Chaskalson TEARS APART Mnisi-Madlanga Left SPEECHLESS!

Added: 2026-05-05

[00:00:00]Sometimes you watch these hearings and you just think we are doomed. The level of corruption being exposed. Seeing these youngers acting like seasoned mobsters is deeply sad. Thank God General Mkuanazi opened this can of worms last year or there'd be nothing left of South Africa. But today the arrogance finally met reality. This chap, Gareth Mani, walked in thinking he could out talk senior counsel Matthew Chescllson. But the second he realized he was staring down the barrel of a prison sentence, the loyalty vanished and he threw Sergeant Nosi right under the bus. Now, please like this video.

[00:00:43]Thank you. Now, Damini, run the clip.

[00:00:45]>> Is there any legitimate basis on which Sergeant Corsy should have access to this document?

[00:00:54]This is a TMPD. No permission to expand.

[00:01:00]>> Go ahead.

[00:01:00]>> I'll be very quick. The TMPD report for 03 draft admin report. It makes reference to the closing register items.

[00:01:11]So on this when I evaluated this document, it was nothing sensitive that had been done. But my answer is yes.

[00:01:18]There was no need for him to get this.

[00:01:20]He could have just got the closing register which would have been published. It was there in the website.

[00:01:25]That would have been the best document to get.

[00:01:28]>> Yes. But he didn't get that document. He got this document which was a draft prepared by someone inside the BEC process.

[00:01:37]>> I can't confirm that. I don't know where he got this document.

[00:01:40]>> Well, it it was a draft prepared by someone inside the BEC process was my was the proposition I was putting to you. draft administrative report on PMPD3 could only emerge from someone inside the BEC process. Is that not correct?

[00:01:56]>> It's a proposition Essie. So, I'm not going to disagree with you, but I I don't know where this could >> Who else would be preparing draft administrative reports in relation to TMPD3?

[00:02:07]>> Essie, I don't know. I can't give an answer to that. The only body that could produce draft administrative reports in relation to TMPD3 at this stage was the BC. Surely.

[00:02:17]>> Okay.

[00:02:19]>> Does does the okay mean I agree.

[00:02:24]>> Commissioner, I don't agree. My answer is I don't know, but I'm accepting the proposition that the senior council is bringing on board. I I just don't want to speculate.

[00:02:33]>> Which other body could have produced this report other than the BEC? Which other body?

[00:02:40]Certainly could not have been the BAC.

[00:02:43]>> No, it's not the BAC.

[00:02:44]>> So, which other body other than the BEC?

[00:02:47]>> I don't have the full report. I can't see the contents of it. So, it's very difficult for me to give a conclusive answer and bind some someone at this stage.

[00:02:56]>> Can I can I ask you to look at page 175 where we get past the list?

[00:03:01]>> Yes.

[00:03:09]2.1 Late bids received if applicable. No late bids received. Three, pre-compliance. The following 435 biders were evaluated on pre-compliance. So, some evaluation has already taken place.

[00:03:21]Who does the evaluation on pre-compliance?

[00:03:23]>> It's blank. This means no evaluation has taken place.

[00:03:28]It says it is blank at this stage but it says the following 435 biders were evaluated for pre on pre-compliance.

[00:03:35]>> So it's a shell that's what they would have needed to complete once evaluation commences. If it's blank it means the process had not started >> and who keep it's a shell for whom?

[00:03:47]>> Like I said I don't know for whom but I'm accepting the proposition that it could be from BEC. The proposition wasn't that it was could be >> ordinarily ordinarily Mr. who within Swan would use this blank ordinarily ordinarily and please don't be KG ordinarily who would use this blank >> this blank would be used by members of BEC >> thank you yes Mr. Anybody else?

[00:04:20]>> It's incomplete. I don't know. I can't say. But it looks like it could be used by the SC. Anybody else? I don't know.

[00:04:27]>> Well, it's not entirely incomplete because if we see the list contains 435 biders and pre-ompliance, the item three refers to 435 biders. So, someone has taken a template and done some change to it in relation to this bid. You see that >> they've loaded the closing register. The contents of the closing register.

[00:04:49]>> Yes. They've loaded the contents of the closing register and they put it onto a template which I am assuming is a template used by the BEC.

[00:04:58]>> Yes.

[00:04:59]>> Right.

[00:05:01]So let's get back to lock and key.

[00:05:05]despite lock and key um a document a template that is used by the BEC has made its way to Sergeant and Corsy should that be possible >> and these are the reason it shouldn't be possible the answer is no but these are the reasons why this tender was canceled >> was not the reason why this tender was canceled nowhere in the in any of the reports does it say Sergeant and Corsy received a template from the BEC the process was compromised.

[00:05:36]>> I was saying that the test of safety ensuring the document was safeguarded was one of the reasons why this tender was canceled. Not specifically that Sergeant Cory, but the test for for documents being kept safely was one of the reasons that were identified.

[00:05:53]>> That's the 25th of March.

[00:05:56]You now know that a template used by the BEC in relation to this tender has been sent to Sergeant and Corsy.

[00:06:04]That's going to taint the process of this tender, is it not?

[00:06:09]>> No.

[00:06:10]>> So then it's not a reason why the tender was canceled.

[00:06:15]>> The documents that were lost was the reason. We just agreed SC that this was not the reason that Sergeant Cory received that. We we agreed on that.

[00:06:23]>> Yes. It should have been, but it wasn't.

[00:06:25]Yes, >> but you knew from the 25th of March uh that this was happening and that this objectively viewed would taint the regularity of this tender.

[00:06:38]I >> I had received this from my evaluation of the document. It contained information of the closing register which was published. There was no additional sensitive information that was brought on board through evaluating assessing this document that I had received. But you knew that the obvious inference to draw from the fact that Sergeant and Corsy sent you this document is that he had someone inside the BEC who was giving him documents.

[00:07:05]>> I didn't know I don't know where that comes from. So I did not know where he received this.

[00:07:11]>> The obvious inference to be drawn from this was that Sergeant and Corsy had someone inside the BEC who was giving him documents.

[00:07:20]Is that do you take issue with that?

[00:07:22]>> I do take that's not true.

[00:07:24]>> Well, what inference what other inference could you draw?

[00:07:27]>> The truth of where he received this >> from what other source could sergeant go possibly have received this document.

[00:07:38]Bear in mind that you have said ordinarily this is a document used by the BEC. So other than the BEC, what would his source have been ordinarily?

[00:07:52]Other than the BEC?

[00:07:54]>> Yes, commissioner. That's information is known. He received this from the deputy the general. He did not receive it from anyone in the BEC.

[00:08:03]>> And where would the general have received >> the general was Oh, was he not a member of the BC?

[00:08:08]>> No, he was not a member of the BEC.

[00:08:11]Well, >> where would the general have received it?

[00:08:15]>> I don't know where he would have received, but he would have received it internally. He would have received it somewhere internally, >> presumably from someone inside the BC.

[00:08:23]>> Presumably, yes. But >> so Sergeant and Cory had an indirect route into the BEC through the general.

[00:08:29]You didn't know it at the time, but directly or indirectly, Sergeant and Corsy must have had a route to the BC to get to the into the BEC to get this document. Well, I'm not sure and I can't comment on that.

[00:08:43]I've got no comment on that. Mr. >> Mi, was this a publicly available document?

[00:08:48]>> The document in his form? No.

[00:08:50]>> Yes. So, he didn't get it properly. It wasn't shared with him uh in a permissible way, in a regular way.

[00:08:59]Surely you must accept that.

[00:09:01]Commissioner agreed to that.

[00:09:03]>> Yes. That's a simple proposition that's been made to you that Sergeant Gossi had possession to a tender related document that he should not have had.

[00:09:14]>> That's that's a simple proposition that's being made. You must accept that >> commissioner. I've accepted that. But if you had listened to the discussions, the inference was that Sergeant Gossi received it from BEC directly. So >> I'm reformulating. Sergeant Goi had access to a tender rel a tender related document that should not have been in his possession.

[00:09:38]>> You accept that?

[00:09:39]>> I have accepted that.

[00:09:40]>> And and that suggests or at least on the face of it is a corruption already of the tender process. It is being mad. Do you said that? that a tender document >> that is internal of an incomplete >> tender assessment process is sitting with a member of the public because that's what he is. It's sitting with a member of a public that is problematic for that tender process. No >> commissioner don't accept that with all due respect the content of this report that here does not contain any sensitive information whatsoever.

[00:10:14]>> It doesn't matter. No, from my question it doesn't matter whether it contains sensitive information or not. It's a tender document or tender related document as a matter of policy. It should not be outside >> I've agreed to that >> of the municipality that it is outside of the municipality with a member of the public in itself is an irregularity. You must be able to I've agreed to that.

[00:10:42]>> Thank you. That's all I'm checking with you. Thank you.

[00:10:45]But you didn't take any steps upon being made aware of this irregularity, did you?

[00:10:52]>> Indeed, again, I assessed the contents of the document. The document from my perspective did not need me to take any further steps. This was information that was radio available to the public upon my receiving of this document. Did not contain anything sensitive or confidential.

[00:11:06]>> This is another example of you involving Sergeant Enosi in operational matters that have nothing to do with him.

[00:11:18]Mr. Nissi, this is another example of you involving Sergeant Nunosi in operational TMPD matters that have nothing to do with him. Is that correct?

[00:11:30]>> Yes, commission is correct.

[00:11:31]>> He's not inserting himself here. You are inserting him.

[00:11:35]>> Yes, I am.

[00:11:35]>> You are sharing with him contractual documents between Tuani and its service providers.

[00:11:42]>> Yes, Commissioner. dealing with termination of contracts between Swania and its service providers.

[00:11:46]>> I agree with you commissioner.

[00:11:48]>> Do you consider that appropriate?

[00:11:49]>> No, Commissioner. However, he was already involved in this matter and this was closing the loop. This was all in relation to addressing these matters. If you can see further on, >> can can you not please uh we agreed on this yesterday that if you answer my question and you want to explain, I will allow you. Okay?

[00:12:07]>> And believe me, I won't gag you at all.

[00:12:09]>> Okay?

[00:12:11]Apologies. Commissioner >> Sergeant Goi was involved in the payment issue relating to an invoice.

[00:12:23]We are now dealing here with termination and you say he was still involved. How was he involved in the termination of the appointment of GIS?

[00:12:36]Please explain that to me. So from my perspective this was the context of that starting point of that matter that this matter needs to cease and um if you look at the next chat chair I do ask for number DC's number >> I don't want to go to the next chat I'm asking you how was he involved in the issue of the termination >> from my perspective it was still around the same topic when we are discussing it now does provide a perception that it's two separate events But in my mind ch this was closing the loop on this matter indefinitely that we'll no longer have any issues of this nature and I wanted to communicate this with the deputy lamini.

[00:13:17]>> Remember that it is commissioner spee who takes the decision.

[00:13:22]It's a committee which sat and I was part of that. Within that there was a discussion with water services deputy chief spee was assigned to ensure that he runs with the process moving forward because this function was now fully delegated to him and there's no uncertainty any further.

[00:13:42]>> Let let me tell you because deputies has given evidence before this commission.

[00:13:47]He says on the 12th of March he gave an instruction to Mr. Malaji to terminate this ad hoc appointments the following morning the 13th of March. Mr. Malaji did not comply with that instruction because he said the instruction had to be in writing and when deputies please realized that Mr. Malachi was stalling with this terminations following an investigation which led to Mr. Malachi's suspension around the same period. He then wrote the letter terminating the services and that's his evidence which Mr. Malachi came here although he disputed the issue of the insubordination he admitted that that is the sequence. Now was Sergeant Nosi part of the committee discussions to terminate the appointment of Gobis?

[00:14:41]>> No Sergeant Kosi was not part of that.

[00:14:43]>> So he was not part of that.

[00:14:44]>> Now this letter deals with that termination.

[00:14:47]>> Yes. So when you say he was involved not in the one invoice from 2024, the termination in June 2025, how was he involved?

[00:14:58]>> From the context of my discussion and how I'm responding to you, commissioner, is that this was closing the loop and closing this matter? Yes, it might seem like it's two separate events, but from my perspective, it was around the it was for the same incident that he was involved in in terms of ADOC services.

[00:15:14]it was for the same instance of the same company that we're dealing with here. So I assumed at that point in time that he was closing the loop and in fact what I should have done was ask for the number first because I asked for the number afterwards and it's a hindsight that I've done cuz immediately after that I asked him for the details because I realize it I should have just I should communicate directly presumably I had forgotten that I already asked for his details or hadn't saved these details on earlier on but I do ask for his details and he does send it to me and I then have further communications directly with the deputy chief >> Mr. Minister, I have a different a different issue with this that the date of this letter uh received is 24th June 2025. The the invoices that you were you were involved with overseeing payment following the call from Mr. Matlangu as at this date that had been resolved. No, >> it had been resolved except for the exposed faster invoice.

[00:16:14]>> Yes. So when you say if those invoices were resolved and there's only the expos factor invoice which according to your evidence was something above your grade.

[00:16:26]It was not for you to resolve the expos factor invoice. At this point there's no outstanding invoice issues that require the closing of the loop. So what loop are you talking about closing at this point? I agree with you commissioner as I have agreed with um commissioner Kumalo reason being I'm saying that it was for the same services being ad hoc it was for the same company involved in my mind I assume that it's closing the loop for this matter indefinitely so there's no longer the confusion but I am agreeing that it in hindsight does look like these are two separate complete events but I had >> it doesn't look like they are completely separate things >> in hindsight they are separate events but when I looked at this matter at that point in time. It was one event and I was closing the loophole indefinitely on the matter. So I do agree with both yourself and with um Commissioner Kumar.

[00:17:18]>> What what is there for you to discuss with General Lamini and why when his superior spee has written this kind of letter uh you say there was a committee meeting you were party to that spee was in that meeting. So the executive has met some level of senior management has made and made a collective decision. Spe um commissioner spee writes that letter to goobies.

[00:17:51]What business do you have talking to his junior general Jamini about this matter to close whatever loop you say you're closing when the head has communicated to a service provider >> and what are you discussing that you should be discussing with with space in fact >> okay firstly commissioner it's not his junior they are equals they're both deputy chiefs they're both deputy chiefs and they're equals with separate responsibilities responsibilities.

[00:18:22]>> I accept that. Yeah.

[00:18:23]>> The responsibilities of deputy chief space is APSS. The responsibilities of uh DC lamin support services and finance matters. So me communicating with him is be aware of this. Ensure that you guard against this. So that if anything of this nature comes up, you know how to deal with it. You can't entertain this moving forward. It can't be confusion that we had seen. We seen earlier on there was confusion where individuals were saying for will deal with this. He has committed. So I needed to engage him directly to make that matter certain.

[00:18:53]>> Was it not for Space to to communicate that with him? I mean the matter is now with Commissioner Space according to you. You tell us uh that he was delegated now to deal with the matter.

[00:19:05]Why why are you inserting yourself um on the termination issue which is not anything you have discussed with lamini previously with this m with this matter and you are aware that commissioner spee is the one that's dealing with the matter why are you inserting yourself to discuss this with with general >> so this is part of my roles I need to ensure that all the part all parties understand fully previously there was complete misunderstanding between APS PSS as well as payables or finance services within TMPD. That's why we had an issue of that nature. So I'm involved uh commissioner by view of ensuring that all parties are on the same state of mind. There's no confusion from anyone and this and DC um Jamini who's responsible for support and finance matters must be fully aware of that as well. So all you needed to do, you're telling us is to tell uh General Lamini that SPEC has terminated the services of Goobies.

[00:20:08]>> Yes. The user because the way we've understood it there's the there's the client and the TMPD has got a role. I think you said it's the user. So that's all you needed to tell uh General Lamini that SPE has has terminated this agreement.

[00:20:22]>> Yes, Commissioner. I need to assertain myself that he's fully aware of that.

[00:20:25]Yes.

[00:20:25]>> Okay. Thank you. Can we just uh I will leave this to Mr. Chasen.

[00:20:30]Do you remember of hand what your contract of employment says about confidentiality >> of hand?

[00:20:38]>> Yeah.

[00:20:39]>> I know there is a clause.

[00:20:40]>> I I don't want to force you. If you don't remember, you can just say I can't recite it.

[00:20:45]>> I I can't recite >> and we don't have it in the bundles. Am I correct?

[00:20:49]>> I haven't seen it in the bundles.

[00:20:50]>> Can you please make it available? Uh, I don't even mind if you redact or black out everything because I'm only interested in the confidentiality clause.

[00:21:02]>> At present, I'm suspended from the city as you're aware. I received communication that I'm unable to access the system nor am I able to communicate with any individuals. I will try and have uh communication with the city manager from this request. I don't have that at my disposal.

[00:21:15]>> And and you don't have difficulty if we obtain it through our own effort.

[00:21:19]>> No, that would help me even better. I I can assure you I'm only interested in that clause. I'm not interested in any other things.

[00:21:26]>> I've got no issues at all, Commissioner.

[00:21:28]>> And the reason I'm interested in that clause is I have reason to believe that you've breached the provisions of that clause when you inserted Sonosi in operational matters of the city of Swan.

[00:21:42]If you want to comment on that aspect, you can comment or you can leave it for later on.

[00:21:47]>> Yes, please. If I can >> maybe before you comment, let let me let me try and help. I I don't know where Commissioner Klo is going with this. It might be helpful. I hope what I'm saying that you should accept that as a as a as a matter of common law an employee and that includes you has an obligation to keep the the the the affairs information of the employer confidential and to disclose only in so far as it's required by their role in the discharge of their functions. I think I'm going to ask you to accept that as a common law principle that applies to all employees. Um and I think if you do comment, you should comment on the basis of what I'm suggesting to you is the correct position of the law.

[00:22:33]>> Commissioner, firstly on that perspective, I'll need to get guidance from my legal team. I'm not aware and I can't comment on that and I can't accept it. I'll need to get guidance from my legal team. However, on the issues raised by Commissioner Kumar, first of all, I did concede that um Sergeant Kosi involved himself. Second of all, from my perspective, um there was nothing completely s sensitive or confidential within the payment process. That entire process was general communications from me is a general winning. F is a general winning.

[00:23:09]Please extend my gratitude to the general. There was nothing sensitive about those communications. In terms of this termination letter, he had already gone out to the service provider. The service provider had that. So there was no upper hand that Sergeant Cory would have obtained by having view of that letter in any case. So I did accept the oversight and that in hindsight I should have asked for the number first. That's why um Commissioner Bal was saying on 33 on 332 I quickly realized that hey maybe I shouldn't have done that and I immediately ask for his numbers again.

[00:23:40]He sends me the general's numbers. So that's an admission on my part. But at this time the information that Sergeant Goi has is of no value. It can't assist him for any benefit of any sort. Hence it was around the situation that we're discussing. That's my comment.

[00:23:56]>> Let me tell you how it can assist him.

[00:23:58]You do know that Gubies is a competitor of Sergeant Goss's brother's company, right?

[00:24:05]>> They are not appointed on 10p1.

[00:24:07]>> No, no, that's not what I asked you.

[00:24:08]They are competitors.

[00:24:11]>> Yes.

[00:24:11]>> Sorry if I can just interrupt. They are in fact appointed on TMPD1.

[00:24:15]>> No, this is uh TMPD2 sorry 2016 2017.

[00:24:19]They are not appointed on this adoc services tend senior council. Gapesia is not part and parcel of TMPD2 2016 >> but he is bidding for TMPD1 in at this stage and Gubis is ultimately appointed to TMPD1 along with >> yes I agree with that but on this particular tender I would like us to treat them in isolation. They are competitors. They do bid. But on this particular one, they're not competitors.

[00:24:44]The other one is not has not been appointed by the city.

[00:24:47]>> I I did not ask you about 20 tenders.

[00:24:49]All I said to you was you do know that Gubies is a competitor of uh Sergeant Ningos's brother's company.

[00:24:59]>> I am aware. And any document that belongs to Gubies such as an invoice or letters of termination will show what rates charges for its services. Right.

[00:25:13]>> Not the termination letter but any invoice. Yes.

[00:25:16]>> The 2024 2025 invoice we talked about.

[00:25:19]>> Yes.

[00:25:20]>> Now why is Sajinosi entitled to see what his brother's competitor's company is charging? because you said so yourself.

[00:25:31]They are bidding for tenders in Puma Langa which you said was that tender you were assisting with in April.

[00:25:39]So really what I'm dealing with is your suggestion that Sergeant Enosi does not stand to benefit if you allow him access to Gub's documents including invoices including knowing when Gubis is going to that Sergeant Nos's brother can use to his benefit to the detriment of Gubies and it troubles me that you don't see anything wrong with that because you say by sharing all these things with Sergeant Enosi he will not benefit it is of no use to him and I'm saying you are wrong because the mere fact that his brother's company is Gubis's competitor and you know very well that his brother's company tenders when it comes to security issues and certainly actively assists his brother in all of these matters because that's how you get involved in assisting a pesa.

[00:26:45]So you must know that all this information is of benefit to so I don't understand when you say he will not benefit.

[00:26:55]>> Do you want to comment?

[00:26:56]>> Yes I do please uh commissioner with your permission firstly I need to focus on documents that I share and I share this termination letter. It's the only sensitive document which I'm of the view that is of no value to him. Why I'm saying that the termination letter contains nothing in terms of rates pricing or anything that could benefit Napia. Reasons being for this tender which these airdog services are currently operating in they're not even appointed. So even if he does know there's no way or form that he could be allocated um the work that was allocated to Kubis. Hence I'm saying from what I share there's no benefit that you would have. I did not share an invoice. I did not share a payment date. I did not share requisition with Sergeant Goi. Um >> but you allowed Lieutenant Lamini to share that invoice with Sergeant Goi who then forwarded it to you.

[00:27:47]>> I didn't allow him. He will explain why he shared it and what were the reasons behind that. I did not allow that.

[00:27:52]>> But you didn't stop it when you became aware that uh Mrs. Jamini shared it with Enosi clearly with the intention that he must forward it to you because that was the whole point of the exercise. He assist you.

[00:28:07]That's the only reason Sergeant Enosi got involved in that dispute with Gubies. He say so even in his evidence it was to assist you and I agreed to that. It was to assist me but I did not ask him to assist me.

[00:28:22]He volunteered and out of his own took it upon himself to do that. My people, before I close, let me just summarize what we found out today about what Gareth Mani and Sergeant Fanny and Kosy were actually sharing with each other.

[00:28:38]Because I think when you hear it all together, it tells you everything. They shared shooting trips. They shared pictures of automatic weapons. They shared messages about enemies. They shared a driver that Nosi privately called a bodyguard and warned Mani to keep around so that enemies would not know the protection was gone. They shared New Year's messages calling each other true brothers in July brother forever. They shared information about a private business deal in Durban worth enough in Nosi's own words for both of them to grow. They shared 45 pages of luxury SUV pictures. They shared information about a taxi association president called number one who Nikosi was meeting at 6:30 in the morning on a public holiday. And then they shared something that brought both of them to this commission. An internal BEC evaluation template for a 2.9 billion rand tender. A list of seven preferred companies including Enos's brother's company called Enapa. A goobis invoice that showed what their competitor was charging and a termination letter from Twain's own files. All of that. And Manishi signed a sworn legal statement to this commission saying he had received no benefit from Sergeant Enosi directly or indirectly. Brother forever.

[00:30:02]That is what Enosi called Mani in July.

[00:30:06]Today the brother gave the brother up peace by piece to save himself.

[00:30:12]South Africa. I want to end with this.

[00:30:16]When General Mcuinazi stood up on the 6th of July 2025 and opened this can, people laughed. Some said he was rogue.

[00:30:24]Some said this commission would go nowhere. Today, a suspended CFO admitted at a presidential commission of inquiry that he shared a city's confidential contract documents with an arrested police sergeant. That a live tender template leaked out of the evaluation process to that same sergeant. that a commissioner found he breached his employment contract and that Enosi's brother's company was competing against the very company whose documents he was sharing. That is not nowhere. That is exactly where Muanazi said this thing would go. Mani is still in that chair.

[00:31:01]This commission still has the invoices, the budget manipulation, the treasury payment pressure, the Joseph Sibonei connection, and the Manni taxi man instruction to cancel the tender. None of that has been finished yet. There is more coming, a lot more. If General Muinazi did not open this can on the 6th of July, 2025, none of this comes out.

[00:31:25]Not a single word of it. Please share this video. Not for us, but because South Africa deserves to see everything that happens in that room. Every document, every WhatsApp, every concession, every commissioner's verdict. If this commission matters to you, share it now.