Acsa loses appeal for control of baggage screening services at airports
The Airports Company of South Africa (Acsa) and the South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA) have suffered a legal blow in their battle with Aviation Co-ordination Services (ACS) to take control of baggage control screening.
This comes after the Gauteng High Court dismissed the urgent appeal by Acsa and SACAA on Friday, which barred it from bidding for or purchasing baggage screening equipment.
Judgment on airport equipment
The court judgment by Jude Twala upholds the high court's order on 5 November 2024, requiring Acsa and SACAA to allow ACS to replace the relevant equipment at OR Tambo and King Shaka International Airports while a main review case is still before the courts.
It confirmed that the critical replacement of old hold baggage screening (HBS) equipment may proceed at the international airports, which is needed to ensure public safety and airport efficiency.
ALSO READ: Acsa interdicted from adjudicating and awarding R3bn tender
Acsa baggage services
In May 2023, Acsa announced plans to terminate ACS's more than two-decade role in providing baggage screening services. It said it intended to take over these services directly.
Acsa argued that it was supposed to be responsible for the baggage services, and that ACS had been running the services without a formal tender, which means Acsa was in breach of the procurement rules for state-owned entities.
However, ACS contends that the airline is responsible for providing HBS services at airports, with ACS legally mandated by the airlines to operate and manage the services.
ACS appeal
In response, ACS approached the courts to review and set aside Acsa's decision to insource HBS services, including issuing a R3.15 billion tender for HBS equipment and force SACAA to approve the replacement of four backup baggage screening equipment at OR Tambo and King Shaka airports.
In November last year, the court ordered that SACAA must approve the replacement and allow the process to be completed within 10 days of the order being made.
Acsa and SACAA then sought to suspend these directives through an appeal, arguing that they should not be enforced while broader legal proceedings, mainly the review of Acsa's plan to insource HBS services, are ongoing.
However, the High Court judgment on Friday dismissed this appeal, affirming that these orders remain operational and enforceable during the review process.
'The replacement of these units is essential to maintaining uninterrupted, internationally compliant baggage screening services at South Africa's major airports. We are pleased that the court has recognised the urgency and importance of this work, and that we can now move forward in the interests of all airline passengers,' said Duke Phahla, CEO of ACS.
ACSA tenders
Acsa has a fraught history of dealing with large tenders.
In August last year, despite stating that there were no allegations of irregularities, Acsa suspended its chief information officer in relation to a technology tender.
Mthokozisi Mncwabe had been placed on precautionary suspension after 'prima facie evidence of wrongdoing' was uncovered in a biometric and digital identity technology project.
This came despite Acsa previously stating before the High Court that there were no irregularities in the procurement processes.
The contract, worth R115 million, was awarded to French multinational technology company IDEMIA, with a requirement that at least 30% of the value be subcontracted to a South African, black-owned enterprise.
IDEMIA partnered with the local company InfoVerge, but the relationship eventually deteriorated.
Security tender
Also last year, the court halted Acsa from awarding an airport security tender to a non-compliant service provider since 2018.
This followed allegations made by the South African Transport and Allied Workers' Union (Satawu) that Acsa unlawfully awarded the contract to Checkport SA, 'a foreign-owned company that has no requisite expertise'.
NOW READ: Acsa wants a look over in fight over baggage screening services
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
24-07-2025
- The Citizen
ACSA to act over security breach at ORTIA
Airports Company South Africa (ACSA) has said it is taking action following a security incident at O.R. Tambo International Airport (ORTIA) involving a passenger found with two training hand grenades after arriving in Ethiopia. In a media statement, ACSA confirmed that the passenger, who departed from ORTIA, was found with the grenades during reverse baggage screening at Bole International Airport in Addis Ababa. Ethiopian Airlines formally notified ACSA of the incident in line with international aviation protocols, and ACSA reported the matter to the South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA). READ: ACSA sets sights on air cargo growth in Africa through OR Tambo The security breach occurred in the Hold Baggage Screening (HBS) area, which is under the operational control of Aviation Coordination Services (ACS), a third-party entity controlled by the Airlines Association of Southern Africa (AASA) and the Board of Airline Representatives of South Africa (BARSA). 🚨 🇿🇦➡️🇪🇹 Two training grenades slipped past security at OR Tambo and were only caught at Ethiopia's Bole Airport-known for some of the tightest airport security in Africa. Now SA's busiest airport is facing a R2m fine. Serious questions being asked. — Ethiopia (@Ethiopiaa1st) July 22, 2025 While ACS claims that airlines are responsible for HBS, ACSA maintains, along with SACAA, that ACSA, as the licensed aerodrome operator, is responsible for providing HBS on behalf of the state. ACSA has decided to terminate ACS's services, stating that ACS has no legal contract to perform HBS services and is operating contrary to public procurement laws. According to ACSA, ACS has accepted responsibility for the security lapse and has instituted disciplinary action against the employee involved. Historical context ACSA stated that ACS took over HBS operations from ACSA around 1998 under questionable circumstances, prompting ACSA to report the matter to the Hawks, the Special Investigating Unit (SIU), and the Auditor-General. ACS has been operating without a contract on an evergreen basis and is not recognised under civil aviation legislation. READ: EduFeArn and ACSA empower learners with mathematics dictionaries To address compliance issues, ACSA moved to insource HBS services and issued a tender to purchase the necessary equipment. However, ACS challenged this decision in court, obtaining an interdict that prevents ACSA from implementing its insourcing plan until a court review is finalised. ACSA has been granted leave to appeal the interdict, with a date for the hearing yet to be set. Strengthening security In response to the incident, ACSA has implemented additional security measures in collaboration with the Border Management Agency, State Security Agency, SAPS, SAPS Crime Intelligence, National Key Point authorities and EMPD. These measures include increased surveillance in critical zones, the establishment of joint oversight forums, and ongoing training to prevent similar incidents.
IOL News
17-07-2025
- IOL News
Mango airline's business rescue plan faces setback as court ruling is challenged
Mango's business rescue practitioner is challenging the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, ruling declaring the plan to save the state-owned low-cost airline unimplementable. Image: File The business rescue practitioner (BRP) of grounded low-cost airline Mango is challenging the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, judgment declaring the plan to save the state-owned company unimplementable. BRP Sipho Sono has filed an application for leave to appeal Judge Denise Fisher's ruling handed down last month. Judge Fisher found that the plan, stripped of its complexity, amounts to nothing more than the confiscation of creditors' claims to be transferred by Sono to an investor who pays no value for them or the shares. She ordered: 'The compulsory cession contained in clause 6.2.6 of the business rescue plan is declared to be invalid and of no force and effect. It is declared that the business rescue plan cannot be implemented'. Judge Fisher said Sono's opposition to Aviation Co-ordination Services' (ACS's) application was unmeritorious. ACS, which provided security-related services such as baggage and cargo screening services, baggage reconciliation and check-in services, hauled Mango and Sono to court over the plan to save the subsidiary of South African Airways. The company is one of the creditors owed about R2.91 billion by Mango before it was placed under business rescue in July 2021 and is owed over R23.3 million. ACS complained that its estimated settlement would translate roughly to R44,300 per R1m, a return which it described as negligible, if not nominal. Sono has indicated that there are sufficient funds to pay a dividend of more than the 4.43 cents to each rand owed, as estimated in the business rescue plan. In the challenge to Judge Fisher's judgment, Sono stated that the court's findings that a business rescue plan cannot provide for an involuntary cession against non-acceding creditors was made as a principle that is far-reaching and has implications that extend beyond the present dispute and constitute a compelling reason why leave to appeal should be granted. 'The decision involves a question of law which is important, as the decision is of general application, affecting all business rescue plans that entail an involuntary cession, including against non-acceding creditors, which is a common feature of business rescue plans,' he explained. Mango and Sono want to be granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal and believe there are reasonable prospects of success. Sono defended the appeal, asserting his right to pursue litigation if he reasonably believes that a favourable outcome for Mango will benefit all affected parties. 'The BRP will continue to act and take such steps as he reasonably believes are in the best interests of all affected persons, notwithstanding the various threats made by ACS and its legal representatives, which are regrettable, inflammatory, and achieve no legitimate purpose,' he added. According to Sono, ACS's intentions remain unclear but on the face of it, it would seem that the company prefers a situation where the potential investor withdraws and Mango is wound up. 'It is not clear why such an outcome would be favourable to ACS, who during the height of Mango's operations generated approximately R70m per annum in revenue,' he added. [email protected]
IOL News
14-07-2025
- IOL News
Airports Company of South Africa's leadership shake-up follows significant security breach fine
The Airports Company of South Africa (Acsa) has remained mum over reports that it has been fined R1.5 million by the SA Civil Aviation Authority for security-related breaches. Image: File Image While the Airports Company of South Africa (Acsa) has remained mum over the alleged R1.5 million fine imposed by the South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA), the authority has confirmed having recently imposed an undisclosed fine against Acsa for alleged security-related breaches. The fine comes as Acsa confirmed that it has placed its group executive for enterprise security and compliance, Lieutenant General Mzwandile Petros, on precautionary suspension as investigations commence into troubling allegations of operational irregularities. On Saturday, in a statement, Acsa revealed that Petros has been replaced by Mary Ann Joubert, who has been appointed to act in the post. "Airports Company of South Africa (ACSA) has placed the Group Executive: Enterprise Security and Compliance (GE: ESC), Lt General, Mzwandile Petros, on precautionary suspension pending the outcome of an independent investigation into allegations of operational irregularities. The decision to place the GE: ESC on precautionary suspension is a crucial measure to protect the integrity of the investigative process and any current and subsequent processes," Acsa said. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading The airports company said Petros' suspension will not hamper its day-to-day operations, with Acsa emphasising that the suspension is precautionary and does not imply guilt, but allows for a fair and unbiased investigation. Reacting to the fine, SACCA spokesperson, Sisa Majola, stated that the aviation authority had acted in the best interest, security, and safety of the public and passengers when it imposed this penalty against Acsa. "Consistent with the SACAA mandate of regulating aviation safety and security, the Regulator confirms that enforcement action, including a fine, was meted out against Acsa on security-related matters. The regulations allow operators to make representations, which, upon submission, are evaluated. The enforcement processes allow operators to appeal against an enforcement decision; hence, the matter is still in progress as guided by the regulatory processes," Majola said. While Acsa assured the public that airport operations, including security and compliance, remain uninterrupted, some affected parties have disagreed, saying this is not the case following recent reports of delays and long lines in some of the affected airports. According to a source, the alleged R1.5 million fine forced Acsa to beg Fidelity Security to assist in covering the King Shaka International Airport, even though the company's contract had lapsed on June 30, 2025, following Acsa's decision to insource its security screening personnel across its nine airports in the country. "Ironically, Acsa had retrenched many of its security screening personnel in 2021, citing cost-cutting measures, with many experienced aviation safety officers taking voluntary severance packages. Fast Forward 2025, the same Acsa management has terminated contract security agreements in favour of insourcing personnel. Even after they were warned on the ballooning cost effect of such a move," the source said. Attempts to get a comment from Acsa were unsuccessful at the time of going to print, following numerous requests for comment last week.
