Court hears of alleged irregular conduct in NW Department of Public Works

A “whistleblower” has told the Labour Court in Johannesburg he is facing a disciplinary hearing by the North West province’s Department of Public Works and Roads because he reported alleged irregular conduct about the department’s yellow fleet (heavy machinery and construction equipment), the supply of bulk diesel, and the installation of diesel tanks.

Peter Jonker, the department’s chief mechanical engineer, made the allegations against the head of department (HoD) and the North West MEC for Public Works and Roads.

Read:
Protecting whistleblowers: A national imperative
Calls for whistleblower fund after govt pensions agency saga

Jonker applied for an order interdicting the department from conducting his disciplinary hearing until the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) takes a decision on whether to conduct an inquiry in terms of a section of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) into the allegations of misconduct against him.

The LRA section gives an employee, who alleges in good faith that the holding of an inquiry contravenes the Protected Disclosures Act (PDA), the option to request that an inquiry be conducted into the allegations regarding the employee’s conduct or capacity.

The department, the HoD and the MEC opposed the application. The claim the dispute arose in late 2025.

Jonker however alleges the matter dates back to September 2022 following the appointment of a Mr Kgantsi as HoD on 1 August 2022.

Sensitive information and ‘defamation’

Judge Tapiwa Gandidze, in a judgment handed down on Saturday, said the disciplinary process that Jonker was seeking to be interdicted concerns allegations of “leakage of sensitive information” and the “defamation of the character of the HoD and the MEC” by Jonker.

Gandidze said there can be no denying the charges arise from Jonker’s allegations, dating from 2023, that the HoD and MEC were engaged in irregular conduct.

She said the fact the HoD and MEC allege the charges stem from a forensic investigation conducted in August 2025 “does not alter the picture”.

Gandidze ruled that Jonker had made out a prima facie case for an order interdicting the internal disciplinary hearing so the General Public Service Bargaining Council can decide whether to hold an LRA inquiry into the allegations of misconduct against him.

She said if the bargaining council accepts the referral, the department will have an opportunity, before an arbitrator appointed by the bargaining council, to prove the charges.

“The only difference is that the arbitrator is independent, unlike the [disciplinary hearing] chairperson appointed by the department.

“If, however, the bargaining council rejects Jonker’s referral, the department may proceed with the disciplinary hearing.

“The court fails to see any harm to the department should the interdict be granted pending the bargaining council’s decision on whether to hold a … LRA inquiry,” she said.

Restaurant meeting

Jonker alleged he was instructed in September 2022 to meet the HoD at a restaurant and on arrival was met by the HoD and a Mr Modiselle, who the HoD introduced as a long-time friend and a businessman who runs Reakgona Petroleum (RP) and supplies diesel to several government departments.

He alleged the HoD instructed him to visit all sites with diesel tanks with Modiselle, discuss the department’s challenges, and allow Modiselle to propose solutions.

Jonker made a number of other allegations about instructions he received from the HoD related to Modiselle, including writing in a report that the existing contract would be cancelled and a contract would be entered into with RP, including the installation of diesel tanks and equipping them with monitoring systems.

Jonker did not comply with this instruction, and the MEC refused to approve the report.

Following this presentation to the MEC, the HoD removed some of Jonker’s functions and reassigned them to the chief financial officer.

Jonker alleges he was effectively sidelined.

Notice of suspension

Jonker wrote to Director of Legal Services Eva King on 27 March 2023 and copied his direct supervisor, the chief director of transport infrastructure, regarding the HoD’s alleged irregular conduct in removing some of his functions because of the HoD’s intentions to do business with RP, and requested that King provide a legal opinion on the matter.

Jonker was served with a notice of intention to suspend him in relation to an investigation into the yellow fleet on 29 March 2023 and in another e-mail dated 30 March 2023, requested that King investigate the HoD’s ties to RP.

Believing the intention to suspend him was linked to his correspondence with King, Jonker visited the Hawks offices in April 2023 and raised the same issues he had raised with King.

He was served with a notice of suspension on 25 April 2023.

The suspension was lifted after Jonker filed an urgent application in the North West High Court. He returned to work on 7 August 2023.

Jonker subsequently contacted the Hawks and deposed an affidavit on the allegations he had made about RP.

The disciplinary dispute was unsuccessfully conciliated on 9 October 2023.

Jonker was served in October 2024 with an amended charge sheet and a new disciplinary notice in relation to a hearing scheduled for 28 October 2024 but referred a second unfair labour practice dispute to the bargaining council, which led to the postponement of the disciplinary hearing.

The dispute was unsuccessfully conciliated on 4 December 2024.

The disciplinary hearing resumed that same month.

Forensic investigators 

In August 2025, Jonker was instructed by the HoD to attend an interview with forensic investigators appointed to investigate “leakage of sensitive information” and the “defamation of the character of the HoD”, based on information circulating on social media.

Jonker met the forensic investigators and their report concluded that he was a person of interest regarding the information leak because he had claimed to be a whistleblower.

In October 2025, Jonker was invited to make representations as to why he should not be charged.

In response, Jonker stated that he was a whistleblower but on 28 January 2026 was notified to attend a disciplinary hearing on 5 February 2026 to face charges – including of making serious and unsubstantiated defamatory allegations and circulating unsavoury and untruthful information about the HoD – and suspended at the same time.

Jonker on 9 February 2026 received a letter from the department raising several issues, including a denial that he was a whistleblower and advising him the disciplinary hearing would proceed on 9 March 2026.

The department, HoD and MEC:

• Dispute that Jonker is a whistleblower as contemplated in the PDA;
• Deny the pending disciplinary inquiry constitutes an occupational detriment;
• Deny that the alleged disclosures were made in good faith; and
• Submitted there is no nexus between the alleged occupational detriment and the ongoing disciplinary hearing.

They claimed that at the time of the HoD’s appointment, the chief financial officer’s investigation into Jonker regarding the yellow fleet was already underway.

Listen/read: Whistleblowers: There’s scope for more legislation

They further claimed Jonker has a propensity to tell lies, fabricate facts, and claim victimhood once his lies catch up with him and he is not even worthy of claiming to be a whistleblower or to be facing an occupational detriment.

The department, HoD and MEC alleged that Jonker’s complaints to both the Hawks in August 2023 and the Special Investigating Unit in February 2026 were made after he had been charged following the forensic investigation and were therefore lodged in response to disciplinary proceedings against him.

They further claimed Jonkers’s alleged whistleblowing is driven by malice and bad faith and if he were a genuine whistleblower, he would have requested that his identity be withheld, rather than shouting from the rooftops.