Karabo Ngoepe|Published
A Limpopo whistleblower has filed complaints against Kholeka Gcaleka, alleging that the Public Protector reneged on a commitment to investigate alleged irregular payments within the provincial education department.
Maphuti Mashalane claims the Public Protector confirmed in 2025 that his complaint would be investigated, but months later, no probe has materialised, prompting him to approach the Parliament of South Africa and the Legal Practice Council.
The dispute centres on a complaint in which Mashalane asked the Public Protector to investigate the conduct of the Special Investigating Unit and officials in the Limpopo Department of Education. He alleged that two principals at Seshego High School were simultaneously paid salaries in violation of the South African Schools Act and that public funds should be recovered.
According to documents, the Public Protector initially declined to investigate in May 2025, stating that the SIU’s decision to refer the matter to the Department of Public Service and Administration constituted administrative action that could only be reviewed by a court or tribunal.
Mashalane then applied for an internal review. In a determination dated September 24, 2025, the Public Protector’s office reversed its earlier position. The internal review found the allegations serious and involving potential financial prejudice to the state and ruled that the institution did have jurisdiction to investigate.
The office further decided the matter would be allocated to another investigator, who would contact the complainant for further information.
“The office of the public protector took a decision to investigate the above complaint on 24 September 2025, and I got communication from Advocate Nelisiwe Nkabinde, the Public Protector’s COO,” he said.
When there was no movement, he said he approached Parliament to lodge a complaint against Gcaleka and also approached the Legal Practice Council.
“I also reported the non-investigation to the speaker of parliament, Hon Thoko Didiza. Parliament sought information from the office of the public protector regarding the complaint and the public protector confirmed to parliament that my complaint would be allocated to another investigator at the national office and be investigated. This was in September/October 2025, but now, in February 2026, no investigation is happening,” he said.
“I also reported the public protector advocate Kholeka Gcaleka to the Legal Practice Council and the Gauteng office is investigating,” he said.
Correspondence from Parliament confirmed the decision to Mashalane, stating the complaint had been closed but taken on internal review and “allocated to another investigator for investigation” and that the Public Protector was dealing with the matter.
However, Mashalane says no investigation has begun. He has also accused officials in the Public Protector’s office of mishandling the complaint and said he approached the Legal Practice Council over alleged professional misconduct.
Mashalane’s complaint arose after he reported alleged irregularities to the SIU regarding the Limpopo education department’s payment of two principals at the same school. He submitted documentary evidence and requested the recovery of the salaries. The SIU referred the matter to the Department of Public Service and Administration, a decision he challenged.
In assessing the internal review, the Public Protector noted it cannot act as a court reviewing SIU decisions but may investigate maladministration. The review further indicated primary responsibility for the alleged irregular appointments would rest with the Limpopo Department of Education, with oversight roles played by National Treasury and the Department of Public Service and Administration, while the Public Service Commission would ordinarily be best placed to examine personnel practices.
Despite this, the review concluded that “special circumstances” existed due to the seriousness of the allegations and possible financial implications, warranting an investigation by the Public Protector.
The Office on Institutions Supporting Democracy in Parliament informed Mashalane that the National Assembly cannot interfere in the functioning of the Public Protector because of constitutional independence and advised him to await the outcome of the investigation.
Under sections 181 and 182 of the Constitution, the Public Protector is empowered to investigate improper conduct in state affairs, report on it and take remedial action.
The Legal Practice Council confirmed that a complaint had been received against Gcaleka and that it had reached out to her to obtain her version of events. Spokesperson Kabelo Letebele said the complaint was received and registered on November 24, 2025.
“The allegations of the complaint relate to the legal practitioner’s failure to conduct herself as an officer of the court in a civil dispute/matter. The complaint was referred to the legal practitioner (Gcaleka) for a reply, and no response was received. A further follow-up correspondence was addressed to the practitioner,” he said.
Letebele added that the matter is awaiting placement before an Investigating Committee for a recommendation. This will be considered on paper only, in the absence of the legal practitioner’s reply.
“Once the Investigating Committee has made a recommendation, both parties will be advised of the recommendation and the next steps to be taken in the investigation of the complaint. It is worth noting that the advocate has been on the non-practising roll since November 2006,” he said.
Attempts to obtain a comment from Gcaleka’s office were unsuccessful. Her spokesperson, Ndili Msoki, did not respond to questions.
Karabo Ngoepe
iol.co.za
