By Thapelo Molefe
The Public Protector has found that the Sedibeng District Municipality appointed Maria Mokoena as Assistant Manager: Licensing, even though she did not meet the minimum requirements for the advertised post.
The watchdog concluded that the recruitment process was flawed and amounted to “maladministration”.
The investigation followed a complaint lodged by Jack Mokalapa, who alleged that Mokoena’s appointment did not comply with municipal recruitment prescripts.
According to the Public Protector’s report, the municipality advertised the post in July 2021, requiring applicants to have Grade 12 plus a three-year degree or National Diploma in Licensing. But Mokoena did not possess a qualification that met this requirement at the time of her appointment.
The investigation found that the recruitment process was characterised by “serious procedural failures and a disregard for established recruitment prescripts”.
This included a failure to properly verify candidates’ qualifications, inadequate scrutiny of CVs to determine whether applicants met the inherent job requirements, and shortcomings in the capacity of the selection panel, the Public Protector said.
The report also found that the selection panel did not have the requisite skills and knowledge to oversee the recruitment process, in line with municipal policies.
The chairperson of the selection panel, Bheki Ngobese, was criticised for submitting recommendations to the then-acting municipal manager that contained material administrative errors.
“Notably, the recommendations failed to highlight discrepancies regarding Ms Mokoena’s academic suitability for the position, as stipulated in the job advertisement,” the Public Protector said.
Verification conducted by the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) confirmed that none of Mokoena’s qualifications could be classified as a three-year degree or National Diploma.
Several of the certificates submitted were short courses, which “could not be considered a qualification” for purposes of meeting the advertised requirements, the Public Protector said.
“The selection panel did not have any comprehensive knowledge concerning the distinction between a short skills course or programme and a formal qualification equivalent to the SAQA identification, levels, and credits.”
In its conclusions, the Public Protector found that the conduct of municipal officials involved in the appointment was inconsistent with sections 33 and 195 of the Constitution, which require lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair administrative action.
“In the circumstances, the conduct of the functionaries of the Municipality amounts to improper conduct in terms of section 182(1)(a) of the Constitution and maladministration in terms of section 6(4)(a)(i) of the Public Protector Act.”
As remedial action, the Public Protector directed the executive mayor of Sedibeng District Municipality to table the report before the municipal council within 90 days for deliberation and approval of an appropriate and effective course of action to address the irregular appointment.
The municipal manager has also been instructed to take corrective action against the selection and recruitment panel responsible for the appointment, and to ensure that officials involved in recruitment processes receive proper training to ensure compliance with recruitment prescripts in future.
INSIDE METROS