MATSAPHA COUNCIL’S E33 000 A MONTH LEGAL FEES

MBABANE – The Matsapha Municipal Council has opted for the most expensive provider of legal services available to the institution.

Should council defy all odds and engage MTM Ndlovu Attorneys as its legal advisors, then the municipality will have to fork out E33 000 a month for these services.
This is despite a recommendation by the evaluaation committee that SV Mdladla and Associates, which quoted a charge of E13 000 a month, be awarded the tender.

Another law firm, Thwala Attorneys, had reportedly charged around E20 000 a month.
The appointment of MTM Ndlovu Attorneys comes in the wake of council having kicked out Hhukwini Member of Parliament Nkhanyeti Ngwenya from a statutory meeting and said this was in line with Prime Minister Ambrose Dlamini’s belt-tightening measures.

two salaries from govt

It was stated that MP Ngwenya cannot be allowed to continue in his position as councillor because that would cause him to draw two salaries from government and therefore council would be seen as going against the PM’s austerity measures.
A legal eagle, who spoke to the Times SUNDAY, said it was disingenuous for council to cite the PM’s austerity measures in the case of MP Ngwenya on the one hand, but back the enlisting of the most expensive legal services for council on the other.

“Why don’t they hire a fulltime legal advisor as part of their staff if they are prepared to spend so much money every month? Even if that was the case, that legal advisor would not come at the cost of E33 000 a month,” the reputable lawyer opined.
Matsapha Council Chief Executive Officer Lucky Sukati said the matter was still being deliberated upon and they had not reached the stage of discussing why the most expensive services had been preferred.
“We are still discussing it within council and will we will inform you once it is ready for public consumption,” the CEO said.

The mayor, on the other hand, said the decision to choose MTM Ndlovu Attorneys was taken by council and not him individually.
“But at the moment, I can’t talk much about the issue because it is still being discussed and there are legal issues to be considered,” Zwane said.
However, this publication has it in authority that the decision to ignore SV Mdladla and Associates was because the councillors felt MTM Ndlovu would give them a ‘personal touch’.

“We felt that Mdladla was overly engaged in other duties where he is doing business and would not personally come to attend council meetings, but would send a representative from his law firm, which we don’t want. With Ndlovu, we got the assurance that he would personally attend our meetings. So it was our feeling that the cost should not be a hindrance,” said one of the councillors.

The councillor said Thwala Attorneys was not even considered because they just did not want their services considering the experiences they have had Thwala him in the past years as he served council.
“The councillors don’t want Thwala. They all agreed that he should not be reengaged. This therefore left us with Ndlovu who will be serving council for the first time and has promised a hands-on approach, which is what we want,’ added the councillor.

tender null and void

An Independent Review Committee (IRC) has ruled that the tender award to MTM Ndlovu Attorneys was null and void.
The committee, which consisted on senior lawyer Lucky Howe, senior structural engineer E.D Simelane and lawyer B.S Dlamini, directed the Matsapha Council to “award the tender afresh without the need to evaluate the tender, as the process was done correctly in our view”.

The committee said the award was not correctly made and the awarded persons were not the successful party.
SV Mdladla and Associates won the tender with a score of 74 per cent, followed by Thwala Attorneys with 70 per cent while MTM Ndlovu Attorneys scored 64 per cent.  
Following the committee’s ruling, the Zwane-led council sought legal opinion from Ginindza Attorneys and the latter advised that the reasons advanced for not accepting the lowest tenders cannot be said to be irrational and unreasonable under the circumstances.

“It [is] our view that council was correct in raising an issue pertaining to the under valuation of the work entailed in the tender by SV Mdladla and Associates. Council being fully aware of the amount of the work involved herein was rightly concerned that the surprisingly low price could be a catalyst for poor quality service,” reads the legal opinion.

already collecting rates

Ginindza Attorneys also raised a view that SV Mdladla and Associates could be conflicted considering that they were already collecting rates for council.
“...An example made is that of an architect who has been awarded a tender to produce architectural drawing for council. It would be a conflict if the same person was then awarded a tender to prepare an environmental impact assessment report in respect of the same project. Similarly, SV Mdladla and Associates could fund themselves conflicted if they were called upon to advise council on the rate ability or exemption from rates payment of certain properties from whom they, on the one hand, are tasked with collecting rates,” said Ginindza Attorneys.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: