ANC councillor Andile Lungisa wants the Nelson Mandela Bay municipality to hire 11 men to work as bodyguards and drivers for himself and other mayoral committee members.
In an internal letter, seen by The Herald, Lungisa instructs the director in the mayor’s office, Roelf Basson, to make the appointments happen immediately.
The attempt was rejected by acting city manager Peter Neilson, who said it was not in line with procedure.
Lungisa, who is the political head for infrastructure and engineering, wrote that he and mayor Mongameli Bobani had agreed to employ the protectors and drivers.
He went a step further, claiming that all 11 men had, in fact, been protecting six mayoral committee members – without pay – between September and November.
According to municipal policy, only the mayor, deputy mayor and the speaker are entitled to bodyguards.
However, human settlements political head Andile Mfunda had also been allocated security because the position had been previously assessed and confirmed as high-risk.
Some of the men listed in Lungisa’s letter are part of a group that has been seen accompanying him around town for months.
In the November 30 letter, Lungisa claimed the protectors had already been allocated to:
● Human settlements portfolio head Andile Mfunda;
● Roads and transport portfolio head Rose Daaminds;
● Corporate services portfolio head Makhi Feni;
● Economic development and tourism portfolio head Queenie Pink; and
● Public health portfolio head Yolisa Pali.
Lungisa wrote that all MMCs except Mfunda had been allocated a driver and a protector. He claimed the protectors had been allocated as follows:
● Mfunda had been assigned one extra protector to bolster his existing security detail;
● Daaminds, Pink, Pali, Feni and Lungisa were each allocated a protector and a driver.
On Tuesday, Lungisa declined to comment, only saying: “These are internal matters which cannot be discussed with the media or anybody else – they are matters of security and are very sensitive.”
Some of the listed protectors have been seen accompanying Lungisa to meetings and events, some since the coalition came into power in August.
Basson warned on December 10, before referring the matter to Neilson, that the political appointments were not provided for in the city’s budget and the organogram could not accommodate the officers.
“In terms of corporate human resources practices the employment of political office bearers is also subjected to the positions reflecting in the approved organogram and that budget provision exists.
“The employment of persons outside the human resources management services is regarded as irregular,” Basson wrote.
Safety and security portfolio head Litho Suka said a threat analysis had found that only Mfunda was under threat due to the dangerous nature of his portfolio.
The Herald has also on many occasion seen some of the MMCs drive themselves to and from work.
Suka said: “We found that there was a threat to councillor Mfunda, hence we had to provide protection for him – his predecessor Nqaba Bhanga also had protection.
Suka said Pink and Pali had recently reported incidents to speaker Buyelwa Mafaya but were yet to get protection.
“We did a threat analysis and found that there could be some threat to councillors Pali and Pink, however, no protectors were allocated to them as yet,” Suka said.
He said that Feni had also not been allocated a security detail by the municipality.
Asked if Lungisa and Daaminds had been allocated protectors, Suka said: “They have protectors but not from the municipality.
“Daaminds also has a private arrangement – they are not on the municipality’s payroll – and Lungisa also has a private arrangement.
“Perhaps he wants to get them into the system, but I am not sure.”
At the moment the city has on its payroll 13 protection officers allocated to Bobani, deputy mayor Thsonono Buyeye, Mafaya and Mfunda.
In addition, a driver is attached to budget and treasury head Mkhuseli Mtsila.
Mtsila failed to respond to questions on why he had been allocated a driver. Meanwhile, safety and security director Arlin Robile, in a separate report, also warned that there was no budget for more protectors in the department.
Robile wrote that the protection officers were not in the department’s organogram and that the norm was to train staff from within the department.
“The [safety and security] department has never in the past deployed any close protectors as political appointees.
“One isolated incident was on request from the speaker that an individual not employed by safety and security to be deployed to her office as secondary assistance.
“This is the only instance where a political appointee was appointed on a close protection function.”
Robile said the additional appointment to Mafaya’s protection team had proved cumbersome and forced him to forfeit budget that had been set aside for security.
“The biggest obstacle I am currently facing is that within the security services no sufficient budget exists for any further political appointments as CPOs to any other office,” Robile wrote.
Neilson said Lungisa’s instruction had been rejected and he was advised to follow the correct procedure.
“I responded to the letter and I wrote to [Lungisa] saying that I note the contents – however there is a procedure that is followed, and that procedure is that close protection is only allocated when there is a threat that has been identified by the police,” Neilson said.
“There has to be an investigation and a recommendation that there is a threat. The speaker’s office is then notified on the outcome and the speaker then makes a decision and requests the executive director for safety and security to allocate the CPO based on the threat.
“There isn’t just a close protector assigned and I responded as such. Unfortunately it does not work that way.
“There is a process and it has to be followed,” he said.