The Special Investigating Unit says a money trail links two properties associated with former PRASA GCEO Tshepo Lucky Montana to proceeds allegedly derived from a R5.6 billion security contract
The Special Investigating Unit (SIU) has secured an order from the Special Tribunal preserving two multimillion-rand properties linked to former Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (PRASA) Group Chief Executive Officer Tshepo Lucky Montana.
The preservation order follows an SIU investigation into alleged corruption surrounding PRASA’s R5.6 billion Integrated Security Access Management System (ISAMS) contract, which was awarded to Siyangena Technologies (Pty) Ltd, a subsidiary of TMM Holdings.
According to the SIU, its investigation uncovered what it describes as a direct and uninterrupted money trail linking the acquisition of the two properties to proceeds allegedly derived from Montana’s association with the ISAMS contract.
The development places renewed focus on allegations surrounding procurement and financial management at the state-owned passenger rail agency, while Montana has strongly disputed the SIU’s characterisation of the legal proceedings against him.
Responding to the SIU’s announcement, Montana argued that the law-enforcement agency was overstating the significance of the order it obtained.
Montana said the SIU had not obtained an order freezing his assets, but rather a provisional order that forms part of the process of initiating legal proceedings.
“The legal process is simple: an Organ of State would approach a court to seek a Provisional Order, as part of initiating its legal action. You are not notified or served papers at this stage,” Montana said.
He said that, in his case, he was served with the papers on or around 9 July 2026 and subsequently filed a notice to oppose the application.
“I filed my notice to oppose last Thursday. In terms of the Uniform Rules of the Court, I’m required to file my opposing affidavit within 20 working days from the date of the filing of my notice to oppose, which falls on 19 August 2026,” he said.
Montana compared the process to action previously taken against him by the South African Revenue Service (SARS), saying the tax authority had followed a similar process in an attempt to sequestrate him.
He further disputed the SIU’s description of the legal development as a preservation order.
“They obtained a provisional order to initiate legal action against me, but they have not obtained a Preservation Order. Therefore, they have no reason to get excited,” Montana said.
The distinction is significant because a preservation order is intended to prevent property or assets potentially linked to unlawful activity from being disposed of or otherwise dealt with while legal proceedings are pursued.
SIU links properties to PRASA contract
The SIU’s case centres on the alleged flow of funds connected to PRASA’s ISAMS contract.
The R5.6 billion contract was awarded to Siyangena Technologies, a subsidiary of TMM Holdings, for the implementation of an integrated security and access management system at PRASA.
The SIU says its investigation traced funds from the contract to the acquisition of the two properties now subject to the preservation order.
The unit’s findings therefore place the properties at the centre of its efforts to potentially recover assets allegedly acquired through the proceeds of unlawful conduct.
However, Montana has rejected the allegations and accused state institutions of repeatedly targeting him.
He alleged that his opposition to political interference during his time at PRASA had contributed to the subsequent legal and investigative scrutiny against him.
“I trampled on the toes of Govt Ministers and senior ANC leaders when I refused to give them a share of the R53 billion new-train contract (the Gibela contract),” he said.
Montana alleged that law-enforcement agencies had subsequently been used against him.
“They’ve set the dogs (law-enforcement agencies) on me. Every time they tried, they failed,” he said.
His comments introduce a broader dimension to the dispute, placing the current legal proceedings within his longstanding allegations of political pressure and attempts to undermine his reputation.
A wider test for public-sector procurement
The developments involving Montana come against a broader backdrop of scrutiny of procurement, governance and financial controls at South Africa’s state-owned entities.
For PRASA, the stakes extend beyond the individuals named in investigations. The agency plays a critical role in South Africa’s public transport system, with its rail infrastructure supporting commuters and economic activity across major metropolitan areas.
Questions around the management of large procurement contracts can therefore have implications beyond the immediate financial value of a transaction. Where procurement processes are compromised, the consequences can include financial losses, delayed infrastructure programmes and reduced public confidence in the institutions responsible for delivering essential transport infrastructure.
The ISAMS matter is consequently significant not only because of the value of the contract, but also because of what the investigation could reveal about the governance of major security and technology-related projects within the passenger rail environment.
The SIU’s preservation application is part of a broader legal process and does not, in itself, constitute a final finding of wrongdoing against Montana. The allegations remain subject to legal proceedings, while Montana has indicated that he intends to oppose the SIU’s case.
For now, the preservation of the two properties means the assets will remain protected from disposal while the legal process unfolds.