For four and a half days in the Zondo commission witness box, “exhausted” former Eskom and Transnet boss Brian Molefe has been subtly pursuing political and personal vendettas against two individuals – President Cyril Ramaphosa and ex-public protector Thuli Madonsela.
This was part of his strategy to divert attention away from the plethora of serious allegations against him.
On both his targets, Molefe was determined to throw mud and hope it sticks, by hook or crook.
The end goal though appears to be to blemish Ramaphosa’s “Mr Clean” image that he used to campaign before the 2017 Nasrec ANC conference.
This would sow enough seeds for ANC branches to revolt against Ramaphosa at the planned national general council meeting, with the end game being his ultimate removal at the ANC’s national conference next year.
The launch of this part of Molefe’s plan was so spectacular, very few will forget his anti-Ramapahosa political rant on day one of his testimony back in January.
Molefe was throwing mud at Ramaphosa from all directions, and whether it was based on fact or fiction was the least of his worries.
For those who may have had a doubt he was on to Ramaphosa, Molefe made sure to remind them during his return appearance last week, objecting to a summary of his previous testimony read out by evidence leader Pule Seleka SC.
He insisted the commission put it on record that he made allegations against Ramaphosa, demanding they be investigated.
Molefe has now on three separate occasions accused Ramaphosa of championing the interests of Optimum Coal Mine through Eskom.
When Molefe joined the power utility in April 2015, the Glencore-owned company had a coal supply contract with Eskom that was meant to expire in 2018.
But at the time, Optimum had petitioned Eskom to up the buying price of coal from R150 to R432 per ton, to which Molefe said no.
His decision to refuse the coal price increase, he told deputy chief justice Raymond Zondo, was meant to punish Optimum for seeking to “extort” Eskom and hoping Ramaphosa would save it
“Glencore (Optimum parent company) had been trying to extort R8bn from Eskom, and the current president had been made a shareholder in Optimum, the company that is the centre of everything that has happened here,” said Molefe last week.
“So, technically, while he (Ramaphosa) was chairman of the war room, he was in fact strictly speaking as the shareholder. For, if the Competition Commission had not approved that transaction, any financial benefit derived would have accrued to him because the transaction had not been consummated by fulfilling the conditions precedent.”
Molefe was throwing mud at Ramaphosa from all directions, and whether it was based on fact or fiction was the least of his concerns.
After being pressed on why he thought Ramaphosa used his position as the chairperson of the war room, Molefe reneged, admitting: “I am not saying he did anything.”
On the same day, Molefe also conceded that he could not back up his claim that Ramaphosa was the chairperson of Optimum, bar producing a news article.
But when he returned the following day, he revisited the subject.
“Last night I was able to print a 00:03:51 announcement from Optimum, which is a JSE 20 announcement when a listed company makes changes, and it lists Mr Ramaphosa as being appointed as a nonexecutive director and chairman of the company, Optimum,” Molefe pressed on.
Molefe was intent on forcing Zondo’s hand to call Ramaphosa to respond to the allegations – with the hope that Zondo would at the end make an adverse finding against the president in his report.
This would feed into the narrative that former president Jacob Zuma was not alone in serving external interests during his chaotic nine years at the helm.
“So in my opinion I think there is sufficient evidence to show that Mr Ramaphosa was indeed chairman.”
Turning to Madonsela, Molefe’s appears to be still chewing sour grapes against adverse findings by the erstwhile public protector on his alleged shenanigans in service of Guptas while at the power utility.
The vendetta appears to run so deep, Molefe has been mentioning Madonsela’s name willy nilly at the commission, even when the questions are about his controversial friendship with the Gupta family.
Just this Monday, Molefe, unprovoked, made reference to Madonsela a staggering 31 times in 40 minutes.
Just this Monday, Molefe, unprovoked, made reference to Madonsela a staggering 31 times in 40 minutes.
His was a desperate attempt to discredit Madonsela’s damning State of Capture report, something he failed to do through proper processes such as a court review four years ago.
This became evident when Molefe opted to rather take a swipe at Madonsela when asked if he regretted ever befriending the Guptas, the creators of his downfall.
Evidence leader adv Anton Myburgh asked him on Monday: “What is your answer to whether you feel betrayed by the Guptas, is it yes or no?
“No, I feel that I was hard done by the public protector,” Molefe responded
Myburgh tried to bring him back in line: “So you do not feel betrayed by the Guptas?” to which Molefe said: “No, the person who was supposed to protect me from this onslaught that happened because of evidence or in the absence of evidence, that person who was supposed to protect me, was the public protector.”
The evidence leader was in disbelief: “So can we record that you do not feel betrayed by the Guptas – short point, correct?
“I feel betrayed by the public protector,” Molefe repeated.
Myburgh again: “And you do not feel betrayed by the Guptas?”
Molefe closed the exchange with an emphatic “yes” while the evidence leader resigned with an “alright, thank you”.
Molefe is due to conclude his marathon testimony on Wednesday morning.
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.