NO action has been taken against Memme Sejosengwe, the Secretary General of the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ), who is accused of making irregular appointments of officials in the OCJ.
In October 2022, a complaint against Sejosengwe was lodged with the office of the Public Service Commission (PSC) detailing the alleged violation of the law and the abuse of power.
Among others, it was alleged that the OCJ Head body-shamed the spokesperson of the OCJ who had applied for a director position.
“Between 2015 and 2016 a Director of Communications position was advertised. The interviewing panel Chaired by Mr Nathi Mncube unanimously recommended a Deputy Director at OCJ. Ms Charmaine Gideon prepared the memo to the Secretary General Ms Memme Sejosengwe. However, the post was not filled.
“Ms Sejosengwe approached the Chairperson of the panel and informed him that she did not approve the appointment of the deputy director because she was shabby and overweight,” read the complaint.
The author stated that there was a disagreement between Sejosengwe and Mncube about the rationale behind not appointing the Deputy Director, for the Communications Director position.
As a result, the post was allegedly re-advertised, Mncube was excluded from the panel and a different candidate was then appointed.
“The Director Secretariat was appointed on a five-year contract. At the end of the 5-year contract, Sejosengwe converted his appointment into a permanent appointment without complying with the DPSA regulations for the appointment of SMS members. No proper recruitment process was followed. The person appointed has since left OCJ.
“Sejosengwe had a driver, she had a fall out with the driver and transferred him to Pretoria High Court without following due process. The driver was protesting about having to travel from Pretoria East to pick up Sejosengwe from Atteridgeville and take her to Midrand, and take her back to her house in Atteridgeville late at night,” read the complaint.
It was also alleged that Sejosengwe transferred her Food Aid to Johannesburg High Court without following due processes.
The complaint went further and alleged that a Chief of Staff position was created for the former Chief of Minister Sydney Mufamadi.
“The man took a severance package and came back to the Public Service, where he was employed by the OCJ on a 5-year contract as a Chief of Staff. When his contract ended in 2017, he was given a 1-year Chief Director contract additional to the establishment from 2018 to 2022 that was renewed yearly.
“In March 2022 he was given a 3-year contract by the vacant Chief Director (in the office of the Sejosengwe who created a post for him in the OC. The post was not advertised, and no recruitment process was followed. The minister was not consulted as per delegations. To make matters worse, the memo appointing the man was prepared by him and Ms Sejosengwe’s PA.
“You will not be able to find any advertisement for this post. The Acting Chief Director was put under pressure to sign the memo that she had not prepared. Furthermore, the DDG: Corporate Services was excluded from the process as per Ms Sejosengwe’s instruction. The CFO was never asked to approve the budget for this post as the process requires,” read the complaint.
Another startling allegation contained in the letter was that Sejosengwe appointed an old friend she previously worked with to a “non-existent” position of Chief Director Coordination that cannot be traced in the OCJ organogram.
“Apparently, they worked together at the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development before he was appointed as a Deputy Director General in Western Cape. When he left the Western Cape, he started a company. He used to be called by Sejosengwe to facilitate OCJ Strategic Plan Sessions. He has been appointed Chief Director: Coordination,” read the complaint.
spokeswoman for the OCJ Lusanda Ntuli said that It was the first time the OCJ became aware of the complaint.
“Neither the OCJ nor the staff implicated in were ever requested by an appropriate authority to respond to the allegations contained therein. It is common law that when an allegation is made, the affected person should be given an opportunity to respond in line with the audi alteram partem-rule and in accordance with and with due regard to the rights of those affected and in the spirit of fairness.
“It is important that authorities bestowed with the legal power to investigate allegations of the nature contained in Annexure A (Allegations against the OCJ Head) be allowed to deal appropriately therewith. It is, therefore, the view of the OCJ that it will be premature for untested allegations, impacting on the rights of those affected, to be ventilated publicly. The media has an obligation to report responsibly and not in violation of the rights of any person as any such violation may become the subject of due recourse through the appropriate authority,” she said.
PSC spokesperson Humphrey Ramafoko said the Commission received the complaint on October 25, 2022, and subsequently referred it to the then Minister of Justice and Correctional Services Ronald Lamola on November 3 2022.
“The complaint was referred to the Minister for investigation as it implicates the Secretary General of the Office of the Chief Justice, on whom the PSC doesn’t have a mandate,” said Ramafoko.
Lamola’s spokesperson did not respond to questions from the publication.
The Department of Public Service & Administrations’ spokesperson Moses Mushi emphasised that all departments were responsible for ensuring adherence to the norms and standards including conditions of service, discipline management, and any other matter related to their individual employees.