A deviation letter that ensured Gupta associate Iqbal Sharma’s company scored a R24.9m feasibility study contract was allegedly dictated to the then acting supply chain head of the Free State department of agriculture and rural development.
This emerged during day three of the fraud and money-laundering trial in the Free State high court, which is expected to run until March 3.
Shadrack Cezula, who drafted the deviation letter, told the court he had been “instructed” and “pressured” to produce the document, with his supervisor and CFO Seipati Dhlamini dictating it.
“In normal circumstance we ought to have been given time to get the documents that were not there,” Cezula said.
He said DhlaminI told him a deviation letter need to be drafted urgently and that a payment to Nulane also needed to be made that day.
“I typed as [Dhlamini] dictated,” Cezula said.
Dhlamini is accused in the fraud and money-laundering trial along with Sharma, former head of department of rural development Peter Thabethe and former head of the agriculture department Limakatso Moorosi.
Other accused are Sharma’s brother-in-law Dinesh Patel and Ronica Ragavan, a long-serving employee of the Guptas.
The case is based on an alleged corrupt tender in which the money was paid to Nulane Investments to conduct a feasibility study for the Free State’s Mohoma Mobung project, on the basis that Nulane had unique skills to perform the work.
Cezula, a section 204 indemnity witness, painted a picture of chaos as he told the court that this was done without any supporting documents for a deviation, with Thabethe repeatedly calling Dhlamini to check on how far the document was.
“I received a call on my landline from the HOD asking how far we were with the letter,” Cezula told the court.
Cezula said despite the absence of a tax clearance certificate, banking details or testing the market to assess if the service rendered by Nulane Investments was offered by other service providers, a R12.4m payment was still made on the same day.
You agreed that there was nothing wrong with the deviation, until you were threatened with an indictment, an arrest, you only then saw it differently.
— Daniel Mantsha, Peter Thabethe’s lawyer
To avoid insubordination charges, he said he did as instructed.
The deviation document was used to pay Nulane Investments R12.4m on the same day using the deviation document as motivation.
Cezula told the court that Dhlamini wrote the banking details of Nulane Investments on a piece of paper as the department did not have them on any official document, neither in the system because the company was not its service provider.
“I accompanied the CFO to the finance department for the payment to be processed that day,” said Cezula.
Cezula said they left the office late on that day to ensure the payment had been loaded by the finance department.
Thabethe’s lawyer, Daniel Mantsha, cross-examining Cezula, said his version was improbable as he was a senior staff member and could have refused to do something he knew was improper.
Mantsha told Cezula that he was the one who misled Thabethe, Moorosi and Dhlamini as the drafter of the deviation document.
“The mistake they made is that they agreed with your motivation for a deviation, you are the author of the [deviation] memo,” Mantsha said.
Mantsha accused Cezula of opting to become a section 204 witness to save his skin.
“You agreed that there was nothing wrong with the deviation, until you were threatened with an indictment, an arrest, you only then saw it differently,” said Mantsha.
Cezula denied he was threatened to become a section 204 indemnity witness.
The trial continues on Thursday.
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.