By Johnathan Paoli
Suspended Tshwane Metro Police Department (TMPD) Road Policing Major Lebogang Phiri has denied allegations that he facilitated security tenders worth at least R59 million with security company Gubis85 Solutions without authority, claiming that he acted strictly on instructions from above.
Appearing before the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry on Thursday, Phiri said he did not manipulate deployments, that he acted under instructions from suspended Asset Protection Security Services head Tshukudu Malatji, and that the Water and Sanitation department had already selected Gubis for the job.
“I have been made aware of inferences suggesting that I may have favoured Gubis85 or received incentives for channeling work to them. I categorically deny these allegations. I executed my duties strictly pursuant to instruction from Director Malatji and the explicit directives of the Water and Sanitation department, without any improper motive or corrupt relationship,” Phiri said.
Phiri said the decision to utilise Gubis originated from officials within the Water and Sanitation department, who he claimed had already been working with the company before his involvement.
“I must state unequivocally that the company was chosen by the management of the water and sanitation department, not by me. The Water and Sanitation department specifically mandated the use of Gubis 85 Solutions, citing that they were already utilising this provider’s services,” he stated.
He said the company’s deployment by him was effectively a rubber stamp, since the company was already providing services to the department.
“Gubis85 personnel were essentially already working and deployed to sites prior to me issuing the official deployment letter. As the paying end-user, the department dictated their preferred service provider, and my mandate was strictly limited to facilitating the base of their operational instruction,” Phiri said.
Phiri described his role as largely administrative and reactive, positioning himself as a conduit between departments facing security crises and the service providers already identified by those departments.
“My designated role was akin to security coordinator for municipal departments experiencing security vulnerabilities. The established procedure was that when a user department required security assistance, Director Malatji would provide me with an instruction to timeously facilitate the necessary deployment,” he said.
Phiri also pushed back against suggestions that he acted recklessly in deploying guards, telling the commission he had initially resisted pressure to roll out security at vandalised pump stations in December 2024.
He said that during a January 2025 meeting with Malatji and Water and Sanitation officials, he stood firm on the need for proper site inspections before authorising deployments.
Phiri claimed he reiterated that he could not authorise deployments without conducting physical site inspections, noting that complaints had been raised that delays had cost the city millions in further damage to infrastructure.
According to Phiri, his eventual approval of deployments only came after inspections were completed.
“It was only after satisfying myself that these infrastructure sites existed and had been verified that I signed off on approximately the first batch deployment notices on 14 January 2025,” he said.
Phiri further distanced himself from the financial aspects of the contracts, stating that procurement processes, including purchase orders, fell outside his responsibilities.
“I am not responsible for generation or creation for purchase orders, that is the sole responsibility of the Water and Sanitation department or TMPD finance division,” he said.
Phiri’s claims stand in stark contrast to what Malatji himself testified to the commission a few weeks ago.
“I have not delegated powers of allocation to anyone in respect of sites to be guarded by the service providers rendering services under TMPD 02 2016/17,” Malatji previously said.
When questioned on it, Phiri described Malatji’s testimony as “incorrect and malicious”, maintaining that it was “impossible” that he acted without instruction.
But former ‘caretaker’ of the asset protection unit, Deputy Commissioner George Bolhuis, similarly told the commission that Phiri had no authority to deploy.
“As the caretaker, I never allocated these sites to Gubis 85 Solutions, nor did I instruct Inspector Phiri to do so, nor did I give him permission or the delegated authority,” Bolhuis said.
Evidence before the commission indicates that around 40 sites were allocated to Gubis85 Solutions, with purchase orders processed through official TMPD systems.
Deputy Commissioner Revo Spies previously testified that R59 million was paid to Gubis for ad hoc services rendered between July 2024 and June 2025 alone.
He alleged that suspended Tshwane CFO Gareth Mnisi and Deputy Commissioner Umashi Dlamini communicated with each other by sending messages through suspended Organised Crime Sergeant Fannie Nkosi for the creation of purchase orders for ad hoc services.
The commission continues.
INSIDE POLITICS
