A contractor who stepped in to finish the R116m Semphato Secondary School project in Soshanguve has lodged an affidavit with the South African Police Service alleging that officials, consultants and contractors improperly claimed payments totalling R16.9m for work that did not exist.
Discrepancy between claimed and actual progress
The complaint, contained in an affidavit signed by Nhlanhla Mkhize, owner of Mkhize Gcwabe Properties (MGP), centres on four alleged instances of fraud relating to payment certificates for preliminaries, roof sheeting and trusses, paving, roads and parking, and masonry.
Mkhize says MGP was brought into the project in January 2024 to assist the original contractor, Yaweh 1 Construction and Projects, shortly before that contractor was terminated. MGP resumed work on 17 January 2024.
At the first technical meeting after MGP joined the project, the department presented the work as 55% complete, with cumulative expenditure of R48.4m. MGP’s own assessment put physical progress at 23.48%, with expenditure of R31.4m — a difference Mkhize says amounts to R16.9m.
| Measure | Department figure | MGP assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage complete | 55% | 23.48% |
| Cumulative expenditure | R48.4m | R31.4m |
| Alleged unjustified payments | R16.9m | |
"The claimed progress figure was vastly different from our own audit at feasibility stage," Mkhize says in the affidavit.
Allegations and timeline
The affidavit alleges forgery, corruption, theft by false pretence and conspiracy to commit crimes. Among the specific claims is that more than R6.1m was paid for paving, roads and parking — yet when MGP arrived on site in 2024 there was no paving present.
According to the affidavit, 71% of the budget for paving, roads and parking had already been paid between September 2021 and the end of 2022. Mkhize says this raises the question of what quality control and measurement processes were used if no physical work existed to inspect.
Whistleblower says earlier warnings were ignored
Mkhize says he flagged concerns to the department more than a year before lodging the police complaint but that the allegations were never properly investigated despite promises that the department’s risk management unit would be involved. The affidavit sets out his version of events and the documentary and physical discrepancies that prompted him to approach SAPS.
The matter is now a police complaint. The affidavit and the specifics cited will be part of any investigation that follows.
Local impact and oversight questions
If the allegations are substantiated, they would represent a significant loss from a provincial education project and a direct hit to service delivery in a township where new school infrastructure is critically needed. The case also raises broader questions about contract administration, site verification and the approval of payment certificates on public projects across the province.
- Alleged offences named in the affidavit: forgery, corruption, theft by false pretence, conspiracy to commit crimes.
- Areas of alleged overpayment: preliminaries, roof sheeting and trusses, paving/roads/parking, masonry.
- Key figures: R116m total project value; R16.9m in disputed payments; R6.1m alleged for paving/roads/parking.
Provincial departments are required to follow prescribed procurement and payment controls, including verification by project managers and internal risk units. The affidavit’s assertion that requests to involve the department’s risk management unit were not acted on will be material to any internal review.
Residents in Soshanguve and education activists have repeatedly emphasised that delays and cost overruns on school builds directly disrupt learners and teachers. If funds were diverted or certificates approved without proper inspection, the cost is borne by the community waiting for completed classrooms and safe facilities.
The affidavit was lodged with SAPS; any further action, including an internal departmental probe or a formal criminal investigation, will produce additional findings and possible prosecutions. Officials named in the affidavit and the Gauteng education department had not been quoted in the affidavit text available in the report. The next steps will be whether SAPS opens a docket and whether the department initiates its own inquiry into contract administration on the Semphato project.
As this is an active complaint lodged with police, follow-up reporting will monitor responses from SAPS and the Gauteng education department, as well as any formal steps taken by provincial oversight bodies to probe the payments and certificates cited in the affidavit.
