We’ve made it simple and convenient for you to connect with us. You can choose between an in-person appointment or an online session for all your queries, consultations, and services.
Whether you’re an existing member or a prospect, you can easily schedule an appointment with just a few clicks.
.pdf%20(1720%20x%201080%20px).png)
Fundudzi Forensic Investigation found certain members of the board guilty and SAMRO covered it up.
Truth: The Fundudzi forensic investigation report identified potential fraudulent royalty claims by certain members, who are composers, authors and publishers, in collusion with a former employee and recommended further investigation; SAMRO commissioned the probe, implemented remedial steps, and referred the matter to SAPS/Hawks. The full report isn’t public while law-enforcement processes continue.
The COO’s suspension is in retaliation for whistleblowing.
Truth: The investigation was commissioned by the Board, not initiated by the COO, so she cannot be considered a whistleblower in this matter. The precautionary suspension of the COO on 4 August 2025 is part of an internal disciplinary process unrelated to the forensic investigation. It is not intended to conceal wrongdoing but to ensure a fair, transparent process. A CCMA matter has been initiated and is proceeding to conciliation.
The COO is the whistleblower.
Truth: The investigation was commissioned by the Board, not initiated by the COO, so she cannot be considered a whistleblower in this matter.
There’s no evidence of criminal referral.
Truth: The matter was formally handed to SAPS (CAS:584/06/2023), with the Hawks investigating. Can refer to the letter to the to the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation.
The CEO and chairperson were implicated by Fundudzi.
Truth: The CEO and Chairperson are not implicated in the Fundudzi report. They have not breached internal policies or the law. The report focused on irregular claims by certain members and a former employee. Irregular claims were massive and unchecked.
SAMRO has misappropriated R90 million or R60 million of members' money.
Truth: The scope of the work that formed part of the investigation included the period FY2020- FY2022, where R60m was claimed, and R30m paid out to members—from the R60m claimed, an amount of R3.4 million (three million four hundred thousand rands) was flagged by SAMRO and deemed to be irregular, which formed the basis of the investigation. The remaining portion of the claims, which was not disbursed, remained in the Undocumented Works pool. Within the 3 years covered by the forensic report, only R3.4 million was deemed to be irregular.
SAMRO isn’t being transparent.
Truth: Since December 2023 and again in 2025, SAMRO has updated members at the AGM and sent direct member communication explaining progress made on the forensic investigation.
The EGM results prove that governance is collapsing.
Truth: At the 10 July 2025 EGM, a motion to remove three non-executive directors was proposed. SAMRO then acknowledged procedural defects and moved to re-run the decision via a proper, member-led process. This took place on 29 August 2025, and the results of the votes were shared with members on Friday, 05 September 2025. This is not an example of governance collapsing but SAMRO’s commitment to addressing and correcting procedural defects, held in full compliance with the Companies Act, its Memorandum of Incorporation (MOI), and standard governance procedures.
SAMRO meetings are not properly conducted or exclude members.
Truth: SAMRO meetings, including EGMs, are held in full compliance with the Companies Act, its Memorandum of Incorporation (MOI), and standard governance procedures. Virtual meeting formats are used to ensure wider participation across South Africa and internationally, as per the Board's authority.
SAMRO independent board members' fees are exorbitant while members die as paupers.
Truth: SAMRO board members are remunerated quarterly in line with standard industry practices for their roles as defined in the Companies Act, and the fees paid reflect the value they contribute to the effective governance and running of the organisation. The directors' fees are approved by a special majority vote - requiring more than 75% approval - from SAMRO members at each Annual General Meeting (AGM) and this is well established. The payment is a standard, approved fee for the entire quarter. It is not paid per meeting.
The EGM Voting results are not credible.
Truth: The votes captured were done via a secure and unmoderated platform. There was no interference with the votes captured and with the results reflected.
The SAMRO board is divided, there is no governance structure.
Truth: While discussions and differing views are a natural part of any board, the organisation operates within a robust governance framework, fully compliant with the Companies Act and its Memorandum of Incorporation.
Members are calling for the Independent Board Members to step down. Why are they not stepping down?
Truth: Independent board members serve at the behest of the members. Members who wish to have them removed must follow the correct procedures as outlined in the MOI. These procedures ensure a fair and transparent process.
At the EGM held on 29 August 2025, members were not allowed to attend and SAMRO Board and Executives fled offices to avoid members
Truth: The Board has determined that a virtual meeting format allowed for wider and more equitable participation for members across South Africa and internationally. The decision to hold an online meeting was communicated to members in accordance with statutory requirements.
Additionally, as of August 2024, SAMRO has implemented a hybrid working model for all its employees. This approach combines both remote and in-office work, allowing staff greater flexibility in how and where they perform their tasks.
The Chairperson was requested to step down from presiding over the proceedings. What
prompted his decision not to honour this request?
Truth: Some members called for the Chairman to recuse himself. After a thorough review and consultation with the Company Secretary, it was formally confirmed that no conflict of interest existed, and therefore, there was no legal, ethical, or governance basis for the Chairman’s recusal. The meeting proceeded accordingly.
Why are the implicated publishers back on the SAMRO board?
Truth: In accordance with the outcomes of the EGM held on 29 August 2025, Ordinary Resolutions 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 were adopted, resulting in the reinstatement of the three (3) Publisher Board members. The voting results were communicated to members on 5 September 2025 within seven (7) days as had been communicated by the Chairman.
What’s in the news about SAMRO?
%20(2).png)
%20(6).png)