for any position must be the ones considered for appointment, and that any open position does not provide an opportunity for non-suitable persons to be appointed on a political basis.”

LenkaBula has accepted the findings, admitting the institution failed to adhere to its own rules.

“The university notes and accepts the findings of the Public Protector... The university acknowledges that the approval process in this instance did not fully comply with the applicable governance framework and accepts the finding that the provisions of the Delegations of Authority were not adhered to in their entirety,” she stated.

Daily Maverick sent questions to LenkaBula to understand whether the action against Motebele had been taken. No response has yet been received. However, Unisa spokesperson Professor BB Senokoane said the university was still studying the report and would apply its discretion after studying the contents.

Daily Maverick also reached out to Motebele for comment, but no response had been received by the time of publication. DM.