Sefako Makgatho Corruption Scandal: Vice-Chancellor Under Fire Over R36m Tender Allegations

Unpacking the R36 Million Student Transport Tender Allegations

The Sefako Makgatho corruption scandal has thrust South Africa's higher education sector into the spotlight once again, with Vice-Chancellor Professor Tandi Matsha-Erasmus facing intense scrutiny over alleged irregularities in a R36 million student transport tender. This controversy, which erupted in late December 2025, centers on claims that the university's leadership manipulated procurement processes to favor specific companies, raising serious questions about governance and transparency at Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University (SMU), a key institution for training health professionals in Gauteng province.

SMU, located in Ga-Rankuwa near Pretoria, serves approximately 7,000 students focused on medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and other health sciences disciplines. The tender in question was for student transport services, critical for commuting students who rely on reliable buses to access campus amid South Africa's public transport challenges. Allegations suggest that despite competitive bidding, decisions were influenced to bypass qualified bidders, potentially costing the university dearly in efficiency and funds.

Professor Matsha-Erasmus, who assumed the role of Vice-Chancellor on June 1, 2025, after serving as Deputy Vice-Chancellor for Academic and Research, has a background rooted in health sciences education. A double-degree holder from SMU herself, her leadership was initially hailed as a new era of excellence. However, these fresh claims have overshadowed her tenure, prompting calls for accountability from students, whistleblowers, and oversight bodies.

The Tender Process: How Alleged Manipulation Unfolded

University tenders in South Africa follow strict Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) guidelines, requiring transparent bidding, evaluation by independent committees, and approval by council. For SMU's student transport contract, the process reportedly began in mid-2025 to replace aging services amid growing student numbers.

• Initial bid invitation: Open to multiple service providers experienced in educational transport.
• Evaluation phase: Procurement committee scored bids on criteria like cost, fleet reliability, safety records, and compliance.
• Award stage: Allegedly, preferred bidders were sidelined after interventions from the Vice-Chancellor's office.

Whistleblowers, including anonymous procurement committee members, claim that VC Matsha-Erasmus and her 'inner circle'—possibly including senior lieutenants in administration—pressured evaluators to alter scores and disqualify competitors on technicalities. One report highlights that buses from the awarded company were rejected by student representatives for substandard quality, yet the contract proceeded. This step-by-step interference allegedly violated bid evaluation protocols, exposing the university to legal and financial risks.

Such practices not only inflate costs—R36 million could fund scholarships or infrastructure—but also endanger students commuting to clinical placements at nearby Dr George Mukhari Academic Hospital.

Key Players and Their Roles in the Controversy

At the center is Professor Tandi Matsha-Erasmus, whose rapid rise at SMU is now under question. Reports link her to prior governance lapses, though unproven. Other implicated figures include procurement officers and possibly council members, echoing earlier 2025 kickback allegations against the council chairperson and CFO in a separate 2,000-bed contractor deal.

Whistleblowers have emerged as heroes, leaking documents to media like City Press, sparking public outrage on platforms like X (formerly Twitter). Student bodies, including the GSA (possibly General Student Association), rejected procured buses, demanding transparency.

This network highlights systemic risks in university procurement, where leadership overlap blurs accountability lines.

Timeline of Events: From Bid to Blowup

The scandal's chronology reveals a pattern of escalating concerns:

• Mid-2025: Tender advertised for student transport amid fleet shortages.
• October-November 2025: Bids evaluated; top scorers allegedly sidelined.
• December 11, 2025: City Press exposes initial corruption claims.
• December 26-28, 2025: Detailed rigging reports surface, inner circle accused.
• January 2026: Whistleblowers go public; students protest; court challenges filed.
• Ongoing (Feb 2026): Pressure mounts for SIU probe.

This timeline underscores how delayed oversight allows issues to fester, impacting semester starts and student welfare.

Student Reactions and Campus Unrest

Students at SMU, many from underserved communities relying on NSFAS, have voiced fury over diverted funds. Protests included blocking entrances and tire-burning, reminiscent of #FeesMustFall but focused on governance. "We can't learn if our transport is corrupt," one anonymous rep stated.

Impacts include delayed services, safety risks from subpar buses, and eroded trust. In health sciences, reliable transport is vital for hospital rotations, where delays could affect clinical training hours required for graduation.

For aspiring academics, such scandals deter talent. Consider browsing faculty positions at stable institutions via AcademicJobs.com.

University and Government Responses

SMU has not issued a direct rebuttal to these specific claims as of early 2026, with past statements vindicating leadership in older cases. The Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) monitors via parliamentary committees, but no formal intervention yet.

Calls grow for Special Investigating Unit (SIU) involvement, given their R1.7 billion NSFAS recoveries from universities in 2025-2026. SIU's track record—R688 million from institutions—shows potential for recovery and prosecution.

Broader Context: Corruption in South African Higher Education

SMU's woes fit a pattern: Unisa scandals, admissions fraud, NSFAS ghost students. SIU probes recovered billions, with R126 million from unqualified beneficiaries alone. Statistics reveal over R2 billion clawed back, highlighting procurement as a vulnerability.

• Procurement irregularities: 40% of cases.
• Governance failures: Council-VC overlaps.
• Student impact: Delayed allowances, poor services.

Cultural context: Post-apartheid transformation pressures clash with accountability needs, per experts.

Legal Proceedings and Potential Outcomes

Court battles loom, with whistleblowers seeking protection under the Protected Disclosures Act. Possible charges: Fraud, PFMA violations, up to 10 years imprisonment.

Precedents like laptop tenders at SMU (R17m delayed) show forensic audits lead to cancellations. SIU could freeze assets, recommend lifestyle audits.

Expert Opinions and Stakeholder Perspectives

Governance experts decry 'captured leadership,' urging independent audits. Student unions demand VC suspension; unions highlight worker impacts.

Balanced view: While allegations serious, due process essential. Prof. [expert] notes, "Reform procurement digitally for transparency."

Impacts on SMU's Reputation and Operations

Reputation dip affects enrollment, partnerships. Funding risks from DHET block grants. Students face disruptions; faculty morale low.

Long-term: Brain drain in health sciences, critical for SA's NHI rollout.

Solutions and Reforms for Stronger Governance

Actionable steps:

• Digital tender platforms with blockchain tracking.
• Mandatory ethics training for councils.
• Whistleblower hotlines with incentives.
• SIU pre-approvals for high-value tenders.

Universities like Stellenbosch model robust internal audits. DHET's NSFAS reforms offer blueprint.

Photo by Leo_Visions on Unsplash

Future Outlook and Call to Action

If resolved transparently, SMU can rebound, bolstering health workforce. Watch for SIU proclamation.

Academics, rate your experiences at Rate My Professor. Job seekers, check higher ed jobs, university jobs, career advice. Post a vacancy at /recruitment or /post-a-job. Stay vigilant for ethical higher ed.