Staff members of the uThukela District Municipality gathered outside the municipality’s offices in Ladysmith on Wednesday, 25 February 2026, after several employees reported that their February salaries had not reflected in their bank accounts.
The development occurred despite written assurances from Municipal Manager Langelihle Jili that salaries and allowances had already been processed.
In correspondence dated Tuesday, 24 February 2026, Mr Jili informed staff that payments had been made and would reflect in accordance with the respective processing timeframes of banking institutions. However, by mid-morning on Wednesday, a number of employees remained unpaid. Uncertainty quickly turned to frustration, with staff seeking clarity on the municipality’s financial position and the reliability of its payroll systems.
Although no formal public statement had been issued at the time of publication, the salary delays arose against the backdrop of the municipality’s bank accounts being frozen.
While slow interbank processing has been cited in some quarters as a possible explanation, Councillor Thys Janse van Rensburg has attributed the situation to the Municipal Manager’s alleged failure to comply with a court-ordered payment of R3 million to RASP Consultants CC.
“This is not due to external factors like Equitable Share delays, as Mr Jili falsely claimed in council; the funds were there, but he chose not to comply with a binding court order. This negligence has frozen municipal accounts, halted salaries and services, and burdened residents with avoidable costs. The IFP ignored our early warnings about Mr Jili’s problematic record and continues to shield him, prioritising cronyism and corruption over accountability,” said Councillor Janse van Rensburg.
As previously reported on 23 February 2026, the municipality confirmed that its bank accounts had been frozen following legal action instituted by RASP Consultants CC. The dispute dates back to October 2023, when RASP secured a court order attaching municipal assets, including bank accounts, in relation to an outstanding debt of approximately R15 million, plus interest. Enforcement of that order has continued to restrict the municipality’s financial operations, directly affecting service delivery and staff remuneration.
Click here to read more about this.
Although affected employees ultimately received their salaries, the political and governance ramifications remain unresolved.
Councillor Janse van Rensburg has since lodged a formal inquiry into the reported use of the uThukela Economic Development Agency (UEDA) bank account to facilitate municipal payroll and related transactions during the attachment period.
According to the councillor, information available to him suggests that municipal funds may have been channelled through UEDA’s bank account to enable partial salary payments while the municipality’s primary accounts remained attached. While he acknowledged that paying employees is imperative, he questioned whether the mechanism allegedly employed complies with the existing High Court order and the provisions of the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA).
The inquiry has been escalated beyond the municipality.
Copies have been submitted to National Treasury, the KwaZulu-Natal MEC for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, the MEC for Finance, and the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Treasury, placing the matter within the scope of provincial and national oversight.
In his letter to Mr Jili, Councillor Janse van Rensburg states that, based on the information currently available, there is no known Council resolution authorising the use of a third-party account for municipal payroll purposes or the deposit of municipal-related funds from Inkosi Langalibalele Local Municipality and Alfred Duma Local Municipality into such an account.
He has requested a comprehensive written response within seven calendar days addressing several areas of concern.
Firstly, he seeks full disclosure of the origin and authority of all funds deposited into and disbursed from the UEDA account for municipal purposes over the past 30 days, including supporting documentation and confirmation of the legal basis for any redirected funds.
Secondly, he has asked how the use of UEDA’s account aligns with the High Court attachment order.
In particular, he questions whether routing transactions through a separate municipal entity could constitute circumvention of the court directive and whether legal advice was obtained to mitigate potential risks, including contempt proceedings or further litigation.
Thirdly, the inquiry seeks clarity on who authorised the transactions, on what dates, and under what authority. It further calls for confirmation regarding potential liability for any irregular, unauthorised, or fruitless expenditure arising from the arrangement, including possible personal liability under MFMA section 32(6) and the Public Audit Act provisions relating to certificates of debt for material irregularities.
He has also requested confirmation that statutory deductions, including SARS, pension, and medical aid contributions, were properly processed and that a verifiable audit trail exists.
Finally, the councillor has questioned why Council was not informed in advance of the arrangement, as required under MFMA section 52(d) and Standing Rules Rule 22, and has requested evidence of any prior approvals, risk assessments, or formal reporting.
Taken together, the salary disruption and subsequent inquiry have shifted attention from a payroll delay to broader questions of financial governance and legal compliance within the municipality. What began as an operational issue has evolved into a matter engaging statutory oversight frameworks and testing the limits of executive authority under constrained financial conditions.
The response from the Municipal Manager, together with any findings from provincial and national oversight bodies, will determine whether the measures adopted were lawful and defensible, or whether further corrective or legal action may follow.
Until then, the episode continues to focus scrutiny on the municipality’s financial management practices and internal accountability mechanisms.
With the above in mind, what are your thoughts? Let us know below.
Do not forget to read:
