Tourism Minister Patricia De Lille refuted claims that South African Tourism had irregular tender procurements, to the tune of R100 million, to host flagship trade events including Meeting Africa and Africa’s Travel Indaba. (David Harrison)
A scathing ruling calling the leadership of the South African Council for the Architectural Profession (Sacap) “reprehensible” has underscored accusations that Public Works Minister Patricia De Lille is allegedly protecting gross mismanagement and bullying at the regulatory body.
In early July, the appeal committee of the Council for the Built Environment (CBE) — a public entity tasked with “instilling good conduct within built environment professions”, according to its website — delivered a unanimous ruling that overturned the guilty verdict Sacap delivered against architect Mark Oates for misconduct.
The CBE’s unanimous decision is dated 4 July 2022, with Oates’s disciplinary matter having begun in 2020.
The July ruling caused Oates to send a strongly-worded letter to De Lille calling on the minister to suspend the president, registrar and Sacap’s council because the architectural profession had been “brought into disrepute by persons who appear to be either oblivious of their legal responsibilities, or, in the alternative, are incompetent”.
The CBE’s ruling follows the M&G reporting in May that De Lille was withholding an investigative report into alleged sexual harassment and bullying of architects and Sacap councillors. De Lille said she submitted the report to the parliamentary oversight committee for public works. But two members of the committee rejected the minister’s claims, saying the oversight body had not received the report.
The investigation, which was commissioned by De Lille, followed allegations against Sacap’s president, Charles Nduku, as well as the body’s registrar, Toto Fiduli.
‘Reprehensible Sacap’
The charges against Oates followed a complaint against his architectural work from a member of the public, whose name is known to the Mail & Guardian and who alleged that Oates, among other things, failed to participate in development activities and put all items of appointment in writing, and used a bogus letterhead during correspondence.
But the CBE’s appeal committee overturned Oates’s guilty verdict and found that the matter was not properly investigated; that the investigating committee, set up by “delegated authority” in line with the Architectural Professions Act, recommended the charging of Oates on given “directives” that it “merely rubber stamped”.
“[Sacap’s] conduct and due process followed was not only flawed, but reprehensible and justifies us interfering in its decision/ruling,” the appeal committee said.
It added that senior Sacap officials, including its registrar Fiduli, attended a November 2020 investigating committee meeting, which was “grossly irregular and in contravention of the regulatory framework”.
This was because architectural regulations envisage “a ‘separation of powers’ between the council and the investigating committee”.
“It is apparent that officials of the respondent [Sacap] seemingly have a propensity of flouting regulatory framework by, [among other things], engaging themselves in matters where they are directly conflicted,” reads the appeal ruling.
The CBE cautioned in its judgement that the “flimsy and floppy flaws” conducted by Sacap in not adhering to the regulatory framework “should not be taken lightly”, adding that these alleged flaws showed that Sacap’s leadership did not seem “to comprehend basic fundamental principles enshrined in the regulatory framework”.
“Such professional acts of negligence analysed holistically have a tendency of bringing the built environment professional councils into disrepute. We hold the view that the registrar [Fiduli] was seemingly the judge, jury and executioner.
“Such conduct on the part of the registrar was grossly irregular and vitiates the regulatory framework, in particular, the constitution,” charged the appeal ruling.
‘CBE driving an agenda’
Sacap president Nduku, responding to M&G’s questions, rebuked the CBE’s appeal ruling, saying it was based on ulterior motives meant to damage the architectural council’s reputation.
“The ruling is driving a clear agenda of attacking the entire Sacap and mentions individuals with the aim of tarnishing my reputation and that of the council and staff at Sacap. It is not a surprise to see a clear link to earlier allegations which were dismissed as baseless.
“The ruling fails to deal with the actual content of the appeal and is one sided to achieve a particular agenda,” Nduku asserted.
“If you are doing your job as a regulator, you will never be the darling to those that are affected. Therefore, I [would] rather be blamed or be unpopular for doing my job than be praised.
“The court will decide on this matter and I will not pronounce any further than to say let the court confirm my reprehensible leadership.”
The ruling harshly criticised Nduku and Sacap’s vice-president, Letsabisa Shongwe, for being part of Oates’s hearing, which prevented Oates from cross-examining the person who laid the complaint and the complainant was not called to speak to the allegations against Oates.
“They (Nduku and Shongwe) both seemingly turned blind eyes and condoned such gross irregularities and contravention of the regulatory framework. This brings about serious causes of concern on the integrity of the [Sacap’s] council as a whole under the leadership and direction of Mr Nduku and Ms Shongwe.
“Nothing was lawful, reasonable or procedurally fair.”
‘Sexual harassment and bullying’
Sacap’s alleged breaking of the law led Oates to demand the removal of the architectural body’s council, calling Sacap’s leadership “self-serving”.
“The findings pave the way for the president and the registrar and other Sacap personnel to be sued (in both criminal and civil matters) for items including dereliction of duty, incompetence, misrepresentation, wasteful and unnecessary expenditure, harassment, emotional trauma, damages and defamation,” reads Oates’s email.
Harassment allegations were initially made against Fiduli in an August 2021 affidavit by Sinovuyo*, who is alleged that the registrar was a “pervert” who made unwanted sexual advances to her since around July 2019.
Nduku was accused of bullying by Karuni Naidoo, who alleged that Nduku removed her on “ridiculous” charges, including copying an external architect in an internal email, which Naidoo had sent to ask Sacap to remedy an article that was allegedly plagiarised by the regulatory body.
Although the minister told M&G that she had given the report to the parliamentary oversight committee, and that the investigation had found “no serious corporate governance challenges”, Madeleine Hicklin and Wayne Thring, who both sit on the committee, rejected De Lille’s claims.
Hicklin and Thring are parliamentary members from the Democratic Alliance and the African Christian Democratic Party, respectively.
Hicklin went further and accused the minister of protecting the alleged wrongdoing at Sacap, with the parliamentarian saying she had appealed the rejection of her Promotion of Access to Information Act application, which Hicklin said De Lille had rejected.
The M&G sent questions to Zara Nicholson in De Lille’s office on Tuesday. Nicholson did not respond to the emailed questions, nor did she respond to repeated text messages asking whether the ministry would comment or not.
Fiduli also did not answer questions sent to him.
[/membership]