'Smoking gun' exposes Zuma's 'hidden hand'
Publish date: 23 November 2017
Issue Number: 4355
Diary: Legalbrief Today
Category: State capture
President Jacob Zuma has been directly tied to the state capture saga for the first time, notes Legalbrief. Zuma, Public Enterprises Minister Lynne Brown and their Gupta associates were the ‘hidden hand’ which former Eskom chair Zola Tsotsi told MPs were orchestrating affairs at the utility, notes a Business Day report. It says the closest Zuma has come previously to being linked with such allegations was through his son Duduzane and the Guptas. But yesterday Tsotsi told MPs in the state capture hearings being held by the Public Enterprises Committee that Zuma, in cahoots with then SAA chair Dudu Myeni, had played a direct role in dislodging senior executives from Eskom, opening the way for the appointment of Brian Molefe as CEO and Anoj Singh as chief financial officer. Molefe and Singh have been implicated in concluding deals with Gupta-owned companies, notes the report. Tsotsi, who was chair of Eskom between June 2011 and March 2015, also told the inquiry of approaches made to him by Tony Gupta regarding the affairs of Eskom and the association between Brown and the Guptas. He was also told repeatedly by Tony Gupta to toe the line, lest he upsets 'uBaba', notes Legalbrief.
Myeni's role in the saga was detailed by Tsotsi, who recounted that shortly before Eskom's newly-appointed board was due to hold its first meeting in February 2015‚ he received a phone call from Zuma telling him that the meeting would not go ahead. ‘Hardly a week later‚ I was called by Dudu Myeni. She said I should avail myself for an audience with the President‚ and declined to discuss any details over the phone. On or about 7 March 2015‚ I arrived at the Durban presidential residence and was met by Dudu Myeni‚ her son Thalente and Mr Nick Lennell‚ who was introduced as a lawyer.’ According to a TimesLIVE report, Tsotsi said Myeni had told him that because of Eskom's financial distress‚ an inquiry should be instituted and three executives – acting CEO Tsediso Matona‚ Dan Marokane and Mathsela Koko – should be suspended. ‘Shortly hereafter‚ the President entered. After some pleasantries‚ he requested to know what was up for discussion‚ whereupon Ms Myeni repeated what she had previously stated. The President then inquired if I knew who the executives were who were to be suspended.’ Tsotsi said he had wanted to consult HR guidelines and Myeni had told him that Lennell had assisted her with a ‘similar situation’ at SAA and suggested Lennell draft a resolution to present to the board. The board met with Brown on 11 March‚ and resolved to go ahead with the inquiry and the suspensions.
Tsotsi claimed financial director Tsholofelo Molefe was also eventually suspended on the instruction of Brown. He described how he felt ‘sinister clouds’ were gathering in February 2015, notes a BusinessLIVE report. He was first approached by Tony Gupta who remonstrated that Tsotsi was ‘not helping us with anything. We are the ones who put you in the position you are in. We are the ones who can take you out,’ Tsotsi quotes him as having said. ‘I found this matter altogether shocking and proceeded to question the need for suspending these executives as I saw this as a recipe for inducing instability in the company,’ Tsotsi said. Myeni argued against his concerns, saying that an inquiry would be held into the performance of the executives while they were under suspension. At a following meeting of the people and governance committee, director Ben Ngubane stated that financial director Molefe should be added to the list of executives to be suspended, saying that this was on the instruction of Brown. ‘The second astonishing event had to do with the appointment of the executives who had to act for those suspended. Hardly an hour after the end of the board meeting which decided on the suspensions Ms Chwayita Mabude was announcing the names in the people and governance committee of the executives who were going to act. Once again Dr Ngubane said these names came from the Minister.’
Tsotsi also described a meeting at Brown's home at which Tony Gupta and Salim Essa were present. According to a TimesLIVE report, he said he couldn't remember the exact date of the meeting but it was shortly after the Eskom board had been reconstituted. He said they were to discuss board allocations‚ which Essa‚ the ‘Gupta lieutenant’‚ had become involved in. ‘It seemed to me that I was not able to complete this exercise without the involvement of Mr Essa. I got a list (from him)‚ and I changed the list on the basis of what I thought it should be and I sent it to the Minister. She sent it back and it hadn't changed from when I got it‚’ he said. Tsotsi detailed how Gupta would use the threat of going to ‘uBaba’ when he was not able to help him with certain requests made. ‘He turned around and said that he must report me to uBaba because I am working with uBaba's enemies‚’ he said. He added that he got the ‘impression he was very close to uBaba’. Tsotsi said he could think of three occasions where Gupta had made requests but said he could not assist. One of these was a request to help secure contracts for gas in the Western Cape. When the contract was awarded to another company‚ Tsotsi said Gupta had told him they were ‘uBaba's enemies’.
Brown categorically denied that she consulted anyone about her executive functions – not Tony Gupta, Gupta-associate Salim Essa, nor anyone else – when she gave testimony under oath late yesterday. She asked why she would hand over her functions to anyone else. ‘Insofar as board appointments are concerned, I report to Cabinet and Cabinet decides who serves on boards. Recommendations to establish sub-committees come to me from the boards, in writing. The chair of the board sends me a letter with the names of the people in the sub-committees. Usually, I approve it because the chairs of sub-committees generally know their members better than I do,’ she is quoted as saying in a BusinessLIVE report. Brown said she was ‘quite astonished that Mr Tsotsi found it appropriate to attend a meeting with the President’ without conferring with her before the meeting, and not bothering to share the outcomes of the engagement with the President with her. In her statement to the committee, Brown said cleaning up SOEs was of secondary importance to using the trouble they were in to achieve short-term political and business objectives ‘regardless to the cost to the company or the country’. In this context there was no time to wait for proper investigations by the law enforcement agencies following due legal process. ‘Information is constantly regurgitated as if repeating it often enough will prove it is true. The same allegations levelled against the same individuals (go) around and around, destroying the reputations of companies that form the spine and the ribs of our economy, and people who have been associated with them, including me.’ Brown said the best thing for the country was to have a comprehensive investigation. The establishment of a crack investigating team by the NPA was heartening, she said, and her request for a Special Investigating Unit probe into Eskom was awaiting approval by Zuma. Also, the commission of inquiry into state capture was imminent. ‘It presently feels as if Eskom has been beaten to the ground and is being pinned down by the weight of untested allegations, while being kicked to death,’ she said.
Brown said she was appearing at the inquiry against legal advice. She told MPs the legal advice was based on the view that the committee’s process ‘was unfair, inappropriately accusatorial, and that my appearance would only serve to legitimise a predetermined interim report containing a rehash of untested information designed to embarrass particular positions’. She added, according to BusinessLIVE: ‘I did not take that legal advice because the constitutional principles that members of the executive should account to Parliament and the people have the right to know are more important than any of us.’ Brown insisted that her interest was to ensure a fair and just process and noted that no committee member had insisted on this. She rejected a suggestion by evidence leader Nthuthuzelo Vanara that she had been ‘obstructionist’ in writing three letters requesting clarity on a number of issues and in not demonstrating a willingness to assist the committee with its inquiry. One of the questions the Minister asked was whether the committee would rely on the unverified leaked Gupta e-mails. Questioned about her role in the suspension of three senior executives in March 2015 Brown said it was a proposal by the board which she accepted. Brown also rejected as false Tsotsi’s claim that when he visited Brown at her home Gupta-associate Essa and Tony Gupta were present. She effectively accused Tsotsi of lying in claiming that she had told then Eskom director Ben Ngubane that the financial director Tsholofelo Molefe should also be suspended along with the three already agreed upon by the board.
The Gupta brothers‚ Essa‚ Eric Wood‚ Duduzane Zuma and Myeni are to be asked to appear before the inquiry. Following weeks of evidence in which the Gupta brothers‚ Essa‚ Duduzane Zuma and Wood have regularly been named‚ ACDP MP Steve Swart proposed that they be subpoenaed to attend, notes a TimesLIVE report. EFF MP Floyd Shivambu said given Tsoti’s testimony citing Myeni as having set up a meeting with Zuma and Tsotsi to discuss board suspensions‚ she should be called too. The committee resolved that rather than take an ‘antagonistic’ approach straight out of the gates‚ they would first issue invitations. Inquiry chair Zukiswa Rantho said that if the invitations were not taken up‚ they would consider using Parliament's power to subpoena.
