City Power is pushing back after the Hawks conducted a search and seizure operation at its Booysens offices last week, as part of an investigation into an allegedly irregular R64 million tender. In a legal move, the municipal electricity utility has filed an urgent application with the Gauteng High Court seeking to have the operation declared unlawful.
The Hawks, acting through their Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation, executed a search warrant at City Power’s headquarters in Booysens. The operation is tied to a contract for the supply of electricity transformers in 2023 — contracts that, according to allegations, were never fulfilled.
City Power Disputes Validity of the Warrant
In the court papers, City Power asserts that the search warrant used by the Hawks was invalid. The utility seeks to:
-
Challenge the legality of the warrant
-
Protect any material already seized by the Hawks
-
Preserve evidence until a final court decision is made
Spokesperson Isaac Mangena emphasized that City is not opposed to lawful investigative processes, and affirmed the utility’s willingness to cooperate. He noted that since December 2024, City has been responsive to information requests related to the probe.
“The interdict seeks to challenge the unlawful execution of the warrant and to preserve any material already seized by the Hawks until the courts are able to make a determination on this matter,” Mangena said.
He reiterated that while Power insists on contesting the invalid warrant, it remains ready to assist in proper investigations.
The heart of the matter revolves around a transformer supply contract awarded in 2023. Claims suggest that City Power paid for transformers worth R64 million, but these were never delivered. This non‑delivery has drawn sharp scrutiny, prompting the Hawks investigation.
Related probes indicate that City Power’s financial management has been under pressure in recent months. Earlier, the Hawks were reported to be investigating multi‑hundred million‑rand irregular payments and inflated contracts, including a suspicious R67 million transformer order where the equipment was allegedly never delivered. In that instance, the Hawks conducted a search and seizure operation at City Power’s headquarters, targeting documents, procurement files, and contracts. City Power confirmed cooperation but stated it viewed the visit as part of normal investigative steps. (EWN, “Hawks raid Joburg City Power over R67m transformers order”)
In the prior instance, City Power had insisted that no formal raid or document confiscation took place, and that the Hawks’ visit involved the delivery of a Request for Information. (EWN, “City Power confirms Hawks visited its HQ but insists it was not a raid”)
By challenging the search warrant, Power is forcing a legal test of how far investigative bodies may go in conducting searches of municipal utilities. If the utility succeeds in proving the warrant’s illegality, that could set a precedent safeguarding municipal entities against overreach in warrants and seizures.
At the same time, the allegations are serious: if substantiated, they indicate major procurement, accountability, and governance failures within City Power. Given that electricity delivery is critical to Johannesburg’s infrastructure and public services, any taint of corruption erodes public trust in local government operations.
City Power’s stance is nuanced. While aggressively contesting the legality of the warrant, it maintains it is not impeding legitimate scrutiny. Mangena affirmed that the utility has voluntarily provided information to investigative authorities since late 2024.
This posture suggests City may be seeking to walk a fine line—defending its legal rights while not appearing obstructionist. Yet, the core dispute is whether the Hawks’ actions exceeded lawful boundaries.
The timing and scale of the probe have garnered attention. Johannesburg residents, already frustrated with frequent power disruptions, view corruption allegations against City Power as yet another barrier to improving municipal service delivery.
Political actors have called for a full forensic audit of City Power’s procurement practices and stronger safeguards so that future tenders are transparent, monitored, and enforceable. Some are also demanding immediate suspension of implicated officials until investigations conclude.
Over the coming weeks, the Gauteng High Court will assess City Power’s urgent application. The court’s rulings may:
-
Determine whether the search and seizure should be voided
-
Return seized documents or goods if the warrant is invalidated
-
Clarify legal boundaries for warrants against municipal utilities
Meanwhile, the Hawks investigation is likely to continue, including criminal liability assessments, contract reviews, and forensic audits.
If the court upholds City Power’s challenge, it could limit the Hawks’ ability to conduct similar operations in the future. Conversely, if the court finds the warrant lawful, City Power may face greater liability and increased pressure to surrender further records and face prosecution.
The clash between City Power and the Hawks exposes a high-stakes struggle over power, accountability, and legal limits in municipal governance. At its core, a controversial R64 million transformer tender — and whether the utility can legally resist a warrant seeking proof of wrongdoing — may reshape how similar state-owned entities respond to investigations.
For taxpayers and Johannesburg residents, the ultimate test will be whether justice is done, transparency restored, and City Power emerges more accountable — or further mired in controversy.
Source- EWN
