• home Home
  • keyboard_arrow_right NEWS
  • keyboard_arrow_right Posts
  • keyboard_arrow_rightFikile Mbalula in row over frozen luxury house

Fikile Mbalula in row over frozen luxury house

GroundUp Raymond Joseph

Affidavits claim he borrowed R3-million from Lottery bigwig’s wife

Entrance to a house in Bryanston that is at the centre of a dispute between people implicated in dodgy Lottery grants and ANC Secretary General Fikile Mbalula. Photo: Raymond Joseph

The wife of former National Lotteries Commission chief operating office Philemon Letwaba has claimed under oath that her company loaned R3-million to then-sports minister Fikile Mbalula to help him buy a luxury home in the upmarket suburb of Bryanston in Johannesburg.

Letwaba resigned under a cloud while on suspension pending a disciplinary inquiry, where he would have faced charges of money laundering and abusing his position to enrich himself and his family.

His wife, Rebotile Malomane, the sole director of Ironbridge Travelling Agency and Events, made her bombshell claim in an affidavit lodged as part of an application to overturn a preservation order on the house, frozen by the Special Tribunal.

Besides the Bryanston house, the Tribunal also froze two other properties linked to Letwaba, including Malomane’s own home in a luxury Pretoria gated estate. This, after hearing evidence from the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Assets Forfeiture Unit that they were all bought with money syphoned from lottery grants.

Malomane’s claim about the loan to Mbalula was made in a confirmatory affidavit submitted in support of a founding affidavit by Letwaba’s older brother, Johannes Letwaba.

Their affidavits form part of an attempt to lift the preservation order on the house.

Malomane and Johannes Letwaba both claim that the funds for the alleged loan to Mbalula came from fees that Ironbridge was paid by Lulamisa Community Development for work it did on Durban’s Commonwealth Games bid. Lulamisa received R80-million from the NLC to help fund the bid.

Mbalula, now ANC secretary-general, had approached Malomane for help as he was “apparently … short of R3-million to secure the property”, Letwaba wrote in his affidavit.

Responding to detailed questions about the house and the claims made in the affidavit, including that he borrowed R3-million from Ironbridge, Mbalula said: “I cannot answer to any affidavit not written by myself.”

He told GroundUp that he wanted “to restate” the statement – in this story – by Mr. Esethu Hasane, his former spokesperson. Hasane previously told GroundUp: “The Minister has nothing to do with the mentioned property. Any intention to buy it in the past did not happen. Therefore, the questions about this property are best placed for answers by the owners of the property and must be referred to them. The Minister cannot account for a property that he does not own.”

The Mbalulas had initially made a cash offer of R5.6-million for the house “on behalf of a company to be formed” but then suddenly dropped out.

The original offer to purchase was in the name of Mbalula and his wife, Nozuko. Crossed out on the document are the words” “for and on behalf of a company to be formed”. Nozuko Mbalula signed the offer, but her signature was then also crossed out. It was never signed by the sellers.

Instead, Upbrand Properties, a company that has been at the centre of lottery corruption and that is closely linked to the Letwaba brothers, bought the house after making an identical offer. Solly Siweya, an associate of Mbalula’s, acted on behalf of Upbrand.

Letwaba claimed in his affidavit that “the understanding … even though this was not reduced to writing, [was] that Upbrand will hold the property until such time as the R3-million was repaid.”

There is no explanation so far as to where the balance of R2.6-million of the purchase price of the house came from, even though Letwaba and Malomane both say that Ironbridge only contributed R3-million towards the purchase price.

Letwaba wrote: “Ms Malomane was prepared to loan the monies she earned in the performance of the contract with Lulamisa, to Mr Mbalula, on delivery of some form of security to ensure repayment of the loan.

“I don’t know who made payment of the balance, I can only assume it was paid (I note with interest the fact that applicant [the NPA] and/or the SIU failed to advise by whom the balance was paid).”

Letwaba further wrote: “Despite him having allegedly renounced his association with the property publicly, it didn’t prevent Mr Mbalula from moving tenants into the Bryanston property, him appropriating the rent paid”.

“As Mr Mbalula failed to repay the loan, Upbrand took action and had the tenants evicted from the property.”

In her affidavit, Malomane wrote: “I further confirm that Ironbridge never entered into a written loan agreement with Mr Mbalula. The logical explanation, therefore, being that in the event of his default, Upbrand would utilise the property to recover any outstanding monies, it acquired a real right as being the registered owner of the property.”

“To the best of my belief, Mr Mbalula and his family moved into the property and have since vacated. As matters stand, he is in default and failed to repay the loan.”

She said that even though Johannes Letwaba “constantly fills me in as to the state of affairs in respect of the Bryanston property, I have no personal involvement”.

The house was subsequently offered for sale at less than Upbrand paid for it. But it was still unsold when the preservation order was granted.

Mbalula, in an unclear response to GroundUp, appears to deny ever having moved onto the property. He did not answer specific questions from GroundUp regarding the allegations in either Letwaba or Malomane’s affidavits

Bank statements

In a telephone interview, Siweya claimed that the affidavits by Malomane and Johannes Letwaba were an “attempt by Phillemon [Letwaba] to try and drag everyone into his problems.”

Siweya said that “as far as I am aware” Lulamisa did not pay a cent for the house.”

He added: “In my two years as chairman of Lulamisa, I never interacted with Rebotile [Malomane] as a supplier, but maybe other staff members did. She [Malomane] was never part of Ironbridge at this time.” (Malomane was appointed as a director of Ironbridge in February 2017).

He denied that Ironbridge or Malomane had worked on the Commonwealth bid. “She never sent an invoice to me or anyone else at Lulamisa.”

Told that Lulamisa bank statements reflected payments to Ironbridge from Lulamisa and that Malomane had included a list of these alleged payments amounting to almost R6.4-million with her affidavit, Siweya said he was not aware of them.

But then he appeared to contradict himself when he said that Malomane had worked for Lulamisa as “an administrator” and was paid a salary.

“She was never contracted. I am not sure why Lulamisa might have paid Ironbridge money. Perhaps someone else made these payments. I’ll have to check.”

Siweya said he was aware that Mbalula had wanted to relocate, but “he didn’t have the money. I do not know if Mbalula moved in. I have always seen him at his other house.”


GroundUp previously reported on the R80-million grant to Lulamisa, which was paid in two tranches of R64-million in 2015/16 and a further R16-million in 2016/17.

But neither Lulamisa nor the NLC, then run by a different, very opaque executive and Board, who have been implicated in the corruption that overwhelmed the organisation on their watch, would say what the money was for and how it was spent.

In his affidavit. Johannes Letwaba said: “At the time Mr Mbalula approached her [Malomane], Ironbridge had involvement in a contract with the Lulamisa Community Development Organisation, a registered non-profit organisation.”

Lulamisa was awarded grant funding totalling R80-million by the NLC, for purposes of “bidding for Durban 2022”.

The grant funding was awarded “to enable Lulamisa to administer and pay for expenses associated with the bid to secure the 2022 Commonwealth Games for Durban,” Letwaba wrote.

The bid process was spearheaded by the South African Sports Confederation and Olympics Committee (SASCOC), which was also awarded a total of R64.7-million between 2014 and 2016 for other projects.

“Because Ironbridge … was not in the business of acquiring property, Ms Malomane had no intent to bring this into the sphere of her business. After consideration it was agreed that the Bryanston property will be held in the name of Upbrand, it being involved in the property market,” Letwaba wrote.

As a result, he said, Upbrand signed an offer to purchase the property for an amount of R5.6-million and became the registered owner of the Bryanston property on 27 July 2016.

“Allow me to add that Mr Mbalula was not prepared to pay the transfer costs, seeing that the property was transferred to Upbrand, for which reason it [Upbrand] made payment of the transfer costs.”

Letwaba wrote: “As a result, Upbrand became the registered owner of the Bryanston property on 27 July 2016, and to the best of my belief Mr Mbalula and his family settled into the residence”.

“I have reason to believe that once questions were raised regarding the property transaction, it caused for him and his family to vacate the property,” Letwaba wrote.

Malomane also claimed in her affidavit that Mbalula had stayed briefly in the house.

Several sources have also told GroundUp that Mbalula lived there briefly before moving out. They include an SIU official with direct knowledge of the investigation involving the house and two security guards working at nearby houses.

Another source said he attended a party for Mbalula’s 45th birthday at the house. He said the party was held inside and outside of a gazebo at the back of the property. The source, who identified the house from photographs shown to him by GroundUp, also named two prominent ANC members he said were at the party.

But Mbalula denied this in his response to GroundUp and said that his 45th birthday was at the house that he currently lives in.

GroundView: Fikile Mbalula – at best a man of poor judgment

The above story is complicated and contains accusations and counter-accusations. Did Fikile Mbalula live in the house in Bryanston? Did he take a loan from Upbrand, from money originating from the NLC? We don’t know the precise answers to these questions. There are convoluted agreements, some in writing, some verbal, involving an array of dodgy characters, some who have looted tens of millions of rands from the Lottery.

Mbalula is a man who loves the high-life and who adorns himself with finery. When he finished his 12-year stint as a minister in April, he was earning over R2-million a year. He was an elite earner, by South African standards, throughout this period. Yet this perhaps wasn’t enough to sustain the lifestyle he desired.

In the best-case scenario Mbalula did not act corruptly in relation to the Bryanston house. But he unequivocally showed poor judgment in getting involved with the people who have now written affidavits implicating him.

In a country with a more competitive democracy, it is highly likely Mbalula’s political career, marked by several failures, especially the deterioration of the police and Metrorail while he was the minister responsible for these entities, would have ended long ago. Instead, he holds one of the most powerful positions in the ANC.

Now Read: Powerball Results: Draw Tuesday, 27 June 2023

Written by: Dohne


UpComing Shows

DownLoad Our Mobile App


Privacy Policy


POPIA ActTo promote the protection of personal information processed by public and private bodies; to introduce certain conditions so as to establish minimum requirements for the processing of personal information; to provide for the establishment of an Information Regulator to exercise certain powers and to perform certain duties and functions in terms of this Act and the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000; to provide for the issuing of codes of conduct; to provide for the rights of persons regarding unsolicited electronic communications and automated decision making; to regulate the flow of personal information across the borders of the Republic; and to provide for matters connected therewith.


  • section 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, provides that everyone has the right to privacy;
  • the right to privacy includes a right to protection against the unlawful collection, retention, dissemination and use of personal information;
  • the State must respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights;


  • consonant with the constitutional values of democracy and openness, the need for economic and social progress, within the framework of the information society, requires the removal of unnecessary impediments to the free flow of information, including personal information;


  • regulate, in harmony with international standards, the processing of personal information by public and private bodies in a manner that gives effect to the right to privacy subject to justifiable limitations that are aimed at protecting other rights and important interests,
  1. Definitions and Interpretation

1.1.“Personal Information” means information relating to an identifiable, living, natural person and where it is applicable, identifiable, existing juristic person, including all information as defined in the Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013. 

1.2  Parliament assented to POPIA on 19 November 2013. The commencement date of section 1Part A of Chapter 5section 112 and section 113 was 11 April 2014. The commencement date of the other sections was 1 July 2020 (with the exception of section 110 and 114(4). The President of South Africa has proclaimed the POPI commencement date to be 1 July 2020.

1.3. “Processing” means the creation, generation, communication, storage, destruction of personal information as more fully defined in the Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013.  

1.4. “You” or the “user” means any person who accesses and browses this website for any purpose. 

1.4. “Website” means the website of the KAYA 959 at URL or such other URL as KAYA 959 may choose from time to time.   

  1. Status and Amendments

2.1. KAYA 959 respects your privacy. This privacy policy statement sets out KAYA 959’s information gathering and dissemination practices in respect of the Website. 

2.2. This Privacy Policy governs the processing of personal information provided to KAYA 959 through your use of the Website. 

2.3. Please note that, due to legal and other developments, KAYA 959 may amend these terms and conditions from time to time.  

  1. Processing of Personal Information

3.1. By providing your personal information to KAYA 959 you acknowledge that it has been collected directly from you and consent to its processing by KAYA 959. 

3.2. Where you submit Personal Information (such as name, address, telephone number and email address) via the website (e.g. through completing any online form) the following principles are observed in the processing of that information: 

3.2.1. KAYA 959 will only collect personal information for a purpose consistent with the purpose for which it is required. The specific purpose for which information is 
collected will be apparent from the context in which it is requested. 

3.2.2. KAYA 959 will only process personal information in a manner that is adequate, relevant and not excessive in the context of the purpose for which it is processed. 

3.2.3. Personal information will only be processed for a purpose compatible with that for which it was collected, unless you have agreed to an alternative purpose in writing or KAYA 959 is permitted in terms of national legislation of general application dealing primarily with the protection of personal information. 

3.2.4. KAYA 959 will keep records of all personal Information collected and the specific purpose for which it was collected for a period of 1 (one) year from the date on which it was last used. 

3.2.5. KAYA 959 will not disclose any personal information relating to you to any third party unless your prior written agreement is obtained or KAYA 959 is required to do so by law. 

3.2.6. If personal information is released with your consent KAYA 959 will retain a record of the information released, the third party to which it was released, the reason for the release and the date of release, for a period of 1 (one) year from the date on which it was last used. 

3.2.7. KAYA 959 will destroy or delete any personal information that is no longer needed by KAYA 959 for the purpose it was initially collected, or subsequently processed. 

3.3. Note that, as permitted by the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002, KAYA 959 may use personal information collected to compile profiles for statistical purposes. No information contained in the profiles or statistics will be able to be linked to any specific user.    

  1. Collection of anonymous data

4.1. KAYA 959 may use standard technology to collect information about the use of this website. This technology is not able to identify individual users but simply allows KAYA 959 to collect statistics. 

4.2. KAYA 959 may utilise temporary or session cookies to keep track of users’ browsing habits. A cookie is a small file that is placed on your hard drive in order to keep a record of your interaction with this website and facilitate user convenience. 

4.2.1. Cookies by themselves will not be used to identify users personally but may be used to compile identified statistics relating to use of services offered or to provide KAYA 959 with feedback on the performance of this website. 

4.2.2. The following classes of information may be collected in respect of users who have enabled cookies: The browser software used; IP address; Date and time of activities while visiting the website; URLs of internal pages visited; and referrers. 

4.3. If you do not wish cookies to be employed to customize your interaction with this website it is possible to alter the manner in which your browser handles cookies. Please note that, if this is done, certain services on this website may not be available. 

  1. Security

5.1. KAYA 959 takes reasonable measures to ensure the security and integrity of information submitted to or collected by this website, but cannot under any circumstances be held liable for any loss or other damage sustained by you as a result of unlawful access to or dissemination of any personal information by a third party. 

  1. Links to other websites

6.1. KAYA 959 has no control over and accepts no responsibility for the privacy practices of any third party websites to which hyperlinks may have been provided and KAYA 959 strongly recommends that you review the privacy policy of any website you visit before using it further. 

  1. Queries

7.1. If you have any queries about this privacy policy please contact us by emailing [email protected]