It took four years, more than 300 witnesses, 8-million pages of documents and R1bn in taxpayer’s money to expose the true extent of SA’s crippling years of state capture under former president Jacob Zuma’s watch alongside his circle of friends in the now notorious Gupta family.
Chief justice Raymond Zondo on Wednesday released the final part of the state capture report, a mammoth task pointing fingers at hundreds of culprits, ranging from politicians to businesspeople and organisations. But most notably, Zuma and the Guptas themselves — and not forgetting those who stood by and watched as it happened, including our current President Cyril Ramaphosa.
As Zondo and Ramaphosa smiled at the cameras during the official handover — delayed, again, this time by more than two hours — and solemnly swore that the president had not interfered with the content, almost 2,000 pages were being prepared for release on the presidency’s website to close the chapter of a commission of inquiry the likes of which have never been seen before in SA’s history.
Zondo, while recommending criminal investigations against several senior ANC cadres and Zuma’s son Duduzane, did not spare Ramaphosa. “The president readily acknowledges the existence of state capture as a coordinated project and has made much of his drive to right the wrongs of state capture. However, the question of what he knew is still somewhat opaque,” writes Zondo.
“Ramaphosa must have believed that the ruling party would not defend him in such a case and that the ANC would have protected a president who fired his deputy president for the crime of confronting corruption.
“This aligns with President Ramaphosa's broader contention that his ability to act was curtailed by the political reality of the time — the ‘balance of forces’ in power in the ruling party and in the national executive. This is an indictment on the party and its leadership.”
Other indictments went to Zuma — again — and his soldiers former spy boss Arthur Fraser, currently embroiled in a criminal case he opened against Ramaphosa, and former Free State premier Ace Magashule and agriculture MEC Mosebenzi Zwane.
Zondo found Zuma’s fingers in many pies, including the 2013 irregular landing of the Gupta aircraft at Waterkloof military airforce base and the formation and running of the Gupta media house TNA Media and news channel ANN7, leading the chief justice to conclude that Zuma had breached the executive ethics code.
“The question that arises is this: how credible is Mr Zuma’s version that, before the landing of the Gupta aircraft at Waterkloof, he did not know about it and he had never discussed the issue with the Guptas?
“It is necessary to examine Mr Zuma’s evidence in the light of the totality of evidence heard by the commission, including Zuma’s relationship with the Guptas, the nature of the relationship with them and what he was prepared to do for the Guptas.”
Zondo said the one known fact was that Zuma’s son, Duduzane Zuma, was in business with the Guptas and that the former head of state was indebted to the family because it gave his son employment when apparently nobody was willing to employ his children.
“Adv Ngoako Ramotlhodi testified before the commission that in meetings of the national executive committee of the ANC, voices were raised to the effect that president Zuma’s relationship with the Guptas was affecting the image or reputation of the government and the ANC negatively, and he was urged to end it.
“Mr Zuma always defended his relationship with the Gupta family on the basis that they helped his children when he was going through difficult times and would not entertain the idea of ending his friendship with them,” said Zondo.
On TNA Media and its deals with the SABC, Zondo said: “President Zuma had enabled the extension of such business interests for the benefit of his son, Mr Duduzane Zuma.
“The Gupta family and in turn the [former] president’s son ... Duduzane ... benefited from the relationship that the Gupta family had with president Zuma in that they entered into contracts with various state organs and, in particular the SABC, to the detriment of other potential competitors who operated within the same media space.”
Former communications minister Faith Muthambi and former SABC boss Hlaudi Motsoeneng were not spared.
According to Zondo there is enough evidence to criminally charge Muthambi with several charges under the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act over her relationship with Gupta lieutenants and possibly enabling Motsoeneng to abuse his powers, leading to the diversion of public funds to Gupta-owned media house TNA Media.
On Motsoeneng, Zondo called for him to be investigated and prosecuted for possible contravention of the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) for his role in the business dealings between the public broadcaster and Gupta owned company TNA Media.
The question of what Ramaphosa knew is still somewhat opaque.
— Chief justice Raymond Zondo
Turning to the Passenger Rail Agency of SA (Prasa), Zondo hit out at both Zuma and Ramaphosa, saying the pair stood by while it was plundered. Prasa is still reeling from years of capture under former CEO Lucky Montana, recording a R2bn loss in the financial year ending March 2021. “This board was on its own fighting corruption at Prasa. The then president Jacob Zuma gave it no support. The then deputy president of the ANC and of the country, now President Cyril Ramaphosa, gave it no support. Indeed, all the top six officials of the ANC gave it no support. The parliamentary portfolio committee on transport was openly hostile to this board,” said Zondo.
Zondo recommended criminal investigations into Fraser, David Mahlobo and Thulani Dlomo for illegal activities at the expense of national security, as well as against Magashule — who is still hanging onto his ANC presidency ambitions — and Zwane for the looting of the R25m Vrede dairy farm project meant to empower black farmers.
The ANC also received a tongue-lashing: “It is necessary therefore to interrogate the role of the party in actively engaging in corrupt activities for its own gain, allowing corrupt activities to continue under its watch and failing to intervene to prevent or arrest such activities, creating the framework for corruption and state capture to flourish."
When it came to the State Security Agency, Zondo’s report left little to be desired as he found that the agency along with crime intelligence were never interested in doing their job to detect and counter threats against the people of SA.
Instead, the two most important security agencies were driven by fake reports, politics and information peddling to protect the political career of then-president Jacob Zuma and his allies and crush his opponents.
Zondo issued a stern warning that should this trend be allowed to continue, it had the potential to destabilise the country to unprecedented levels.
To change this dangerous trajectory, Zondo advised, intelligence agencies cannot be allowed to account only to themselves.
On the Guptas, with Rajesh and Atul already facing extradition to SA, Zondo recommended that the family also be investigated criminally for their role in the Vrede dairy farm project. - Andre Jurgens, Mawande Amashabalala, Naledi Shange, Kgothathso Madisa, Amanda Khoza, Tankiso Makhetha, Graeme Hosken, Thabo Mokone, Ernest Mabuza.
"In my view, if president Ramaphosa had spoken out - and he did not need to have been confrontational - and spoken out firmly against state capture and wrongdoing, and president Zuma fired him, that stance could have given hope to a lot of other members of the cabinet who may have been looking for someone to lead in this regard.
"Indeed, there may have been many in the ANC who would have given him support and spoken out if president Zuma fired him as deputy president, he would have continued as deputy president of the ANC because president Zuma could not have fired him from that position.
"President Ramaphosa could have inspired others in the ANC to be more vocal and the more voices became vocal, the less chances that those who were pursuing state capture would have continued as before. President Ramaphosa had nothing to lose by speaking out against what was happening.
"The option he chose did not prevent state capture from continuing.
"There are good chances in my view, that, if he was removed, that would have shaken those who were pursuing state capture. If he was fired as deputy president of the country and remained simply as deputy president of the ANC, he would have had more time to prepare or campaign for the position of the president of the ANC in December 2017. He ought to have remembered that there was a precedent for this.
"President Zuma was fired as deputy president of the country and used the time to campaign for the position of president of the ANC in Polokwane in 2007 and, indeed Mr. Zuma won in Polokwane, defeating president Mbeki.
"Accordingly, in my view he should have spoken out. I accept that it may be difficult to choose between the option that keeping quiet and keeping quiet but resisting. It would be untenable to send a message that if the same scenario were to happen again sometime in the future, the right thing is not to speak out."
— Chief Justice Raymond Zondo on President Cyril Ramaphosa: 'He should have spoken out'
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.