Staff reporter
Bloemfontein – The Member of Executive Council for Education, Dr Maki “Mathlabs” Maboya is applying hear no-evil, see no-evil approach in the controversy around payment of R470 .000 to two companies doing the same job.
This follows the letter Advocate Humphrey Malakoane, head of department signed on the 5 September 2025, which activated the payment as per leaked purchased orders.
STEPUPSANEWS can confirm when the letter in question was sent to assistant director special program at Department of Education few weeks ago, at the time the office of the premier didn’t have acting Director General and acting Head of Communication.
With Joyce “Pretenders” Mathae allegedly advised against the colloquium and Khopotso Moahlodi, Chief Financial Officer rejecting the submission, the next best stop was none other than the generous Department of Education.
Having processed the payments on the same day the letter was sent and signed by head of department, MEC Maboya has not responded to our questions on procurement was done.
Below are questions we sent:
1. We would like to know If the HOD was happy with the documents submitted to Education for the financial assistance including the forged letter(not the June letter)?
2. What procurement process or open bidding process (RFQ) was followed by the CFO Education on behalf of SCM, due to the rejection from CFO OTP to procure communication services for the colloquium ?
3. PFMA clearly indicates that the procurement process must be open, fair, equitable and market related prices; we know that the very same service providers were given early Christmas Gift in a form of orders numbers. We are also aware that the same companies with orders have done lots of work for the OTP in the past, were the very same service providers offered to Department of Education in the past?
4. What were the costs, and were those prices market related?
5. Whether the service providers were provided by OTP or not, was the process open and fair and if so; who were the other service providers submitted the quotations and what criteria was used for the appointment?
6. Are you willing to produce the SCM documents that may justify the appointment of those preferred or favored service providers for communications?
7. Is there an existing contract of these service provides in question to just hand over jobs without other role players in the industries participating?
8. To clarify my above statement, may Education department provide the total amount spent on communications activities, paid to the very same service providers from the beginning of the Financial Year up to now?
9. If there is no contract, what procurement process is followed to give work to one person, despite the knowledge and experience which other service providers may provide if given a chance?
10. If there was a deviation from considering other service providers, what constitute as a valid reasons for the appointment of the above mentioned service providers, while the very same principle is not applied for others?
11. Which officials have signed on the submission to support the deviation from Treasury Regulations and PFMA?
12. Lastly, why is Comeback Legegeru moved from SCM while Andrew Moeti remains?
In other related news, IDT and Department of Education are looking for consultants, tender documents are out.
MEC met IDT in Durban few months ago. …connect the dots….
If you have news or tips please email news@stepupsanews.co.za or WhatsApp 0685000246
1 thought on “MEC dead silent on “how” her department procured services with a “forged” letter ”