Dead president walking...

03 November 2016 - 08:56 By THABO MOKONE, QAANITAH HUNTER, STEPHAN HOFSTATTER and KATHARINE CHILD
subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now

After a day of high political drama, new public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane was yesterday ordered by a full bench of the Pretoria High Court to release immediately the state-capture report prepared by her predecessor, which President Jacob Zuma had sought to interdict.

As the report prepared by former public protector Thuli Madonsela was released, pressure ratcheted up on Zuma to resign.

Civil society groups, joined by senior ANC members such as Max Sisulu and Solly Mapaila, gathered outside the Pretoria High Court, where speaker after speaker said it was time for Zuma to go.

The president is expected to fly to Zimbabwe today, having postponed his depature last night.

Madonsela has recommended the convening by Zuma of a judicial inquiry into state capture, to be headed by a judge selected by Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng.

Here is a look at some of Madonsela's key findings:

Did Zuma involve the Guptas, and his son Duduzane, in ministerial appointments and removals?

Madonsela found it "worrying that the Gupta family was aware or may have been aware" of former finance minister Nhlanhla Nene's removal six weeks before it happened. She also found it worrying that Des van Rooyen, who replaced Nene, could be located seven times in Saxonwold, Johannesburg, where the Guptas reside - including on the day it was announced that he had been appointed finance minister. Madonsela said the frequency was "anomalous" for someone who was based full-time in Cape Town.

On Zuma, the cabinet, the Guptas and the banks.

Madonsela found that Zuma's cabinet took the "extraordinary and unprecedented step" of intervening "in what appears to be a dispute between a private company co-owned by the president's friends and his son".

Madonsela has recommended that the intervention be investigated by the judicial commission of inquiry because it was a "possible conflict of interest between the president, as a head of state, and his private interests as a friend and father" in terms of section 2 of the Executive Ethics Code.

On allegations that Zuma turned a blind eye, in breach of the Executive Ethics Code, to allegations of corruption by the Guptas.

There is no evidence showing that Deputy Finance Minister Mcebisi Jonas's allegation that he was offered money and a ministerial post in exchange for favours was ever investigated by the executive.

On allegations that Minerals Minister Mosebenzi Zwane travelled to Switzerland to facilitate Gupta mining deals.

The former public protector found Zwane's conduct could be "irregular" because his office had booked flights he said he did not take.

This might be in breach of the Public Finance Management Act, the constitution and the Executive Members' Ethics Act, the report says.

On Eskom CEO Brian Molefe and the Guptas.

Allegations that Molefe had a "cosy" relationship with the Guptas are substantiated by cellphone records.

The report shows that Molefe phoned Ajay Gupta 44 times, and Ajay Gupta called him 14 times, between August last year and March this year.

Between August 5 and November 17 2015, Molefe was placed in Saxonwold on 19 occasions.

"Mr Molefe's relationship with the Gupta family, as well as with the directors of Tegeta, cannot be ignored; there was a firm line of communication between Mr Ajay Gupta and Mr Molefe," the report read.

Atul Gupta admitted to Madonsela that Molefe was a "very good friend".

Madonsela was concerned about the relationship because Molefe had not declared his relationship with the Gupta family.

The report questions Eskom's involvement in a deal involving Gupta mining company Tegeta.

The company scored a R2-billion profit from the transaction.

The deal involved Glencor's sale of Optimum Coal Mine and its holding company to Tegeta. The probe found that Eskom appeared to have forced Optimum into business rescue - to benefit Tegeta.

Madonsela flagged several irregularities in the Optimum deal.

The report said Eskom insisted that Optimum Mine could not be offloaded alone and had to be sold with the rest of the shares held in Optimum Coal Holdings.

This, Eskom said, was so that Optimum Coal Mine could be subsidised by the holding company's Koornfontein mine and coal terminal.

Eskom then let Tegeta sell off part of the holding company in the form of Optimum Coal Terminal - a deal that Ajay Gupta told the public protector had netted him a profit of $150-million (R2-billion).

The report concluded that this might constitute a contravention of the PFMA as Eskom "acted solely for the benefit of one company".

"It is unclear why Eskom has now allowed Tegeta to sell an asset that it previously deemed vital to subsidise OCM."

Eskom's actions appeared to prejudice Glencor by forcing Optimum into business rescue, then forcing Glencor and its business rescue practitioners to sell all its shares in Optimum Coal Holdings.

It was unclear to Madonsela whether Eskom had sought to enforce a R2.2-billion fine against Optimum after the Guptas bought it.

Eskom also authorised a R660- million coal prepayment to Tegeta at a special board meeting held at 9pm on April 11, hours after the Gupta company informed Glencor they were R600-million short to buy the mine and banks had refused to come up with the cash.

The report found this could violate the PFMA and amount to fraud as the money was not used to fund the mine but to buy the shares of the holding company - contrary to what Tegeta had said publicly.

It also found the way R1.45-billion in mining rehabilitation funds was transferred to the Bank of Baroda was irregular.

Madonsela notes that the way the Bank of Baroda was used to buy Optimum Coal Mine for Tegeta might be "money-laundering".

The bank said it would fund Tegeta's R2.5-billion purchase of Optimum Coal Mine in a letter to First Rand Bank. But it did not do so, which Madonsela finds "suspicious".

Instead, the bank received money in India in 32 transactions from multiple sources and used this to fund the purchase.

The report says "it is safe to say the frequency and amounts deposited should have attracted attention and investigations in money-laundering".

Transnet was also implicated in the report.

Madonsela cited an article in the Sunday Times earlier this year which revealed how Gupta associate Salim Essa was to profit from lucrative Transnet contracts under investigation by the Treasury. But she does not elaborate on her findings on the probe into Transnet.

The investigation into Transnet will, however, form part of the next phase of the probe.

- Additional reporting by Siphe Macanda

subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now