ActionSA has expelled Kholofelo Morodi, acting swiftly on explosive allegations emerging from the Madlanga Commission, insisting the move was based on its own internal disciplinary framework and did not require waiting for the commission’s final report.
Mongezi Ntsebenzo, ActionSA regional spokesperson, told The Star that the decision was grounded in the party’s constitution and standards of conduct, stressing that it was the party's own assessment, not external findings, that prompted the action.
“The decision taken by ActionSA followed a formal internal disciplinary process, in line with the Party’s Interim Constitution. It’s important to be clear that this process is separate from the Madlanga Commission. While the matter is linked to testimony before the Commission, the Party is not required to wait for external processes to conclude before acting on issues that affect its own standards and integrity,” Ntsebenzo said.
He said Morodi was formally notified of the allegations and given a fair chance to respond, including an extension when requested, and a 72-hour window to submit her written defense.
“The Provincial Executive Committee considered her submissions in full, together with the information placed before the Party, before reaching a decision.”
Evidence presented before the commission alleges that Morodi shared sensitive internal tender documents with Sergeant Fannie Nkosi, including land lease tender specifications, with WhatsApp messages cited as proof of direct communication and transmission of procurement information.
Further testimony suggested that discussions around tenders continued even after bidding processes had closed, raising concerns about insider access and undue influence over municipal contracts.
When asked why ActionSA acted before the Madlanga Commission had issued its report, Ntsebenzo said the matter was treated as an internal disciplinary issue, not a criminal one.
“So, this was not based on speculation or external findings but on the party’s own assessment of the conduct against its constitutional standards. This is a disciplinary matter, not a criminal one. The principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ applies in a criminal context, and no criminal finding has been made by the Party,” he explained.
He reiterated: “The key question for us was not whether criminal liability has been established but whether the conduct is consistent with what we expect from a public representative and with the values of the organisation. In this case, the PEC concluded that the nature of the conduct, viewed in its full context, was incompatible with continued membership of ActionSA.”
Morodi is the first political figure to face expulsion following testimony at the still-ongoing Madlanga Commission, even though others implicated have not faced similar consequences in their respective organisations, making the party’s decisive move a notable development in the political fallout from the inquiry.
Ntsebenzo dismissed claims that Morodi’s expulsion was a politically motivated or rushed decision, insisting that the move was measured, justified, and entirely grounded in the party’s internal disciplinary process.
“We do not accept that this decision was premature or politically motivated. The process was structured, fair, and consistent with how we handle matters of this nature. Where there is a sufficient basis to act internally, ActionSA will do so. For clarity, the decision was not based on any criminal investigation, but on the Party’s internal process and the information placed before it. If any new information emerges, including from the Commission, it will be considered in line with our constitutional processes,” he said.
He added that interim measures are in place to maintain stability and continuity, and any issues involving other members are handled consistently, guided by evidence, fairness, and due process.
In the wake of Morodi’s expulsion, Gauteng chair Funzi Ngobeni highlighted that the party had followed a thorough and fair process, ensuring Morodi was notified of allegations, given the chance to respond, granted an extension, and provided 72 hours to make written representations before a decision was finalised.
“The PEC considered evidence placed before it relating to conduct inconsistent with the values, constitution, and code of conduct of ActionSA, including provisions of the party’s Interim Constitution relating to conduct that brings the Party into disrepute,” Ngobeni said.
He stressed that the party “takes matters of integrity, accountability, and ethical conduct with the utmost seriousness,” adding, "This matter underscores the importance of acting decisively where concerns arise. ActionSA will not hesitate to act where the conduct of its members undermines the integrity of the Party or the public institutions it seeks to strengthen.”
Ngobeni concluded by reaffirming that the party’s decision was fully in line with internal constitutional processes and careful consideration of all submissions, signalling ActionSA’s commitment to clean governance and restoring public trust.
The Star