ABOUT E7 million in public funds remains unaccounted for at the Hlatikulu Town Board.
According to testimonies from various councillors before the Commission of Enquiry investigating alleged maladministration and irregularities in the running of the small town, part of the E13 million paid to the Board by government (roughly E3 million) cannot be accounted for.
| Eswatini Observer WhatsApp Channel
A further E4 million is also unsupported by records showing how it was used. The latter amount was left unspent at the end of one financial year, yet records for the following year show that it was not carried over.
Members of the Commission of Enquiry allegedly identified the issues based on records examined as well as testimonies from different councillors during the ongoing probe.
This was revealed on Friday when the Commissioners interviewed Town Clerk Bongani Dlamini, who was further called upon to account for the lacking information.
The main reason why the Commission raised concern was because they were missing the paper trail which accounts on how the money was used.
The Commissioners requested the town clerk to provide information to explain the expenditure of the E3 million. The Commissioners noted that their records show roughly E7 million of the E13 million allocated to the Town Board was placed in a bank Call Account, while another E3 million was used to settle an outstanding Eswatini Revenue Authority (ERS) debt, this after the initial E6 million liability was reduced by half. What remained unclear, and required explanation, was the fate of the last E3 million once the ERS debt had been paid.
Additionally, the Commission uncovered that there was an amount of E4 million, whose expenditure remained unexplained when the performance reports of two successive Financial Years were examined.
They noted that records at the end of one particular financial year reflected that about E4 million appeared to have been unutilised, whereas the subsequent financial year had no record of that E4 million when it kicked in, raising questions about how it was then spent.
The town clerk tried to list different projects which the Town Board had embarked upon which include the refurbishment of a certain road and the renovation of the town market, but this fell short of verifying the questioned expenditure.
It was noted that the lack of records undermined the Board’s ability to track the effectiveness of its programmes. Without the records, the Commissioners observed that there was uncertainty over how the Board ensured effective utilisation of its resources.
Other discrepancies that were uncovered by the Commission included anomalies observed on how the Town Board presented its income and expenditure figures to the Financial Committee for approval of programmes. It was noted that the Committee was only supplied with information pertinent to their decision-making at the eleventh hour, and not given enough time to appreciate the information.
Moreover, the Commissioners observed that at the Hlatikulu Town Board powers for making crucial decisions were placed in the wrong hands.
“This is where things get interesting, municipal revenue and expenditure numbers are intended to be a tool for oversight, but if the Board is not capturing information correctly and not presenting the Financial Committee such information in time, it is bypassing the platform for making inputs, and only relegating the Committee into rubber stamps,” noted one Commissioner.
In doing this, the Commissioners observed that it defeats the purpose of monitoring and often leads to fruitless, wasteful, unauthorised and irregular expenditure.
The town clerk confirmed the discrepancy. His explanation was that a resolution taken by previous councils had prevented the Board to present its numbers to the decision-makers on time. He recalled that the current council tried to raise this, but their suggestion was turned down.
The Commission also observed that the faulty administration in the small town was as a result of placing power or authority in the wrong hands. They noted from testimonies that the accountant at the town board seemed to be wielding more power or rather, he appeared to be running the show.
For instance, a Commissioner noted that the accountant was included in meetings which he was not supposed to attend.
The Commissioner cited executive committee meetings where only the town treasurer, who ideally serves as the accountant’s supervisor, should attend.
“A particular vexing element of this is that the accountant is allowed to throw his weight in such meetings to the point that it becomes difficult or impossible to take resolutions, especially in matters where there are allegations touching on the accountant. Why is this allowed to happen?” wondered the Commissioner.
The town clerk’s justification, insinuating this was done in order to allow for transparency was thrown out of the window.
He is just an employee and you would be meeting as an Executive,” interposed the Commissioner.
The Hlatikulu Town Board Accountant Artwell Dlamini also faced sharp questioning following claims linking him to a company that was paid close to E2 million, apart from that of his wife which allegedly received over E1 million from the board.
Artwell Dlamini admitted that he had a company, PHD Stationers, that was awarded a tender for supplying stationery, in addition to the one belonging to his wife which supplied protective clothing.
The Commission of Enquiry probing allegations of maladministration and irregularities in the running of the affairs of the Hlatikulu Town Board raised serious concerns of conflict of interest in the award of the tenders, especially because he is also an employee of the Board, something which could allow the possibility of undue influence in the procurement process.
However, the Accountant said there was nothing wrong with the award of the tenders because he had shown his interest in the work that needed to be done for the Board to the Town Clerk.
He stated that the companies in question have been doing business with the Town Board for a long time, and that the decision to award was not taken by him but the clerk.
The Commission is chaired by Zandile Dlamini. Other panelists include former Mbabane City Chief Executive Officer Gideon Mhlongo, Fikile Dlamini and Buhle Hlanze.
Eswatini Observer Press Reader | View Here
