The Amajuba District Municipality has rejected allegations of forged councillor signatures and defended its governance processes after a provincial parliamentary hearing placed its finances, infrastructure projects and consequence management under renewed scrutiny.
The hearing, held on 11 August 2026, formed part of a series of Section 132 proceedings launched by the KwaZulu-Natal Legislature’s CoGTA Portfolio Committee on 5 August 2026.
Section 132 of the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) empowers provincial legislatures to exercise oversight over municipal annual reports.
Portfolio Committee Chairperson Marlaine Nair said the hearings allow legislators to interrogate audit findings, require municipalities to account for identified deficiencies and establish what corrective measures are being implemented.
“These hearings are an important part of the legislature’s responsibility to strengthen accountability and ensure that municipalities respond clearly to financial, governance and performance concerns,” said Nair.
Turning to Amajuba District Municipality, which serves the Newcastle, Dannhauser and eMadlangeni municipal areas, Nair said its financial position was particularly concerning.
“Very concerning for this District is the cash flow issues. The financial position of this municipality is very concerning,” she said.
The District’s equitable share allocation was withheld in July 2026. While the Portfolio Committee acknowledged that the Municipality is working with Provincial Treasury and KZN CoGTA, it called for a comprehensive financial recovery plan.
As previously reported by Newcastillian News, National Treasury withheld equitable share allocations from several municipalities, including Amajuba District, following persistent non-compliance with the MFMA and its supporting regulations.
The concerns included Unauthorised, Irregular, Fruitless and Wasteful Expenditure (UIFWE), unfunded budgets, weak consequence management and non-compliance with financial legislation.
National Treasury identified a recurring failure among municipalities including Newcastle, eMadlangeni, Amajuba District, Umzinyathi, Impendle, AbaQulusi and uMkhanyakude to address UIFWE and enforce consequence management.
“The decision follows persistent and serious non-compliance with the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) and its supporting regulations, despite support provided by the National Treasury through guidance, engagement, and formal or informal communication,” Treasury stated at the time.
Read the previous report here.
During the latest hearing, Nair said UIFWE at Amajuba had doubled and raised concerns about the apparent lack of consequence management.
“We have seen that there has been virtually no consequence management. So, we have called for a detailed report, with regard to disciplinary measures, and what consequence management has been undertaken.”
The Committee also heard allegations that councillors’ signatures had been forged, alongside questions concerning the legality of the Municipal Manager’s appointment and the election of the District Mayor.
However, Nair stressed that the Committee had not established whose signatures were allegedly forged or identified the document or municipal process to which the allegation related.
“However, the Committee did not establish during the hearing whose signatures were allegedly forged or conclusively establish the particular document or process to which the allegation relates. I, therefore, do not want to speculate or identify individuals until the relevant information has been properly verified.”
The Committee has requested detailed reports from KZN CoGTA and Amajuba District Municipality before finalising its recommendations.
Responding to questions from Newcastillian News, the Municipality categorically rejected the allegation of forged signatures.
“The Municipality categorically disputes the claim that councillors’ signatures were forged. No such incidents have been verified. We invite anyone with credible information to follow legislated reporting routes to the relevant authorities.”
The Municipality also criticised what it described as unsubstantiated allegations being aired publicly before it had submitted the report requested by the Committee.
According to the Municipality, it cooperated with the provincial legislature’s fact-finding process, supplied the requested information and was given an opportunity to answer specific questions.
“The municipality was further allowed to respond to specific questions and provide a comprehensive report within the stipulated deadline. It was then strange for us to witness the grandstanding on social media while we were still preparing the required report,” Amajuba District Municipality told Newcastillian News.
Questions surrounding the District Mayor’s election follow a January 2026 ruling by the Pietermaritzburg High Court, which declared the election of Amajuba District Mayor Councillor Thembelihle Mthembu and Deputy Mayor Councillor Shaka Sithole unlawful and unconstitutional.
The court ordered their removal and reinstated the position that existed before the disputed May 2025 council meeting. The African National Congress and Team Sugar South Africa had challenged the election, citing procedural irregularities.
Read the previous report here.
Although the two officials were subsequently re-elected, questions about the Municipality’s governance processes have continued.
Amajuba District Municipality said the latest concerns surrounding the Mayor’s election centred on whether the relevant council meeting had a quorum. It maintained that the allegation was unfounded.
“All meetings were duly constituted, and attendance registers are available,” the Municipality said.
Regarding the appointment of the Municipal Manager, the Municipality said the position had been advertised, interviews conducted and the appointment approved by Council.
It added that the process had been verified and endorsed by the MEC.
The hearing also examined Amajuba’s financial management, infrastructure projects and delivery of water and sanitation services.
Following the proceedings, Member of the Provincial Legislature, Portfolio Committee member and DA KZN CoGTA Spokesperson Tim Brauteseth alleged that the Municipality had committed multiple contraventions of the MFMA.
According to Brauteseth, Amajuba recorded R24.6 million in irregular expenditure during the 2024/2025 financial year, with a closing balance of R45.5 million.
He attributed the expenditure to uncompetitive procurement processes, prohibited awards to state officials and month-to-month extensions of municipal contracts.
“These are all in direct violation of the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) section 112,” he stated.
Brauteseth further said the Municipality recorded R130.2 million in unauthorised expenditure because of overspending on sub-votes, along with R6.4 million in fruitless and wasteful expenditure.
According to the information cited by Brauteseth, 69% of the unauthorised expenditure and 78% of the fruitless and wasteful expenditure remained unresolved, with no recovery of funds.
He claimed this represented a failure to meet the Municipality’s obligations under Section 32 of the MFMA.
Brauteseth also said municipal creditors were being paid an average of 256 days late, despite Section 65(2)(e) of the MFMA requiring municipalities to pay money owed within 30 days of receiving the relevant invoice or statement, unless otherwise prescribed.
“This has crippled suppliers, inflated costs, and undermined service delivery. Revenue management has also collapsed, with 92% of receivables impaired and a growing reliance on unsustainable water tinkering – which ballooned from R9.1million to R15.9 million in a single year,” stated Brauteseth.
Responding to the 256-day figure, Amajuba District Municipality acknowledged that financial constraints had affected its payment cycles but disputed that the period reflected its ordinary payment practices.
“While the figure of 256 days is not reflective of our standard practice, we are implementing measures to improve turnaround times and ensure creditors are paid more efficiently,” the Municipality said.
It attributed the increase in water-tankering expenditure to greater demand and rising operational costs.
“The increase from R9.1 million to R15.9 million relates to the rise in demand for water services, including additional households requiring supply and higher operational costs. The Municipality continues to monitor expenditure to balance service delivery with financial sustainability.”
Brauteseth also raised concerns about municipal infrastructure, including the R59.9 million Braakfontein Reservoir, which remains non-operational after failing watertightness tests.
He alleged that the contract had been awarded without suppliers being properly evaluated for functionality, resulting in financial losses.
“SIU investigation confirmed non-compliance; disciplinary action against Bid Evaluation Committee members still incomplete. MFMA Section 62(1)(c) and Section 173 implicated,” he said.
Amajuba District Municipality confirmed that the reservoir had failed technical tests and said legal proceedings had been instituted to recover money lost through the project.
Brauteseth further claimed that the Ramaphosa Settlement Reservoir project had been abandoned during construction, leaving affected communities without the water supply they had been promised.
The Municipality disputed this description. It said work was continuing in accordance with the project’s technical and financial planning and that certain phases had already been completed.
Further concerns raised by Brauteseth included wastewater treatment plants allegedly discharging non-compliant effluent and municipal employees working without appropriate personal protective equipment.
“This is a municipality in collapse. Amajuba’s leadership has not only failed to comply with the MFMA – they have actively obstructed accountability. Section 173 of the MFMA is clear: officials who deliberately or negligently breach their duties commit a criminal offence,” he said.
Brauteseth called for officials who deliberately or negligently approved irregular contracts, failed to prevent or recover unlawful expenditure, or allowed unauthorised overspending to face investigation and possible prosecution under Section 173 of the MFMA.
His call does not, on its own, establish criminal liability. Any prosecution would require the relevant investigative and prosecuting authorities to establish that the requirements of the legislation had been met in relation to identifiable officials and conduct.
Amajuba District Municipality said it was not yet in a position to provide a complete response concerning the reported fruitless and wasteful expenditure, as it required further information.
However, the Municipality maintained that corrective measures were being implemented through legal, disciplinary and administrative processes.
“Corrective measures are being pursued through legal and administrative channels. Where irregularities have been identified, disciplinary processes are underway. Efforts to recover monies are active, and the Municipality remains committed to accountability and consequence management.”
The Portfolio Committee has not yet issued its final recommendations.
Its requested reports are expected to provide further detail on the financial figures, disciplinary proceedings, disputed governance allegations and progress made in addressing the infrastructure failures identified during the hearing.
What are your thoughts on this, let us know below.
Be sure to read: Game Store Closures Loom as Walmart Expands Across South Africa
