By JD GLOBAL MEDIA
Rand Water has launched an independent fact-finding review into approximately R6.5 million in venue-hire contracts awarded to a company linked to pastor Paseka “Mboro” Motsoeneng, bringing renewed scrutiny to procurement practices at one of South Africa’s major water utilities.
The matter was disclosed by Water and Sanitation Minister Pemmy Majodina in a written response to a parliamentary question concerning contracts awarded by water boards and related entities to a business associated with Motsoeneng.
The contracts were awarded to Incredible Happenings (Pty), a company linked to Motsoeneng, during the 2025/26 financial year. The payments covered the hiring of venues for four Rand Water events between November 2025 and February 2026.
According to the minister’s response, the services were delivered and all four events took place. However, Rand Water’s supply chain management department referred the matter for further examination after concerns were raised, resulting in an independent fact-finding review by the utility’s Integrity and Probity Assurance Business Unit.
The review does not mean that wrongdoing has been established against Motsoeneng, his company or Rand Water officials. Its purpose is to establish whether the procurement process complied with the applicable requirements and to examine concerns raised about the transactions.
Four Contracts Totalled About R6.5 Million
The payments disclosed in the parliamentary response consisted of four transactions.
Rand Water paid approximately R2.3 million for venue rental on 3 November 2025. A second payment of about R213,000 followed on 6 November.
The largest individual payment was approximately R3.8 million for venue rental on 5 December 2025.
A further payment of about R21,000 was made in February 2026.
Together, the four payments amounted to roughly R6.5 million.
The venues were used for Rand Water activities that included long-service recognition events and training sessions.
The minister’s response states that the contracted services were provided and that the four events were completed.
That detail is significant because the review is not based on an allegation that the venues were never provided or that the events did not happen. Instead, the scrutiny concerns the circumstances surrounding the procurement and the questions that were subsequently raised about the contracts.
The fact-finding process is therefore expected to establish whether the procurement was conducted correctly and whether any undisclosed relationships, procedural weaknesses or other irregularities may have affected the transactions.
Parliamentary Question Brings Contracts Into Focus
The information came to light after MK Party MP Visvin Reddy asked whether water boards had awarded contracts to Incredible Happenings or businesses associated with Motsoeneng during the previous decade.
The parliamentary question required the Department of Water and Sanitation to provide information about contracts involving water-sector institutions.
Majodina’s response identified the four Rand Water transactions during the 2025/26 financial year.
The disclosure has placed the contracts under greater public scrutiny because Rand Water is a major public water institution whose operations affect millions of people and whose spending is ultimately connected to the public sector.
Questions surrounding procurement at public entities can attract particular attention because government and state-owned institutions are expected to demonstrate transparent and accountable use of public resources.
The existence of an investigation, however, should not be interpreted as proof that the contracts were improperly awarded.
At this stage, the confirmed position is that Rand Water is examining the matter and that the contracted services were delivered.
Integrity Unit Conducting Fact-Finding Review
Rand Water’s Integrity and Probity Assurance Business Unit is conducting the review.
The process followed a referral from the utility’s Supply Chain Management department on 1 September 2026.
The investigation is described as an independent fact-finding exercise.
That means the review is intended to establish the relevant facts before any conclusions are reached about whether procurement rules or other requirements were breached.
The review could examine the procurement process used to select the venues, the justification for the expenditure, the quotations or bidding procedures that may have applied, the relationship between the service provider and any relevant decision-makers, and whether the amounts paid were appropriately supported.
It could also determine whether the procurement process complied with Rand Water's internal policies and the broader public-sector requirements applicable to the institution.
No final finding has been announced.
This distinction is important because allegations or questions surrounding a contract are not equivalent to a finding of corruption, fraud or tender manipulation.
Any such conclusion would require evidence and a formal investigative or disciplinary process.
Possible Links To Another Contractor Also Under Review
Majodina’s parliamentary response also indicated that Rand Water management is examining whether there may be a connection involving Motsoeneng and another pastor, Witness Mazanga.
Mazanga has separately attracted attention over government-linked contracts involving other public entities.
The minister’s response indicated that Rand Water’s management referred the matter for review to establish whether there was any relationship between Mazanga and an entity allegedly associated with him.
The existence of that review does not establish that the individuals or companies involved acted improperly.
Instead, the question of possible links forms part of the information Rand Water is examining.
Establishing relationships between companies, individuals and procurement processes can be important in a public-sector investigation because procurement rules generally contain requirements intended to prevent conflicts of interest and ensure that decisions are made according to established procedures.
Whether such concerns exist in this particular case remains to be determined.
Mboro Says He Was Unaware Of The Matter
Motsoeneng was approached for comment regarding the contracts and the review.
He declined to provide a substantive response and said he was unaware of the matter.
His response did not provide an explanation of the individual contracts or address the amounts disclosed in the minister’s parliamentary reply.
The company linked to him is the entity identified in the parliamentary response as having received the venue-hire payments.
The investigation will therefore be important in determining the facts independently of the competing claims and positions surrounding the issue.
Political Calls For Further Investigation
Reddy has called for scrutiny beyond the internal Rand Water process if evidence of serious wrongdoing emerges.
The MP said the internal review was an important first step but argued that independent law-enforcement or investigative institutions should become involved if evidence indicates possible corruption, fraud, bid manipulation, conflicts of interest or improper influence.
Those possibilities have been raised as matters for investigation and have not been established as facts.
The distinction is important because an investigation can examine whether a potential offence or procurement breach occurred without establishing beforehand that an offence was committed.
If the internal review identifies evidence requiring further investigation, the relevant authorities could determine whether the matter falls within their respective legal mandates.
Until then, the Rand Water process remains a fact-finding exercise.
Public Procurement Under Continued Scrutiny
The case arrives against a wider backdrop of continued attention on procurement within South Africa’s public institutions.
Water infrastructure and water utilities are particularly important because public entities in the sector are responsible for maintaining systems that support households, businesses, municipalities and industrial activity.
When procurement concerns arise at a water institution, questions about financial governance can therefore extend beyond the individual contract.
The central issue is whether public money is being spent through transparent, competitive and properly documented processes.
In this case, the disclosed contracts were for event venues rather than the construction or maintenance of water infrastructure.
Nevertheless, the total amount involved has prompted questions because the contracts were awarded within a relatively short period.
The fact that the services were delivered will form part of the factual record, but it does not by itself determine whether the procurement process complied with all applicable requirements.
That is one of the issues the fact-finding review is expected to clarify.
What The Review Could Establish
The outcome of the review could provide answers to several important questions.
It could establish how Incredible Happenings was selected for the four venue-hire arrangements, what procurement procedure was followed and whether the expenditure was properly authorised.
It could also determine whether the prices paid were supported by appropriate documentation and whether alternative service providers were considered where required.
Another area could involve possible relationships between individuals connected to the procurement and the companies involved.
If the review finds that the procurement complied with all relevant requirements, that would provide an official explanation for the transactions and help resolve the questions raised in Parliament.
If investigators instead identify procedural violations or evidence of more serious misconduct, the matter could be escalated through the appropriate institutional or law-enforcement channels.
At present, neither outcome has been established.
Why The R6.5 Million Figure Matters
The amount involved is approximately R6.5 million across four transactions.
The largest payment, about R3.8 million, accounted for more than half of the total.
The second-largest was approximately R2.3 million, followed by payments of about R213,000 and R21,000.
Breaking down the figures provides a clearer picture than simply describing the contracts as a R6.5 million procurement.
The transactions were spread across several months, with the two largest payments occurring in November and December 2025.
The parliamentary response also indicates that the payments related to actual events conducted by Rand Water.
The review will therefore have to consider the full procurement circumstances rather than relying solely on the total value of the four contracts.
No Finding Of Wrongdoing Has Been Announced
At the centre of the matter is an important distinction: Rand Water is investigating the contracts, but the investigation itself is not a finding of misconduct.
There has been no announced conclusion that Motsoeneng, Incredible Happenings or Rand Water officials committed corruption or fraud in connection with the venue arrangements.
The minister’s response confirms that the services were delivered and that the events were completed.
The utility’s integrity unit is now examining the circumstances surrounding the procurement.
That process should provide a clearer factual record about how the contracts were awarded and whether all applicable procedures were followed.
The outcome could also determine whether any further action is required.
Next Steps Will Depend On Findings
For now, attention will remain on Rand Water’s fact-finding review.
The utility has not announced a final outcome or indicated that criminal charges have resulted from the review.
The next significant development will therefore be the findings of the internal process.
If no irregularities are identified, the matter could conclude with an explanation of the procurement decisions.
If concerns are substantiated, Rand Water and the relevant authorities would have to determine what corrective, disciplinary or investigative steps are appropriate.
The parliamentary process could also continue if lawmakers seek additional information about the contracts or the outcome of the review.
For South Africans, the broader significance lies in the principle that public expenditure should be transparent, properly documented and subject to effective oversight.
The R6.5 million in venue contracts linked to Incredible Happenings is now under formal scrutiny. Until that process is completed, the established facts remain that Rand Water awarded four venue-hire contracts during the 2025/26 financial year, the services were delivered, approximately R6.5 million was paid, and the utility’s Integrity and Probity Assurance Business Unit is conducting an independent fact-finding review.
Any conclusions about wrongdoing will depend on the evidence produced by that process and any subsequent investigation by competent authorities.
Comments
Post a Comment