R54m SAPS Scandal: Witness Reveals What Phahlane Allegedly Approved Without Proper Justification

Former acting national police commissioner Khomotso Phahlane is facing serious questions over his alleged role in a controversial R54 million SAPS software procurement deal, with fresh testimony placing his approval of the transactions under the spotlight.

Phahlane and five other accused are currently standing trial at the Pretoria High Court over two police software contracts involving Ripjar and Daedalus. The state alleges that procurement procedures were manipulated, resulting in irregular spending on intelligence technology intended for police operations.

According to testimony by former SAPS Crime Intelligence finance head Lincoln Hlungwani, Phahlane allegedly authorised deviations from normal procurement procedures in December 2016 to secure the two software products. Hlungwani has raised concerns about how the transactions were handled and whether the decisions followed the required financial and legal processes.

One of the major issues involves an advance payment of nearly R12 million made to I-View Integrated Systems for the Ripjar software. Hlungwani questioned why such a large amount was paid upfront, arguing that the contract contained no provision requiring an advance payment.

But the questions did not end with the money. The witness also raised concerns about whether the software was properly delivered and installed. During an audit process, he reportedly requested documents confirming the software licence but was informed that the relevant certificate was unavailable.

Even more troubling were questions surrounding the bidding process. Hlungwani claimed that the winning proposal submitted by I-View had exactly the same terms and prices as the unsuccessful bid from Perfect Source. This has raised further questions about how the winning company was selected and whether the process was genuinely competitive.

The second contract, involving Daedalus, also attracted criticism. Hlungwani questioned the price attached to the software, arguing that the R22.3 million quoted for the system appeared excessive.

The revelations have once again raised concerns about financial accountability within SAPS, particularly in Crime Intelligence, where large sums of public money are spent on specialised technology. When senior officials approve expensive contracts, the public deserves clear answers about how decisions are made, whether proper procedures are followed and what taxpayers actually receive in return.

Phahlane is not standing trial alone. His co-accused include Major-General Maanda Obert Nemutanzhela, Major-General Mankosana Agnes Makhele, Lieutenant-Colonel Godfrey Mahwayi, Inbanathan Kistiah and Avendra Naidoo. The accused face allegations including theft, fraud, corruption and contraventions of the Public Finance Management Act. The court is expected to examine the contracts, the decisions made by officials and whether the procurement process complied with the law.

However, the allegations have not yet been proven in court, and none of the accused should be treated as guilty before the legal process is concluded.

At a time when South Africans continue to demand better policing and responsible use of public funds, cases involving millions of rand cannot simply be treated as another courtroom drama. The bigger question is whether those entrusted with managing police resources are being held accountable when serious procurement concerns emerge.

Do you believe senior police officials should face stricter accountability whenever public money is involved in questionable procurement deals, or should the court first settle the allegations before public judgement is passed?

Daniel06 feedback-opera-news-app@opera.com