Johannesburg Council Decisions Raise Serious Legal and Ethical Concerns

Joburg Council Under Scrutiny Over Appointments, Contracts and Land Sales

The JCA, WaterCAN and JoburgCAN have sounded the alarm over a series of legally and ethically questionable decisions by the Johannesburg Council. From controversial appointments and billion-rand contracts to land sales and councillor benefits, serious concerns remain about due process and accountability. With City finances deteriorating and services failing, Johannesburg needs transparency, consequence management and ethical leadership more urgently than ever.

STATEMENT SUMMARY

The Joburg Crisis Alliance (JCA), WaterCAN and JoburgCAN have raised serious concerns about decisions taken at the City of Johannesburg’s 39th Ordinary Council Meeting, warning that they reflect troubling failures in legality, due process, financial governance and ethical leadership.

Among the decisions questioned are the appointment of Lesiba Arnold Malotana as Head of Public Safety despite being flagged as high-risk by the Special Investigating Unit; the sale of municipal land in Fairland and Ivory Park without adequate business cases and key environmental and infrastructure studies; a seven-year, R3.159 billion Rea Vaya contract with Litsamaiso despite concerns raised during public participation; and a revised Councillor Funeral Support Policy despite conflicting legal opinions about its compliance with the MFMA.

These decisions come amid a worsening financial and service-delivery crisis. Financial reports have been significantly delayed, creditors increased by R3.5 billion in one month to R12.4 billion by May 2026, and expenditure was R2.583 billion above budget. Residents continue to experience water and electricity failures and deteriorating municipal services.

The organisations are calling for independent scrutiny of Council decisions, disclosure of supporting legal and financial information, publication of outstanding financial reports, an explanation of how the R2.255 billion Eskom debt repayment was financed, implementation of National Treasury reforms, and stronger consequence management. They argue that officials and political leaders responsible for governance and financial failures should not leave office with bonuses or other discretionary financial rewards.