Some of the vehicles seized from the Sandton home of Hangwani Maumela by the Special Investigating Unit.
Image: SIU/ X
President Cyril Ramaphosa’s nephew, Hangwani Maumela has not yet been charged for his role in the looting of R2 billion meant for healthcare at Tembisa Hospital, owing to information obtained by the prosecutors being converted into admissible evidence in court.
This was confirmed by Justice and Constitutional Development minister Mmamoloko Kubayi when she was responding to parliamentary questions from EFF MP Rebecca Mohlala.
Maumela was implicated by the SIU in September 2025 after it reviewed 1,728 procurement bundles worth R816 million and uncovered irregularities in 924 of them.
The investigation traced 41 service providers linked to Maumela as well as three companies that were awarded contracts worth R13m were reportedly linked to attempted murder-accused tenderpreneur Vusimuzi "Cat" Matlala.
The corruption-busting body has identified properties and luxury vehicles linked to Maumela, and the Asset Forfeiture Unit has preserved some of the assets.
In February 2026, the SIU announced that it handed over evidence against Maumela to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) to assess whether the evidence was sufficient to get a conviction.
The Cape Town office of Director of Public Prosecution received a docket registered at the Cape Town Central Police Station on December 11, 2025, for a prosecutorial decision and guidance on the matter.
Kubayi said the matter remains under investigation.
“The delay is attributable to outstanding investigation required to secure admissible evidence to enable the Director of Public Prosecutions to make an informed decision regarding prosecution. The matter will be enrolled when the outstanding investigations are completed.”
Kubayi also confirmed that no charges have been preferred against Maumela yet.
The minister explained that the matter, commonly referred to as Leg 4 of the Tembisa Hospital, was initially not referred to the NPA.
Instead, it was initially investigated by the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation and later the SIU received a proclamation and was seconded to investigate the matter as well.
“The information supplied to the NPA must still be converted into admissible evidence for a criminal case and further investigations are underway,” said Kubayi.
She could not provide a date for the enrolment of the matter pending the outstanding investigation still to be conducted.
“However, prosecutors in the Specialised Commercial Crime Unit (SCCU) in Johannesburg are guiding the investigation in this matter.”
Asked about the luxury vehicles that were seized at Maumela’s property and the allegations that they were proceeds of crime, Kubayi said the Special Tribunal ruled on January 30, 2026, in favour of the car dealership in its application for rescission of the preservation order in respect of five vehicles.
The vehicles were to be released from the preservation order, but the Special Tribunal imposed a condition requiring the car dealership to provide or retain alternative security with the curator bonis for the full value of the vehicles to be released.
Kubayi said the car dealership filed a notice of appeal on February 19 to the full bench of the Johannesburg High Court against the tribunal’s because it wants the vehicles to be released unconditionally.
“I am informed that the Special Investigation Unit is opposing the appeal,” she said.
Kubayi further said the SIU has since filed a counter-appeal to the car dealership’s appeal, requesting the full bench of the high court to find that the Special Tribunal should not have found in favour of the car dealership.
It also wants the Special Tribunal’s order to be replaced by an order dismissing the car dealership’s application for rescission of the preservation order, and the Special Tribunal should have left the preservation order in respect of the five vehicles unchanged and in place.
mayibongwe.maqhina@inl.co.za