Lucky Montana no-show leaves his two properties legally frozen

The former PRASA boss was due to oppose a bid to freeze R15.75-million in properties he allegedly bought with proceeds of corruption

By Tania Broughton

11 August 2026

Former Passenger Rail Agency boss Lucky Montana was a no show at the Special Tribunal on Tuesday. Archive photo: Ashraf Hendricks

Former Passenger Rail Agency (PRASA) boss Lucky Montana was a no-show at the Special Tribunal on Tuesday where he was expected to present arguments opposing a bid by the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) to effectively freeze two multi-million rand properties, allegedly bought by plundering of the state-owned enterprise.

Montana has filed papers opposing the interim preservation order granted in July, which effectively prevents him from selling, transferring, leasing or dealing with a R13.5-million property in Hurlingham, Johannesburg, and another, purchased for R2.25-million, in Waterkloof, Pretoria.

On Tuesday, he was expected to show cause why the interim order should not be made final.

In a statement, the SIU said Montana had not complied with the tribunal’s directives.

Montana sent a legal representative who told the tribunal that he had only been briefed 30 minutes before and he was not in a position to argue the matter.

The tribunal extended the interim order but did not set a date for the further hearing of the matter. This means that the properties are effectively still frozen.

The SIU alleges that the two properties were bought through the proceeds of corruption.

The interim order was granted following allegations by the SIU about a direct link between the purchase of the properties and the contract for PRASA’s R5.6-billion Integrated Security Access Management System, which was awarded to Siyangena Technologies.

The contract covered the installation, supply and maintenance of a ticketing system at various train stations, part of a pilot project aimed at upgrading specific stations for the 2010 FIFA World Cup to reduce fare evasion and cater for anticipated increased volumes of commuters.

The SIU alleged that there was no link between Montana’s legitimate income and the purchase of the two properties. Instead, bank records showed they had been purchased through a “series of linked transactions” relating to companies involved in the project.