Mbabane – The Eswatini Communications Commission (ESCCOM) is seeking to stop paying its Finance Manager, Sifiso Gulwako, while he faces an ongoing disciplinary hearing over alleged financial misconduct involving about E720,000.
Gulwako has approached the Industrial Court on an urgent basis to stop the Commission from changing the terms of his suspension from full pay to no pay.
The application comes after the Commission, through Acting Chief Executive Officer Ozzie Thakatha, gave Gulwako until close of business on Thursday, October 8, 2026, to show cause why his suspension should not be changed to suspension without pay.
Gulwako is currently suspended with full pay following allegations that payments were facilitated into his personal accounts from Commission funds between December 2025 and July 30, 2026.
According to the suspension letter, the alleged loss is currently estimated at E720,000, although the Commission says the amount remains subject to verification through its investigation.
The Commission says Gulwako was suspended because, as Acting Chief Financial Officer, he occupied a position of trust and had access to the Commission’s financial systems, records, documents and other information relevant to the investigation.
His suspension took effect on July 30, 2026.
The Commission instructed him to vacate his office and surrender its property in his possession, including his laptop, access cards, keys, official documents, passwords, files and other records or assets.
He was also instructed not to contact, influence, intimidate or interfere with employees, witnesses, service providers or other people who could be connected to the investigation.
The suspension letter stated that the suspension was not a finding of guilt and that no final decision had been made on the allegations against him.
Gulwako has since been subjected to a disciplinary hearing, which commenced on August 14, 2026.
He has separately approached the Industrial Court in case number 336/2026, seeking the removal of the chairperson of that disciplinary hearing. That matter is scheduled to be argued on October 12, 2026.
His latest application stems from the Commission’s October 6 letter notifying him that it intended to change his suspension from full pay to no pay pending the finalisation of his disciplinary hearing.
Gulwako argues that the proposed change is unlawful and contrary to the Commission’s Industrial Relations Policy and Procedure 2021, which forms part of his employment conditions.
He says the policy provides for suspension with pay during an investigation and disciplinary process, while suspension without pay applies in circumstances provided for under the Employment Act.
Gulwako argues that he has not been arrested or remanded in custody and has not been found guilty of misconduct.
He therefore contends that the Commission has no basis to move him from suspension with pay to suspension without pay for an indefinite period.
He further argues that the Commission’s October 6 letter does not disclose the legal or factual basis for the proposed change.
According to his founding affidavit, the letter effectively presented him with a decision that had already been taken and only invited him to explain why it should not be implemented.
He describes this as an unlawful “reverse onus” and argues that it violates the principle of natural justice requiring him to be given a fair opportunity to be heard before an adverse decision is taken.
Gulwako also alleges that the proposed salary stoppage is retaliatory and linked to his decision to challenge the disciplinary process in court.
He argues that the Commission is attempting to use the variation of his suspension as a means of putting him under financial pressure while he exercises his legal rights.
The Commission has not yet responded to these allegations in the papers provided.
Gulwako wants the Industrial Court to urgently interdict the Commission from proceeding with the proposed change in his suspension terms.
He also wants the court to declare the process initiated by the October 6 letter unlawful, null and void and contrary to Section 39 of the Employment Act 1980 and Clause 8.4.6 of the Industrial Relations Policy and Procedure 2021.
He says the matter is urgent because the Commission’s October payroll is expected to be processed on October 16 or 17, 2026.
Gulwako argues that if his salary is removed from the payroll before the court can intervene, he would suffer prejudice and would not have an adequate remedy in due course.
He says he has dependants who rely on his income and that an indefinite suspension without pay would affect them.
The Commission, however, has raised a preliminary point of law challenging the timing of Gulwako’s application.
In its notice to raise a point of law, the Commission argues that the application is premature because Gulwako was given an opportunity to show cause why his suspension should not be changed to no pay.
The Commission says the deadline for his response was close of business on October 8, 2026.
It argues that Gulwako should first have responded to the show-cause letter and waited for the Commission to make a final decision before approaching the court.
The Commission therefore wants the application dismissed with punitive costs, arguing that Gulwako “jumped the gun” by challenging an intention before a final decision had been made.
The Commission’s attorneys further describe the court application as an abuse of court process and ask the court to express its disapproval through a punitive costs order.
Gulwako, on the other hand, maintains that he cannot be expected to participate in what he considers an unlawful process and says court intervention is necessary before the proposed salary stoppage takes effect.
Discussion about this post