A damning report by the public protector has laid bare serious governance failures at the University of South Africa (Unisa), finding that the appointment of a security manager was irregular, improperly handled and in breach of institutional rules.
At the centre of the probe was the appointment of Johannes Matlala, who was rehired on a fixed-term contract in January 2024, months after reaching the university’s retirement age of 65.
Report finds Matlala rehired after retirement age breaching rules
Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka found the appointment was not only procedurally flawed, but also amounted to maladministration.
“Having considered the evidence obtained and the applicable legal framework, the public protector concludes there was a governance and procedural shortcoming in the appointment of [Matlala] on a the fixed-term contract,” she said in the report.
Sparked by a whistle-blower complaint backed by the Freedom Front Plus, the investigation report paints a picture of an institution where internal controls were sidestepped and governance safeguards disregarded.
Unisa spokesperson, Prof Boitumelo Senokoane, said: “Unisa confirms receiving the report. However, the university is still studying the report and shall apply its discretion after studying its contents.”
According to the report, Matlala’s appointment violated Unisa’s own employment conditions, which state that fixed-term contracts should not extend beyond retirement age.
While the university said exceptions could be made under operational pressures, Gcaleka found no evidence proper procedures for an exception were followed.
Unisa vice principal initiated, approved appointment
Instead, she noted, the process was effectively driven and approved by a single official, vice-principal of operations and facilities Matsiababa Motebele, who initiated and signed off on the appointment.
This dual role, Gcaleka notes, “raises questions of impartiality and conflict of interest.”
The findings go further, concluding that Motebele’s conduct breached constitutional standards for public administration, including the requirement for transparency, ethical conduct and proper checks and balances.
According to the report, the post was never advertised, there was no shortlisting of candidates, no interviews, and no justification proving no suitable internal candidate was available.
Key sections of the appointment application were left incomplete, including details on qualifications.
Critical approvals that should have been signed off by multiple officials were missing entirely.
University pledges tighter controls
Unisa has defended the appointment by citing urgent security concerns, particularly threats linked to construction projects at its Sunnyside campus.
But the public protector found urgency did not excuse non-compliance with governance rules.
In its response, Unisa acknowledged the appointment “did not fully comply with the applicable governance framework” and accepted the findings.
Unisa has since committed to tightening internal controls, including enforcing stricter separation between those who initiate and approve appointments, and strengthening oversight within its human resources department.
The whistle-blower had alleged the case was not isolated, suggesting a pattern of recruitment irregularities where policies were “frequently ignored”.
As part of the remedial action, the vice-chancellor, Prof Puleng LenkaBula, has been ordered to implement corrective measures within 60 days and take appropriate disciplinary steps against those responsible
