R32bn tender storm: senior RMA official evaluated bid while linked to bidding firm - TimesLIVE

An executive head of investments at Rand Mutual Assurance (RMA) knowingly participated in the assessment and evaluation of bids for a R32bn asset consultancy tender while serving on the investment committee of one of the bidding firms.

According to internal forensic findings by Edward Nathan Sonnenbergs (ENS), Thiru Pather, actively participated in RMA’s tender evaluation team at the start of October 2024, nearly four weeks before her formal resignation from bidder, 27four Investment Managers on October 31 2024.

During this overlap, confidential procurement documents, including candidate shortlists and scoring criteria, were transmitted to her personal email address without a signed non-disclosure agreement, the investigation found.

When confronted by ENS forensic investigators, Pather defended her conduct, asserting that she never felt conflicted. “I have always been able to be objective on things ... Anyone at any point could have said ‘recuse yourself’ from the discussion, and nobody said that,” Pather is quoted as having said to investigators.

She further argued to ENS investigators that RMA lacked internal investment expertise, stating that if anyone else could have conducted the assessment, she would have “volunteered it”.

Addressing evidence that she unilaterally altered scoring to favour 27four over objections from procurement officials, Pather claimed she merely “corrected formula errors”.

RMA is a mutual insurer licensed under Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act (Coida) to administer medical costs, disability payments, and pensions for workplace injuries or diseases in South Africa’s mining and metals industry.

27four is a black-owned asset management firm with over R2-trillion in assets under advice. The company competed against shortlisted bidders Alexander Forbes, Novare Holdings and Selekane Asset Consultants.

The forensic report also revealed that the entire 18-month procurement process lacked authority, as RMA’s investment committee launched the tender in mid-2024 following a verbal update to the board in March 2024, but without a board resolution to go ahead.

Although 27Four was selected as the winning bidder to be awarded a three-year contract in November 2024, the tender process was halted last November, before contract signing, by RMA’s executive committee, which cited whistleblower reports from early 2025 around irregular processes.

Despite the damning forensic findings from ENS’s draft report, and warnings from legal experts, RMA’s board has failed to enforce accountability, and the final report from ENS has been withheld from senior management and shareholders for over a year.

Pather formally declared her prior relationship (with 27Four) to RMA’s investment committee in November 2024, however, RMA’s company secretary did not issue a conflict assessment until February 2025. This was more than three months after the RMA’s investment committee had already approved the award of a three-year private markets consultancy mandate to 27four.

The assessment evaluated only “actual” conflicts, ignoring potential or perceived conflicts and omitting any requirement for recusal, the investigation flagged.

Pather’s initial recruitment was equally controversial.

If the investigation is stalled, or not properly pursued ... senior management will likely be obliged to then make a report in terms of Precca … and involve the Prudential Authority.

RMA’s executive in charge of investments and strategy, Ash Desai, confirmed to investigators that Pather’s CV was provided directly by investment committee chair Koketso Mabe, who previously mentored Pather at the Public Investment Corporation (PIC).

RMA chief executive Mandla Shezi told investigators that Mabe routinely forwarded candidate CVs to management, something “most executives did not agree with”, he added. RMA conducted no open-market recruitment for the position.

Desai acknowledged to investigators that Mabe explicitly instructed management during a pre-investment committee briefing to carve out a private markets mandate specifically for 27four. Desai also confirmed engaging in direct scope and fee talks with 27four leadership in early 2025 while the broader competitive tender was formally paused.

27Four said on Wednesday: “27four investment managers can confirm that it took part in Rand Mutual Assurance’s request for proposal for investment consultancy (asset consulting) services, which was reopened in September 2025. We made a full submission in October 2025 and were later invited to present to RMA’s management team and its investment committee. Since then we have followed up with RMA about the status of the appointment. Apart from being told in May 2026 that the process had been delayed, we have not been told the outcome.”

Despite Pather’s assertions, investigators concluded that she “participated in the procurement process whilst actively conflicted” and breached her fiduciary duties.

ENS also found that Pather demonstrated an “apparent predetermined preference for 27four”, noting that a voluntary declaration without recusal is “materially inadequate” when she actively directed the evaluation, altered competitor scores and edited draft committee minutes to weaken competitors’ comparative standing.

When RMA’s executive committee resolved last November to stop the tender due to operational and risk constraints, Mabe intervened, investigators found.

Within an hour of the exco memorandum being uploaded to RMA’s internal public portal on November 27, Mabe allegedly directed its immediate removal, instructing committee members to ignore management’s objections and asserting that the tender was a “board resolution”, a move described as a “serious governance breach” by ENS teams.

While the board commissioned Corporate Insights, and subsequently ENS to investigate, it has since allegedly refused to act on the findings or share the final reports with executive management.

This prompted senior management to seek an independent legal opinion from senior counsel Anton Myburgh and Joshua Davis in July. The legal opinion warned that while executives are not at present obligated to report board members externally while an investigation is pending, continued stalling by the board would trigger mandatory legal duties.

“If the investigation is stalled, or not properly pursued ... senior management will likely be obliged to then make a report in terms of Precca (Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act 12 of 2004) … and involve the Prudential Authority,” the opinion said.

On Wednesday afternoon RMA board member Tjaart Esterhuyse said the company takes governance allegations seriously, but declined to comment on specific findings.

“RMA takes allegations of misconduct and corporate governance concerns extremely seriously and is committed to the highest standards of ethical conduct.”

“The whistleblower report is being handled in accordance with relevant company policies and governance processes.

“To ensure procedural fairness, confidentiality, and respect for all parties’ rights, neither RMA nor any party will comment on specific allegations before facts are established,” he added.

RMA board chairman Thabo Dloti, Mabe, Desai and Pather did not respond to questions sent to them via RMA corporate communications, despite confirmation that the questions were circulated to them as well.