NewsPREMIUM

RAF executives tells Scopa vetting was not done

Unresolved suspensions and contract controversies plague Road Accident Fund

RAF senior manager Marius Werner is expected to testify in aggravation of sentence. Stock photo.
RAF senior manager Marius Werner is expected to testify in aggravation of sentence. Picture: Stock photo. (123RF/rclassenlayouts)

The standing committee on public accounts (Scopa) on Tuesday heard that senior executives at the Road Accident Fund (RAF) had not been vetted by the State Security Agency (SSA), despite earlier assurances to parliament that the process was complete.

Chief governance officer Mampe Kumalo told MPs that vetting remained outstanding for several executives, including the CEO and CFO, leaving governance structures weakened and exposing the fund to risk.

Subsequent testimony addressed unresolved staff suspensions, contract appointments in the office of the CEO, and allegations of manipulation in disciplinary hearings. Head of the office of the CEO Mpho Manyasha was pressed on the creation of seven specialist contract positions in 2020, including senior advisers in finance, communications, IT and treasury. She said the posts were intended to support organisational transformation but acknowledged that “questions remain about their cost and effectiveness”.

Former senior manager for employee relations Motlhoding Letsoalo was questioned on allegations that officials colluded with external chairpersons to influence disciplinary outcomes. He denied wrongdoing but conceded that the fund had struggled to conclude hearings within reasonable timeframes. Affidavits before the committee record more than 30 employees suspended since 2021, with cumulative salary costs of about R45.2m and legal fees of about R119m. One member said: “We are paying millions in salaries and legal costs while these cases remain unresolved. That is money the fund cannot afford to lose.”

Members highlighted the broader implications of these failures. Kumalo testified that unresolved suspensions had undermined the fund’s ability to process claims efficiently, increasing litigation costs and eroding compliance with the Public Finance Management Act. Manyasha added that capacity in the claims division had been weakened by the absence of permanent staff, and interim measures had not been sufficient.

The committee also heard evidence on the backlog campaign. RAF’s own figures show a backlog of 321,000 claims dating from before April 2021. Executives confirmed that the contact centre had called more than 60% of claimants and law firms in the database to request outstanding documents, but response rates were poor. Veronica Mente told the hearing that three batches of more than 30 cases referred by MPs had yielded only one response. “We cannot say we are helping people if they reach out and there is no follow‑up. That is part of what is wrong at RAF,” she said.

Concerns were also raised about expenditure on staff functions. Documents before the committee recorded costs of between R3.9m and R4m per night for certain events, despite the fund’s solvency challenges. Members asked the board to provide documented value assessments and to consider alternative, lower‑cost formats.

Tension around the conduct of former CEO Collins Letsoalo was also addressed. Witnesses described his approach to oversight as obstructive, with repeated delays in disciplinary processes and confrontations with staff. Members noted that executives had characterised his behaviour as bordering on abusive, citing the prolonged suspensions and costly external legal appointments that followed.

Scopa chairperson Songezo Zibi told witnesses that parliament expected accountability, noting that the evidence before the committee pointed to persistent failures in governance. He said the fund must demonstrate that it is acting lawfully and in good faith. The committee is expected to issue recommendations on governance reform, the conclusion of disciplinary matters and the strengthening of internal capacity. Implementation will depend on Treasury support and executive action. Without decisive intervention, both the sustainability of the fund and the rights of claimants will remain at risk.


Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Comment icon