Tshwane Metro tender favouritism and unpaid security services

The Madlanga commission explored numerous security contracts awarded to Ngaphesheya security services, a company owned by Sergeant Fannie Nkosi’s brother, Bheki Nkosi. 

Suspended Tshwane Metropolitan Police Department (TMPD) deputy chief Umashi Dhlamini was questioned about multiple tender documents he sent to Nkosi. Commissioners noted that Ngaphesheya was favoured in bid evaluation processes. 

“What is going on here? Why are you sending these documents to Sergeant Nkosi?” asked commissioner advocate Matthew Chaskalson.

The commission was presented with WhatsApp evidence of Dhlamini having sent multiple documents during the tender application and bid evaluation for the TMDP1 contract, amounting to R59 million and the TMPD2 contract, amounting to R2m. 

WhatsApp text shows Dhlamini sent Nkosi a clearance certificate during the application and a bid evaluation committee report while the contract was being decided. 

Dhlamini denied any favouritism and tender rigging  in favour of Ngaphesheya but said that because of their close friendship, he had opted not to get involved, instead referring Nkosi to a tender consultant, Nico Mathobela. 

“As I indicated, I received this information from Sergeant Nkosi to check. I then checked with Nico Mathobela, who forwarded screenshots to show he had these documents on his desk and that he had dealt with these matters,” he said.

Chaskalson presented a list of six issues identified in Ngaphesheya’s submission Mathobela sent to Dhlamini: the company was not certified with the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority; its director was graded at level B; it lacked a letter of good standing, a firearm licence and proof of a provident fund.

The city of Tshwane awarded Ngaphesaya a R59m security contract, said Chaskalson, whereas the company received a security licence in February 2025, while the tender had closed four months earlier in October 2024.

“I indicated earlier that I met Nkosi and took an interest in him in 1997 when he started working at the [SAPS]. He will sometimes ask me to intervene and assist.”

Dhlamini said Mathobela  had been assisting him with a range of issues and that forwarding the documents had been part of the routine, mutual business relationship. 

He added that he would regularly receive information to verify and pass on to Nkosi. Dhlamini was also questioned on why he had assisted Ngaphesheya to acquire a contract in Mpumalanga. 

“Is this a tender for a Mpumalanga municipality that Ngaphesheya is bidding for? What does this have to do with you?” Chaskalson asked.

“I did not play any role, I was relaying the information as I received it,” he said.

“But he and his brother have a series of pending bids with the city that you are aware of — TMPD1 and TMPD3, where Ngaphesheya is a bidder. Did you not think it was inappropriate for you to assist Ngaphesheya in another bid?” Chaskalson asked.

Dhlamini denied having favoured Ngaphesheya, saying he had recused himself from the Tshwane bid and delegated responsibilities.

Ngapheshaya was awarded TMPD1 for R59m and TMPD2 for R2m, both of which were  cancelled after irregularities were found. 

“I did not personally assist. I have the capacity and skills to do so but I did not at this stage,” he said.

“Yes but you are acting as the conduit between Ngephesheya and Nico,” Chaskalson said.

“I’m not a conduit. I have indicated that I have a long-standing relationship with Sergeant Nkosi,” Dhlamini replied.

“When Sergeant Nkosi wants Nico to do something in relation to Ngaphesheya, he asks you. When Nico wants documents to go back to Sergeant Nkosi and Bheki, he gives them to you,” Chaskalson said.

Dhlamini said he would intervene on the “odd occasion” when there were misunderstandings. Under pressure from commissioner Mbuyiseni Madlanga, he conceded that he had passed information onto Nkosi but denied acting as a conduit in any tender irregularities.

The commission questioned Dhlamini regarding unpaid invoices for security services involving Tshwane Chief Financial Officer Gareth Mnisi. The controversy surrounds contract renewal for existing security companies and a list of new companies compiled by Nkosi and sent to Mnisi and Dhlamini.

Mnisi previously told the commission that he had been with Nkosi when he had received a phone call from a director of Gubis85 Security Service who was threatening legal action for unpaid invoices. Nkosi had acted as a middleman between Dhlamini and Mnisi to resolve the non-payment issue and avoid going to court. 

“On the 4th of March, I received a call from Sergeant Nkosi, who was with the CFO and the CFO spoke to me about outstanding payments that were owed to three service providers for a period of six months or so. He requested my intervention to go and investigate and assist in ensuring that we sort out the matter,” said Dhlamini.

He said the next day, he had confirmed with his office about the outstanding payments and had to resolve it immediately. 

“How can you find yourself in a situation where there are a whole lot of invoices that were issued and have not been paid and for which it seems there are no purchase orders?” asked Chaskalson. 

Dhlamini said that had been an oversight, which his office had picked up later. He said he had to intervene in that instance as Mnisi had indicated the service provider was threatening to go to court.

“There’s no dispute that services were rendered and companies need to be paid to prevent the city’s account from being attached. That’s where my intervention came in,” said Dhlamini.

He said Mnisi had decided to involve Nkosi as his proxy and that the CFO would be better positioned to give reasons for  why the companies were not paid. 

Chaskalson asked Dhlamini about the R5m security invoices for July 2024 where a purchase order requesting security services was never generated. Dhlamini said the request for security services came from Asset Protection and Security Services head Tshukudu Malatji. 

“No one was held accountable, it was the thing of passing the buck. 

“Much as I indicated we have quarterly coaching where these issues would have been dealt with,” said Dhlamini. 

“But in this case there was no management of consequences. Nobody was held to account for sitting on invoices for six months,” said Chaskalson. 

“In this instance there was none that was taken,” said Dhlamini.