Hawks carry 21 cases from auditor referrals as SIU recovers R6,4m

The Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation is managing 21 cases arising from material irregularities referred to it by the Auditor-General of South Africa, of which 14 remain under investigation, four are before court and one has been finalised with a guilty outcome.

The figures sit in the report of the Standing Committee on the Auditor-General, tabled as ATC260827 and dated 3 June 2026, which records the committee’s annual briefings with the Hawks and the Special Investigating Unit on how they process matters sent to them by the Auditor-General. The report is available through the Parliamentary Monitoring Group at https://pmg.org.za/tabled-committee-report/6754.

The report is a committee summary of those briefings rather than a transcript of the sittings themselves.

What the referrals add up to

Since the material irregularity process began, the Auditor-General has referred 19 matters to the Hawks and 32 to the SIU. The Hawks told the committee it was managing 21 cases, a difference the report explains by two referrals, Thabazimbi and City of Matlosana, that had not yet reached the directorate.

Across the 17 major investigations, investigators generated 107 files. Individual dockets, the committee heard, can run past 50, 100, 200 or even 250 files, because white-collar cases rest on documents, data and witness statements built from them.

The delay between an audit and a referral is part of the problem. The Auditor-General audits financial years typically two to three years before referral. In one case cited to the committee, Zastron CAS 67/05/2025, an audit of the 2023/24 financial year uncovered irregular payments dating back to January 2015, and the matter only reached the Hawks in April 2025. Investigators started with a ten-year gap between the transactions and the investigation.

The Auditor-General advised that the institution had adequate powers to deliver its core mandate, but that the slow processes of other state institutions impacted its ability to perform it.

The SIU’s numbers

Of the 32 matters referred to the SIU, eight proclaimed investigations have been finalised, nine are ongoing, one is a secondment, nine motivations for proclamations are under consideration by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, and five are being prepared for assessment against the jurisdictional requirements of the Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Act.

Over the period from 2020 to date, SIU investigations arising from Auditor-General referrals identified R26 558 966,59 in potential cash or assets to be recovered. Actual cash and assets recovered stand at R6 399 434,52. The unit made 43 referrals to the National Prosecuting Authority, 58 referrals for disciplinary action against officials or executives, and 16 referrals for administrative action.

The Department of Justice told the committee it facilitated and published 47 proclamations in 2024/25 and 17 in 2025/26. The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development described the process as submission, departmental evaluation, compliance checks, ministerial review and a recommendation to the President. She said her role was to ensure legal compliance and not to alter investigations, and that she signed referrals quickly, within 48 hours, while cautioning that investigations must be legally sound to survive court.

What the committee wants changed

The committee has recommended that the Department of Justice and the SIU develop a joint action plan on procedural delays and capacity constraints, with regular progress reviews. It wants talks between the Auditor-General, the SIU and the department to harmonise referral thresholds, or to build a mechanism so that significant cases below the SIU threshold are not overlooked. The Auditor-General’s threshold for a material irregularity is R1 million, against the SIU’s R2,5 million.

It has also recommended a formal mechanism for tracking whether recommendations are implemented, covering disciplinary actions, recoveries and blacklisting, and a coordination forum between the Auditor-General, the SIU, the Hawks and the department to streamline referrals and avoid duplication. On funding, the committee will monitor and endorse legislative changes to give the SIU direct Treasury funding, after the Minister told the committee the unit’s current model, which relies on payments from the departments it investigates, was unsustainable.

The committee’s sharpest request concerns what happens after a case closes. It noted that the SIU presentation did not clearly show the outcome of finalised matters and asked for the number of disciplinary cases initiated and completed, criminal and civil cases taken to court, convictions secured, and whether entities recommended for blacklisting were actually blacklisted. Future presentations must carry a column tracking every referral.

What it means for the money

Every rand in this report is public money that left a department, a municipality or a provincial education authority through an irregular contract, an overpayment, a standing-time payment or a supply chain breach. The SIU’s own list of trends names non-compliance with procedures, contraventions of the Municipal Finance Management Act, irregular contracts, overpricing, conflicts of interest and service providers who did not deliver.

The cases still waiting on a proclamation include R282 551 257,74 in overpayments and standing time at the Northern Cape Department of Roads and Public Works, R54 400 113,26 at the Northern Cape Department of Education, R23 228 384,00 in Mangaung metropolitan municipality overpayments, and R11 366 941,52 in emergency housing at the Department of Military Veterans. The Public Security Industry Regulatory Authority proclamation has been signed by the President and will be processed for publication.

While a proclamation is outstanding, the SIU told the committee it has very limited powers and generally cannot investigate or enforce action. Once a proclamation is issued, it can subpoena, search and seize evidence, question witnesses under oath and litigate to recover state funds. The unit said its ideal turnaround for a proclamation was under 30 days.

The SIU also told the committee how it deals with officials who resign or move posts. It can ask a court to freeze pensions, cite former officials in proceedings to recover losses, trace whether they have moved to another state institution and refer the matter there, and pursue criminal referrals regardless of whether the person is still employed. Where the National Prosecuting Authority declines to prosecute, the SIU engages it to understand why and feeds that back into future referrals.

On prevention, the SIU said it has set up dedicated prevention, advisory, awareness and data analytics units, and that it advises institutions to stop payments on suspect contracts immediately, before an investigation concludes, then goes to court to have those contracts set aside.

The committee will keep the referrals under active oversight and report to the National Assembly. Its next dated step is written into the report itself: annual engagements with the investigating agencies, with future reports required to show, for each referral, the disciplinary, criminal and civil action taken and whether the recommendations were carried out.