Since his suspension in May, the Makana Municipality's Chief Financial Officer is still in limbo. Questions arose last month about the motivation for his suspension. Now, as time drags on, the municipality appears to be flouting disciplinary procedures laid down in law, and the legitimacy of the move is now in question. Prudence Mini reports.
Since his suspension in May, the Makana Municipality's Chief Financial Officer is still in limbo. Questions arose last month about the motivation for his suspension. Now, as time drags on, the municipality appears to be flouting disciplinary procedures laid down in law, and the legitimacy of the move is now in question. Prudence Mini reports.
“I was whisked away from the buildings of Makana like I was a thief,” was the reaction of Chief Financial Officer Jackson Ngcelwane two months ago when he was removed from the City Hall as a "precautionary measure". The problem for Ngcelwane is that it's not even clear what action or omission he's meant to be defending, because no formal report on the matter has been tabled to Council, and there have been no formal disciplinary proceedings.
Municipal Manager Ntombi Baart announced the suspension in May and Executive Mayor Zamuxolo Peter said at the first meeting of the new Council that he needed a report on the suspension of its key employee. Instead of a report, however, at a special council meeting on Tuesday 28 June, Peter said Baart had briefed him on the matter after a preliminary investigation through reports and information from the CFO.
Baart had convinced Peter, he said, that there was “reasonable suspicion that the CFO had avoided or neglected to follow prescribed procedures in relation to the appointment of various service providers”.
Peter concluded, “I should be the first person to defend the actions of the Municipal Manager and provide leadership to my fellow councillors.” However, Grocott's Mail's examination of disciplinary regulations for Senior Managers in local government shows various anomalies.
The regulation (Gazette no. 34213) was passed into law by the acting Minister for Local Government, Nathi Mthethwa, a month before Ngcelwane's suspension, in April 2011.
According to the new regulations, the steps that should have been taken are as follows (Grocott's Mail has paraphrased paragraphs 5 and 6):
1. Within seven days of being informed of alleged misconduct by a senior manager, the Mayor or Municipal Manager must either table a report to Council, or ask the Speaker to convene a special Council meeting to consider the report.
2. Within seven days of being convinced that there's reasonable cause to believe the senior manager did something wrong, Council must appoint an independent investigator to investigate the allegations.
3. Within seven days of being told by the independent investigator that there's no proper evidence to support the allegations, Council must dismiss the allegations of misconduct. Or…
4. Alternatively, within 30 days of proper evidence being tabled to Council, the independent investigator must give Council a written report that includes recommendations.
The Council must consider the report and “must by way of a resolution institute disciplinary proceedings against the senior manager”. In other words, by law, Ngcelwane should know within 41 days what the allegations are against him, and what his position is – whether he has a charge to defend.
But today marks the 49th day after Grocott's Mail first published the news of Ngcelwane's suspension and, according to the information available to us (and the public) at this point, Council has not yet complied with step one (the report).
According to the regulations, there is provision made for the "precautionary suspension" of a senior manager. According to the law, if Council has reason to believe the presence of a senior manager at the workplace may jeopardise any investigation into their alleged misconduct, they may be suspended on full pay. But this paragraph stipulates that before this can be done, the senior manager has seven days in which to make representation as to why they should not be suspended.
According to information at our disposal, this was not done; hence Ngcelwane's reference to being "whisked away from the buildings of Makana like I was a thief".
In our 14 June edition, Grocott's Mail reported on concerns about Ngcelwane's suspension, with a source suggesting it might be linked to comments tabled in Council in March, in which the CFO expressed concern about payments to the Umbumbano Development Academy, a company Makana was paying to run soccer-coaching and training clinics.
