The City of Johannesburg is under fire for a number of acting senior appointments in its administration.
Image: Unsplash
Gauteng Co-operative Governance, Traditional Affairs and Infrastructure Development MEC Jacob Mamabolo has promised to respond to claims by the DA that the City of Johannesburg's provincial government has not addressed the DA's concerns regarding claims that Joburg's senior official appointments flouted legal prescripts in hiring several acting senior officials.
DA Johannesburg caucus leader Belinda Kayser-Echeozonjoku wrote to the municipality demanding that they explain the acting appointment of Group Head of Communication and Marketing Peter Monyuku, who, according to the DA, was initially appointed to this acting position in July last year.
Acting City Manager Tshepo Makola was initially appointed to the position in December, while Andries Mucavele has been acting since August as head of the Department of Public Safety. In the Social Development Department, Dr Tinashe Mushayanyama was initially appointed to this acting position in November.
According to correspondence from the DA, Oupa Nkoane was initially appointed as acting executive director responsible for Human Settlements. Johannesburg Property Company boss Helen Botes became acting chief operations officer in January, and Siyabonga Nodu is acting as executive head in Makola’s office.
Mamabolo said he referred the DA’s letter sent earlier this month to the municipality.
“Please be advised that I once again hereby affirm my undertaking to make a determination on the city’s applications within the 14-day period as expressly embedded in my letter of May 16, 2025,” the MEC explained.
According to the DA, there are four additional reasons why Mamabolo cannot approve the extension of the contracts.
“First, in the cases of Mr Monyuku (2 May 2025) and Dr Mushayanyama (2 May 2025), the city is seeking approval for an extension that dates back to a previous appointment. The MEC is not empowered to extend an acting position at all after the expiry of an acting stint. But he is certainly not empowered to extend an acting stint three months after the acting stint ends, such as to 'retrospectively' extend an acting stint,” the DA complained.
Additionally, in the cases of Monyuku and Mucavele, they were appointed to act towards the middle of 2024, but the city asked for their extensions.
“The only implication is that the city previously extended these persons’ acting stints … The city has no power to do so. Moreover, the MEC is limited to extending an acting stint by three months only. In turn, the MEC cannot extend an unlawfully extended acting stint, and he cannot extend an acting stint to a date beyond three months from when the person was first appointed to act,” the DA insisted.
The party added that the council passed the resolution without considering or never mind endorsing any “special circumstances” or “good cause” warranting an application to the MEC for an extension.
“There are no such special circumstances. These positions have been vacant for many months. The city must fill them, or the MEC must take steps to fill them.
“The city has no good reason to request an extension of the above acting stints,” the DA explained.
loyiso.sidimba@inl.co.za