Maimane to seek update on complaint that Ramaphosa misled parliament over relationship with Bosasa
DA leader Mmusi Maimane is to meet with the Public Protector, Adv Busisiwe Mkhwebane, on Tuesday for an update regarding his complaint that President Cyril Ramaphosa allegedly misled parliament about his and his son’s relationship with Bosasa.
Maimane said on Saturday that it had been five months to the day since Ramaphosa had “misled Parliament about the conflict of interest between him, his son, Andile Ramaphosa, and Bosasa – the company that has been actively bribing ANC officials for almost 20 years”.
He said he had also written to the Zondo Commission into state capture requesting that Ramaphosa be subpoenaed to appear before the commission over his and his family’s alleged conflict of interest with Bosasa.
“Ramaphosa needs to account to the commission and the nation as to the ever-growing list of transactions, contracts and business dealings between his family and Bosasa,” the DA leader said.
He added that what was known was that:
- Cyril Ramaphosa received a R500,000 "donation" from Bosasa CEO Gavin Watson towards his campaign to be elected ANC president;
- Andile Ramaphosa had a contractual agreement with Bosasa for "advisory services", for which he earned over R2m in a little over a year.
- That Ramaphosa had told parliament he had seen that contract, and it was all above board.
- Andile Ramaphosa’s business partner, a Chinese energy company, attempted to secure a R400m kickback from an Eskom loan in January last year – "at a time when his father Cyril Ramaphosa was heading up state-owned entities, and Eskom".
“However there remains much we don’t know. And the Zondo Commission is best placed to seek the truth in this matter,” Maimane said.
He added that he had also requested to view the president’s declaration of interests since his election in February 2018.
“If the president has failed to disclose any conflict of interest as it relates to his son, then the Public Protector must investigate whether he has breached the Executive Ethics Act.”