24 February 2026
The former COO of the National Lotteries Commission has failed in his bid to get back his pension. Photo from NLC website (fair use)
Phillemon Letwaba, former National Lotteries Commission (NLC) chief operating officer, has failed in his bid to get his hands on his R2.8-million pension, which the Special Tribunal froze in September 2022.
Letwaba’s pension, which is held by the Liberty Group, was preserved by order of the tribunal after he resigned under a cloud of disciplinary charges. He was accused of diverting lottery funds meant for good causes to organisations and companies owned or controlled by his wife, brother-in-law and close associates.
It was alleged that he had benefited personally from “diverting millions of rands intended for community uplift projects”.
Letwaba had applied to the tribunal to unfreeze his pension money. The matter was heard in 2025. In a ruling last week, tribunal president Judge Margaret Victor dismissed his application, with costs, in what is considered to be an important ruling on the powers of the tribunal.
She said the foundational issue was whether the tribunal was permitted to issue forfeiture orders at all – “a much-debated issue”.
However, she said, for Letwaba’s present application, it was unnecessary to determine that issue, although “it may carry some weight in balancing the interests of justice at this stage”.
Judge Victor said if the Special Investigation Unit (SIU) was ultimately successful in reviewing the grants and setting them aside and ordering repayment of money or some form of forfeiture, then, in the event of executing that judgment, the issue of Letwaba’s pension would become relevant.
“The issue for determination at this stage is whether the Special Tribunal will ever be competent to order a deduction from his pension fund,” she said, explaining that this is because of the wording of the Pension Funds Act, which defines that only a “court” can order such a deduction.
“It follows, therefore, that if the Special Tribunal cannot order the deduction, then the preservation of the pension fund cannot continue.”
Judge Victor said Letwaba contended that the language in the Pensions Act was unambiguous, and that only a magistrates’ court or high court could hold an employee liable to compensate their employer, in which instance a deduction from a pension fund may be sought and granted.
Letwaba had submitted that the tribunal was not a court of law.
But the SIU, Victor said, contended for a “harmonious interpretation” of the word “court” and the powers of the tribunal.
The SIU had submitted that the tribunal had the power to “make any order” it deemed appropriate to give effect to any ruling or decision made by it.
Thus, the SIU said, to give practical implementation to review powers, it followed “as a matter of logic and purpose” that it would have the power to order a deduction of a pension fund.
Judge Victor said courts were cautious when interpreting two statutes that must be construed together.
“The reality is that South Africa is buckling under the yoke of corruption,” she said, “and the legislature would not have knowingly introduced this inconsistency”.
She said: “An absurdity would arise when the word ‘court’ is construed in a way that excludes what is in reality the role of the Special Tribunal.”
“In the result, (Letwaba’s) quest to seek the release of his pension fund must fail. The issue is complex and fundamental to protecting the rights of the vulnerable when proceeds intended for their care are misdirected, as alleged in this case.”
See GroundUp’s extensive reporting on Phillemon Letwaba.