R1.16 million allegedly laundered by employees at one South African municipality

An alleged fraud and money-laundering scheme involving R1.16 million has been uncovered in the Maruleng Local Municipality.

Maruleng falls under the Mopani District Municipality in Limpopo, with the municipal seat located in the town of Hoedspruit.

Seven suspects have so far been arrested in connection with the scheme on charges of alleged fraud, corruption, theft, and money laundering.

The allegations concern members of the public who sought to have building plans processed and were allegedly directed by the accused to make payments to them.

These payments were allegedly diverted away from the municipal account into the personal bank accounts of the accused municipal officials.

The municipality was first alerted to the issue in January 2025 after it was approached by an affected ratepayer. No action was seemingly taken at the time.

The ratepayer then filed a criminal complaint with the South African Police Service on 16 January 2025, and the Hawks launched an investigation into the matter shortly thereafter.

The suspects, aged between 25 and 27, were arrested on 23 September 2026, and were expected to appear in the Hoedspruit Magistrate’s Court on 30 September.

In a media statement, the municipality noted the arrests and said it did not condone any misuse of its name, systems, or resources.

“The employees who have been arrested are presumed innocent unless proven guilty by a court of law,” the municipality said.

“The Municipality will allow the legal process to take its course and will not comment on the details of the case while the investigation is ongoing.”

The Maruleng Local Municipality said it would continue to cooperate with law enforcement authorities as the investigation proceeds.

Member of the Limpopo Provincial Legislature Marie Helm criticised this response, saying the municipality could not simply “hide behind a press statement.”

“That principle applies to the court case,” Helm said. “It does not prevent the municipality from protecting public money, its systems, and its records.”

“Nor from taking appropriate action against its employees, even if only precautionary in nature. It also does not shield the municipality itself from accountability.”

Helm called on the municipality to explain how the alleged fraud remained undetected for as long as it did, despite having financial controls in place and using external financial consultants. 

She said the municipality needed to account for why no action was taken when the matter was first brought to its attention, and what actions it had taken since then.

She also requested that the municipality disclose the current status of the accused municipal officials, including whether they were still employed or had access to municipal systems.