Public Protector clears Lekgetho’s SIU appointment after qualification complaint - IOL

Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka has found no irregularities in the appointment of Leonard Lekgetho as Chief Operations Officer of the Special Investigating Unit following a complaint about his qualifications.

The Public Protector has found no irregularities in the recruitment and selection process that led to Leonard Lekgetho’s appointment as chief operating officer (COO) of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU).

Lekgetho, who served as the SIU’s COO and acting head, was appointed by President Cyril Ramaphosa as the unit’s permanent head with effect from September 1, 2026.

Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka released the finding on Thursday as part of her second-quarter investigation reports covering July to September 2026.

The investigation followed a complaint lodged by Pranesh Maharaj in July 2024, who had been shortlisted for the position.

Maharaj alleged that Lekgetho did not meet the advertised minimum requirement of a relevant postgraduate qualification in management or an equivalent qualification.

He also questioned additional assessments introduced after the interviews, saying candidates had not been informed in the advertisement that the recruitment process would include further stages.

On March 7, 2024, Maharaj was informed that he had been unsuccessful and that Lekgetho had been appointed.

The appointment was announced by Advocate Andy Mothibi, the former Head and CEO of the SIU, who stated that Lekgetho held an LLB, BA Education degree, BSc Honours in Geographical Information Systems, postgraduate diploma in Cyber Law and diploma in Criminal Justice and Forensic Audit.

Maharaj subsequently raised concerns that Lekgetho did not have the relevant postgraduate qualification in management required by the advertisement.

However, the Public Protector found that the requirement expressly allowed for an equivalent qualification and that this provision was applied consistently during the shortlisting process.

The investigation also found that the additional assessments were consistent with the SIU’s recruitment policies and were aimed at assessing candidates’ skills, experience and suitability for the position.

“The SIU’s decision to appoint Mr Lekgetho was lawful, rational, procedurally fair, and properly exercised within the discretion conferred by law and policy,” Gcaleka said.

The Public Protector found that the conduct of SIU officials did not amount to improper conduct or maladministration and considered the matter finalised.

In a separate investigation, the Public Protector found that approximately R46 million spent on two feasibility studies for the long-delayed Moloto Rail Corridor Development Project was not fruitless or wasteful.

The investigation followed a complaint lodged in October 2020 by Sam Masango on behalf of Moloto Corridor Concerned Residents, who raised concerns about delays in implementing the rail project, the expansion of Moloto Road and expenditure on feasibility studies.

The first feasibility study, commissioned in 2007, cost R30,021,033.24 and assessed a fully government-funded rail solution. It found the option financially unviable.

A second study was commissioned in 2012 at a cost of R16,019,148 after the project was restructured as a public-private partnership.

The Public Protector found that the second study was not a duplication because the change in the funding and implementation model required a reassessment.

“Both studies were procedurally compliant with the PFMA, Treasury Regulations, and the Infrastructure Delivery Management System (IDMS) and Framework for Infrastructure Delivery and Procurement Management (FIDPM),” Gcaleka said.

She said the combined expenditure of about R46 million was not fruitless or wasteful because each study served a distinct purpose under different funding models.

Despite this finding, the rail project has still not progressed beyond the feasibility stage and its funding has not been secured.

The report found that the project was not implemented because of affordability constraints and National Treasury’s refusal of Treasury Approval 1, based on insufficient economic justification and value-for-money concerns.

“The MRCDP has been declared a long-term project, with its funding not yet secured,” Gcaleka said.

The Public Protector noted that National Treasury later identified gaps in aspects of the feasibility studies.

The investigation also found that the second study informed a decision to prioritise road upgrades, which the Public Protector said had substantially improved the Moloto Corridor.

The Public Protector said its intervention had helped resolve a stand-off between the complainants and the Presidency and Transport Ministry over their memorandum to President Cyril Ramaphosa.

The complainants subsequently vacated the Union Buildings, while the Public Protector facilitated round-table meetings between them and state role players.

The office said the establishment of the MTDC Steering Committee to explore options to revive the rail project resulted from its intervention.

The Department of Transport was recommended to ensure that the steering committee meets annually to develop an integrated project plan and minimise delays in securing funding.

The department must also table the committee’s resolutions at meetings between the Ministers of Transport and Finance and submit annual progress reports to Parliament.

SANRAL was directed to provide progress reports and a final report on the Moloto Road Project from September 30, 2026.

The Public Protector also recommended that government consider using available state technical and professional expertise, including institutions of higher learning, during the early stages of infrastructure projects before procuring such services externally.

The Public Protector also found no irregularities in the appointment of Lee-Anne Meiring as Director of Community Safety and Mobility at George Municipality.

The complaint, lodged in December 2025 by SACP Southern Cape member Langa Langa, questioned whether Meiring met the requirements for the position and raised concerns about her previous acting appointment.

The investigation found that the post was properly advertised and that shortlisted candidates underwent screening, interviews and competency assessments.

Meiring’s MBA, at NQF Level 9, and Bachelor of Laws degree were verified during the screening process and confirmed by SAQA. Her management experience also met the requirements.

Gcaleka found that the appointment complied with the applicable legislation and regulations.

“The decision to appoint Ms Meiring was lawful, rational, procedurally fair and properly exercised within the discretion conferred by the applicable legal prescripts,” she said.

The complaint was not substantiated and the matter was considered finalised.