14 October 2026 · Reporting verified against the dated sources below.
A new demand in an old procurement scandal
Commuter activist organisation #UniteBehind delivered an affidavit and forensic report to the National Prosecuting Authority in Cape Town on Tuesday, 13 October 2026, pressing for further investigation and criminal accountability over PRASA’s Swifambo locomotive contract.
The 2013 procurement deal was worth about R3.5 billion. According to GroundUp’s reporting on the handover, approximately R2.65 billion was paid to Swifambo Rail Leasing, but only 13 of the 70 contracted locomotives were delivered. The locomotives became notorious for clearance problems on parts of South Africa’s rail infrastructure.
The group says its latest dossier draws on bank records and proposes lines of inquiry for the NPA, the Hawks and the Special Investigating Unit. Those proposals are requests for investigative action, not new criminal findings against any individual.
A court finding, but no equivalent criminal reckoning
In 2017, the Gauteng High Court set aside the Swifambo contract after finding that the tender process had been corrupt and fraudulent. The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld the judgment in 2018. Those civil procurement judgments are established legal findings; they are not the same as criminal convictions of the people whom activists want investigated.
#UniteBehind has asked prosecutors for a response within 30 days. At the Cape Town handover, NPA deputy director of public prosecutions Tommy Bunguzana received the documents and said the authority would respond, according to GroundUp.
GroundUp also reported that the NPA’s Western Cape spokesperson said the dossier would be forwarded to the director of public prosecutions in Pretoria. PRASA said it continued to support investigations when requested and was not aware of criminal proceedings linked to Swifambo.
Why commuters still have a stake
The procurement saga is about more than locomotives. Rail users endured years of unreliable services, infrastructure loss and costly alternative transport as the passenger rail network deteriorated. It would be misleading to attribute every aspect of that decline to one contract, but the deal remains an emblem of failed public procurement.
The immediate accountability test is concrete: whether the latest submission produces identifiable investigative steps, a reasoned response from prosecutors and, if evidence meets the threshold, lawful proceedings. Allegations in the affidavit must still be tested by the appropriate authorities.
