The Eastern Cape department of provincial planning and treasury has spent millions of rands fighting court orders to reinstate deputy director-general (DDG) Mendoa Dukada.
In the process the department has spent R4.3-million to pay 10 lawyers in legal fees over five years fighting its losing battle – and defied orders to reinstate Dukada.
In the same period, the department spent close to R50-million on business and advisory services – which included the Dukada case.
The department suspended Dukada in 2012 and instead of resolving the matter through internal disciplinary hearings, external lawyers were used.
The department accused Dukada of defying orders to release money for the payment of doctors and teachers in the province in 2012.
Dukada had argued that the proper processes were not followed.
Despite constantly losing their case against Dukada in arbitration, the labour court, the high court and high court appeals, the department defied the court orders to re-instate her as DDG.
In a document seen by Dispatch, the department spent R4 321000 in legal fees for the case between 2012-13 and 2015-16.
This was part of a staggering R48.7-million bill for under business and advisory services.
Sources in the department claimed the money was mainly for hiring external lawyers to work on the Dukada case for the same period.
The 48.7-million was calculated by adding amounts spent on business and advisory services in the audited statements of the department from 2012.
Most of the lawyers were from Johannesburg and Durban and were paid through the business and advisory services budge for accommodation, flights and fees.
This week the department would not divulge the amounts saying payments to the legal representatives in question was “confidential” and “sensitive”.
Dukada was accused of:
- Obstructing the function of the administration in the Eastern Cape provincial planning and treasury as well as the Eastern Cape department of health, which resulted in prejudicing and bringing into disrepute the provincial government as whole; and
- Gross negligence in her duties as senior general manager in charge of managing assets and liabilities in the department of planning and treasury.
Departmental spokeswoman Nosisa Sogayise said their financial statements were audited and “none of the payments to the legal advisers were found to be irregular”.
She also said the accounting officer used her discretion in terms of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) and elected to appoint the lawyers as a result of confidentiality and sensitivity of the matter.
“It was in the interest of the department that the same legal representatives be used as they were well versed with the facts as well as technicalities of the matter,” said Sogayise.
“The department treats the issue of payments to the legal representatives in question with confidentiality and sensitivity it deserves.
“It is our feeling that it will be improper from our part to divulge such information as it involves contracts with other parties.”
In September 2012, Dukada was suspended by the department with full pay. At the time she was earning R1.,3-million a year.
On March 6 2014, 18 months after her suspension in 2012, Dukada was fired by the department and her salary stopped.
She took the matter to CCMA and after a year and won, with the department ordered to re-instate her in October 2015.
The department challenged the finding and using external lawyers took the matter to the Labour Court where they were again ordered again to re-instate Dukada.
The department did not execute the court order and Dukada took the matter back to the Labour Court where the department again lost.
The department then took their case to the Labour Appeal Court (LAC) where it was also dismissed.
The LAC called for the disciplinary hearings to be conducted without any outside legal representative, but the department petitioned the High Court to appeal but later withdrew that.
Instead, the department took “a different route” and applied for the review of the CCMA arbitration award.
In their papers the department said “the arbitrator committed misconduct in relation to his duty as an arbitrator”.
On March 28, in their judgment delivered in Port Elizabeth, the Labour Court dismissed the department’s application for a review.
“The application to review is dismissed with costs, including the wasted costs occasioned by the postponement on November 24, 2016. “The wasted costs occasioned by postponement are to be paid by the applicant’s attorney, Mr Ike Motloung, on an attorney-and-client scale,” read the judgment.
Motloung is one of the 10 lawyers hired by the department for the case. It was not clear at the time of writing if these or some of the lawyers were still involved with the case.
Called for comment, Dukada said she was not ready to comment about the matter as it was “traumatic” experience. — bonganif@dispatch.co.za
R4m legal bill for top Bhisho job
In the process the department has spent R4.3-million to pay 10 lawyers in legal fees over five years fighting its losing battle – and defied orders to reinstate Dukada.
In the same period, the department spent close to R50-million on business and advisory services – which included the Dukada case.
The department suspended Dukada in 2012 and instead of resolving the matter through internal disciplinary hearings, external lawyers were used.
The department accused Dukada of defying orders to release money for the payment of doctors and teachers in the province in 2012.
Dukada had argued that the proper processes were not followed.
Despite constantly losing their case against Dukada in arbitration, the labour court, the high court and high court appeals, the department defied the court orders to re-instate her as DDG.
In a document seen by Dispatch, the department spent R4 321000 in legal fees for the case between 2012-13 and 2015-16.
This was part of a staggering R48.7-million bill for under business and advisory services.
Sources in the department claimed the money was mainly for hiring external lawyers to work on the Dukada case for the same period.
The 48.7-million was calculated by adding amounts spent on business and advisory services in the audited statements of the department from 2012.
Most of the lawyers were from Johannesburg and Durban and were paid through the business and advisory services budge for accommodation, flights and fees.
This week the department would not divulge the amounts saying payments to the legal representatives in question was “confidential” and “sensitive”.
Dukada was accused of:
Departmental spokeswoman Nosisa Sogayise said their financial statements were audited and “none of the payments to the legal advisers were found to be irregular”.
She also said the accounting officer used her discretion in terms of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) and elected to appoint the lawyers as a result of confidentiality and sensitivity of the matter.
“It was in the interest of the department that the same legal representatives be used as they were well versed with the facts as well as technicalities of the matter,” said Sogayise.
“The department treats the issue of payments to the legal representatives in question with confidentiality and sensitivity it deserves.
“It is our feeling that it will be improper from our part to divulge such information as it involves contracts with other parties.”
In September 2012, Dukada was suspended by the department with full pay. At the time she was earning R1.,3-million a year.
On March 6 2014, 18 months after her suspension in 2012, Dukada was fired by the department and her salary stopped.
She took the matter to CCMA and after a year and won, with the department ordered to re-instate her in October 2015.
The department challenged the finding and using external lawyers took the matter to the Labour Court where they were again ordered again to re-instate Dukada.
The department did not execute the court order and Dukada took the matter back to the Labour Court where the department again lost.
The department then took their case to the Labour Appeal Court (LAC) where it was also dismissed.
The LAC called for the disciplinary hearings to be conducted without any outside legal representative, but the department petitioned the High Court to appeal but later withdrew that.
Instead, the department took “a different route” and applied for the review of the CCMA arbitration award.
In their papers the department said “the arbitrator committed misconduct in relation to his duty as an arbitrator”.
On March 28, in their judgment delivered in Port Elizabeth, the Labour Court dismissed the department’s application for a review.
“The application to review is dismissed with costs, including the wasted costs occasioned by the postponement on November 24, 2016. “The wasted costs occasioned by postponement are to be paid by the applicant’s attorney, Mr Ike Motloung, on an attorney-and-client scale,” read the judgment.
Motloung is one of the 10 lawyers hired by the department for the case. It was not clear at the time of writing if these or some of the lawyers were still involved with the case.
Called for comment, Dukada said she was not ready to comment about the matter as it was “traumatic” experience. — bonganif@dispatch.co.za
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos