Civil society organisations are raising fresh concerns about accountability in the sprawling Tembisa Hospital procurement scandal, arguing that businessman Hangwani Maumela — accused of looting more than R2 billion from the public health facility — must face the same criminal justice process as any other citizen, regardless of political connections or perceived influence.
Public Interest SA and Corruption Watch have both called on government and law enforcement agencies to ensure that justice is administered “without fear, favour, or prejudice”, warning that asset forfeiture, while significant, is not a substitute for prosecutions and convictions.
The renewed pressure comes after the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg on Monday granted a final forfeiture order for assets worth approximately R326 million linked to what authorities describe as the alleged Maumela syndicate. The order represents a major legal win for the National Prosecuting Authority’s Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU) and marks a notable escalation in efforts to claw back wealth allegedly accumulated through corruption tied to procurement at Tembisa Hospital.
But for civil society groups, the court order also sharpens a central question: why Maumela is still a free man, and why the criminal case appears to be moving slowly in a matter that has become one of the most politically sensitive corruption dossiers in the country.
Maumela is the nephew of President Cyril Ramaphosa by previous marriage — a connection that continues to draw attention even as Ramaphosa has consistently distanced himself from Maumela and stated they have no personal relationship. The familial link stems from the fact that Maumela is the son of the sister of Ramaphosa’s former wife.
The forfeiture order granted on Monday follows a preservation order issued on 14 August 2025 and covers an extensive portfolio of luxury property and high-end assets. The court order includes luxury real estate in some of the country’s most exclusive areas, including Bantry Bay, Sandhurst, Hartbeespoort, Ballito, and Three Anchor Bay.
Also forfeited are high-performance vehicles and other luxury items, including Lamborghini Urus, Huracan STO, Aventador SVJ and Aventador Ultimate models, a Bentley Continental GT V8, an Isuzu D-Max, a luxury boat, and a multipurpose trailer.
Despite the scale and visibility of the forfeiture, Maumela has remained largely out of the public eye, and — as civil society groups have stressed — has not been arrested in relation to the alleged looting.
Public Interest SA said equality before the law must apply to all, regardless of status or connections, and warned against treating forfeiture as the end of the accountability pathway.
The organisation said that although the final asset forfeiture order is “undoubtedly a significant victory” in the fight against corruption, it must form part of a larger strategy that includes criminal investigations and, where supported by evidence, prosecutions.
“It must form part of a broader strategy that includes thorough criminal investigations and, where the evidence supports it, successful prosecutions of those responsible. Recovering illicit assets and holding perpetrators personally accountable are complementary, not mutually exclusive, objectives,” said the organisation.
Corruption Watch, while careful not to assert political interference as fact, said South Africa has repeatedly seen high-profile cases stall — and that pattern means the possibility of interference cannot be ruled out completely.
Spokesperson Janine Erasmus said that although Corruption Watch could not assume political interference is causing delays in this specific matter, the broader trend of state inaction in major cases is real and deeply worrying.
“That pattern is not just speculation but is a reality, so the possibility of political interference cannot be entirely dismissed,” said Erasmus.
She said that returning stolen public money is essential, but that accountability cannot end there. Erasmus argued that individuals who engage in corruption must face consequences that extend beyond asset recovery, warning against outcomes that look like a “slap on the wrist”.
Erasmus added that while public money used for private enrichment must be recovered and used properly, individual accountability is equally important, and those who willingly engage in corruption should not be allowed to get away with what amounts to a slap on the wrist and then simply go on to repeat those corrupt acts elsewhere.
“We reiterate our view that decisive action must be taken against those involved in stealing R2bn from Tembisa Hospital. Asset forfeiture is just part of the process and is not a substitute for prosecutions and convictions,” she said.
The final forfeiture order was granted to the AFU following a probe into corruption and procurement fraud allegations at Tembisa Hospital spanning 2019 to 2022. But the case’s roots run deeper, and its history is intertwined with the assassination of a whistleblower.
The scandal originates from the murder of Babita Deokaran, a senior Gauteng Health Department official, who was killed on 23 August 2021 shortly after flagging questionable transactions linked to Tembisa Hospital. Her work had uncovered multiple businesses allegedly benefiting from rigged and overpriced tenders — and her death became a defining moment in the public’s understanding of how dangerous corruption investigations can be when large sums of money are at stake.
Investigations by state entities later mapped the alleged scale of irregular contracting and looting. The National Treasury’s Specialised Audit Services Unit (SAS) and the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) confirmed that 14 companies controlled by Maumela secured over R400 million in irregular contracts between 2016 and 2022. The SIU’s expanded investigation later concluded that Maumela’s wider syndicate network fraudulently siphoned more than R800 million from Tembisa Hospital.
The figure of “over R2 billion”, which has circulated in the public debate and features in civil society commentary, has become part of the broader allegation that the hospital was systematically looted over multiple years through procurement manipulation and inflated pricing — with devastating implications for a public health system that continues to struggle under pressure.
Asked what is preventing Maumela’s arrest, SIU spokesperson Selby Makgotho said it is not the unit’s role to answer questions about arrests and prosecutions, and that those questions should be directed to law enforcement and prosecution bodies.
The questions should be raised with the SAPS, the Hawks, IDAC, and the NPA.
NPA spokesperson Kaizer Kganyago said the criminal investigation is being conducted by the Hawks and guided by the NPA’s Specialised Commercial Crimes Unit (SCCU). He said that once investigators are ready, the docket will be submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions for a decision.
When asked what gaps remain in converting SIU referrals and financial intelligence into a trial-ready criminal docket, Kganyago said: “We cannot comment on an ongoing investigation.”
Hawks spokesperson Katlego Mogale could not respond at the time of publication. Questions were also sent to the Gauteng Health Department, but no response was received by the time of print.
For now, civil society groups say the public should not mistake asset forfeiture for justice — particularly in a case tied to the killing of a whistleblower and allegations of systemic looting at a major state hospital. Their message is pointed: recovering millions is important, but without arrests, prosecutions and convictions, the accountability project remains unfinished — and the broader fight against corruption remains compromised.
