The Pietermaritzburg High Court has ruled that the precautionary suspension of Sibusiso Madonsela, uMngeni-uThukela Water’s chief governance and compliance officer, was unlawful.

Madonsela’s suspension, which occurred on October 9, 2025, stemmed from his refusal to approve a sponsorship request for a New York Marathon in October 2024. 

The request had been made by a staff member, Zandile Mhlongo, who had sought the sponsorship under the terms of the uMngeni-uThukela Water Sponsorship and Donation policy.

“I will suggest that if we want to support the initiative, we must issue a call to employees and choose from a list of employees so as not to be seen to be favouring some over others. And we must have a separate budget for such,”  Madonsela had said, declining the sponsorship.

Madonsela, who was accused of leaking the sponsorship information to the media, claimed in his affidavit that the final decision regarding the sponsorship rested with CEO Sandile Mkhize, who subsequently approved it.

Madonsela explained that the request had to originate with him, where he would indicate his support or non-support before forwarding it to Mkhize for the ultimate decision.

Mkhize, in turn, had accused Madonsela of exceeding his authority by making “comments (which) were supposed to be your recommendations to the CEO to consider when making sponsorship decisions”.

Following his suspension, Madonsela urgently approached the High Court, arguing that Mkhize was abusing his powers and ruining his reputation, especially as his contract with the water entity is due to expire in 2027 and renewal was uncertain.

He further highlighted that his suspension had become widely publicised in the news, and argued that it made no sense to be suspended a year later for not backing the sponsorship.

He asserted that the true motive behind his suspension was a R7 billion project for the Lower Umkhomazi Dam construction.

Madonsela explained that in 2023, the entity invited bids for the tender. Subsequently, after an award was made, an unsuccessful bidder lodged an appeal challenging the Bid Adjudication Committee’s (BAC) decision to disqualify it.

“The internal appeal came before me as the chair of the Bids Appeals Tribunal. I, along with my fellow Tribunal members, ruled in favour of the unsuccessful bidder. I believe this decision angered Mkhize, as well as some board members, including the Chairperson, Advocate Vusi Khuzwayo SC,” Madonsela stated.

In the wake of this ruling, Mkhize completely removed Madonsela as chair of the Bid Appeals Tribunal and disbanded the Tribunal.

Furthermore, Mkhize instructed the legal services department to no longer report to Madonsela.

Madonsela detailed the abuse he has suffered under the leadership of Mkhize and Khuzwayo.

He claimed that at times, he was prevented from performing his duties, forcing him to simply sit and do nothing when he came to work.

Mkhize, in his reply affidavit, asserted that Madonsela lacked the authority to decide on a sponsorship request.

Mkhize further noted that an internal audit of Umngeni-Uthukela Water’s expenditure, conducted in September 2025, raised concerns about potential fruitless expenditure, specifically citing that a delay in granting sponsorship to Mhlongo resulted in increased costs.

“The delay, attributed to Madonsela’s usurpation of my authority, meant that the flights included in the sponsorship were more expensive when eventually booked. Furthermore, the delay in booking also resulted in Mhlongo’s return flight being more expensive than initially anticipated.”

Mkhize had argued that the High Court lacked jurisdiction, claiming the matter was between Madonsela and his employer, and urged the court to dismiss the case. 

Madonsela’s lawyer, Advocate Thembeka Ngcukaitobi SC, argued that Mkhize had not acted on the alleged misconduct regarding the sponsorship request, despite being aware of it, thus Madonsela was allowed to perform his duties.

Acting Judge Andrew Matlamela ruled in favour of Madonsela, ordering his immediate return to the position of chief governance and compliance officer.

“The first respondent is directed to pay costs of this application on Scale C, such costs to include the costs of two counsel,” Matlamela ordered. 

nomonde.zondi@inl.co.za

Source link