Acting police minister Firoz Cachalia has confirmed that the police did not reinstate their previous contractor after cancelling the Medicare24 tender but are instead sourcing interim quotations from the Central Supplier Database.
His statement, delivered in response to a parliamentary question by EFF MP Leigh‑Ann Mathys, provides the clearest account yet of how the police are managing continuity of health risk services in the wake of a contract cancellation that has become emblematic of procurement failures in the public sector.
Mathys’s intervention was prompted by the Medicare24 saga, a contract awarded in June 2024 to Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala’s company for R360m. The contract was intended to provide health risk management services to police members, a critical function given the occupational hazards faced by officers. Within months, however, internal auditors flagged poor performance, bid fronting and procurement irregularities.
By April 2025, national police commissioner Fannie Masemola told parliament that the contract had been terminated and classified as irregular expenditure. The cancellation raised immediate concerns about service continuity and compliance with section 217 of the constitution, which requires public procurement to be fair, transparent, competitive and cost‑effective.
The controversy was compounded by revelations that Matlala had been linked in media investigations to the Tembisa Hospital scandal, where the Special Investigating Unit uncovered irregular contracts and inflated pricing in Gauteng’s health department. Companies associated with him were reported to have benefited from procurement networks at the hospital that channeled millions through questionable tenders.
That history deepened parliamentary concern about how Medicare24 was able to secure a major police contract despite its association with one of the country’s most high‑profile procurement scandals.
Cachalia’s reply also makes clear that the police did not revert to Metropolitan Health, the previous contractor, after cancelling Medicare24. Instead, quotations are being evaluated from prospective suppliers for a six‑month interim period.
Metropolitan Health had held the contract from October 2020 to October 2023, with an extension to June 2024, valued at more than R170m. When that contract expired, the police initiated a new tender process, through which Medicare24 was appointed. Parliamentary testimony later showed that the company had failed to deliver on key obligations, raising questions about how it passed through the evaluation process.
Under the previous system, tenders were advertised and adjudicated through the Bid Adjudication Committee. Although bidders were required to demonstrate capacity, financial stability and compliance with Treasury regulations, the process proved vulnerable to manipulation. Companies could misrepresent qualifications or rely on political connections to secure awards. Medicare24 was selected from 22 bidders despite limited capacity, and subsequent parliamentary testimony disclosed irregularities that should have disqualified it.
Testimony before parliament’s ad hoc committee on police procurement showed that the company’s appointment was facilitated by weaknesses in verification and oversight. Bid fronting and misrepresentation passed through the evaluation process unchecked. MPs heard that Matlala himself was facing criminal charges at the time of the award, raising questions about the integrity of the vetting system and the adequacy of safeguards in place.
In response, the police have shifted to sourcing interim contracts through the Central Supplier Database, which allows for direct verification of registration, tax compliance and ownership structures. Treasury has reinforced requirements for independent capacity assessments and stricter oversight by internal audit units.
Parliamentary committees have insisted that large contracts undergo forensic review before re‑advertisement, and deviations from standard procurement processes must now be documented and approved at senior level. These changes are intended to close the loopholes that enabled Medicare24’s appointment and to embed constitutional safeguards in procurement practice.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.