Publications
Partners
A chartered accountant, who is a member of the South African Institute of Chartered Accountants (Saica) and facing a number of charges by the organisation, has accused Saica of benefiting an international diamond dealer through the delay in finalising his own much-publicised disciplinary hearing.
“Saica is now (in effect), becoming the private army of the complainant, Erez Daleyot [an international diamond dealer],” Munroe Swirsky said during an exclusive interview with City Press.
Swirsky is accused of failing to return confidential documents to Daleyot. He was Daleyot’s accountant and personal financial advisor from 2014 and was also chief financial officer of eight of Daleyot’s companies, four registered in Israel, three in Belgium and one registered in South Africa, according to the Saica charge sheet.
However, in 2015, Swirsky resigned but allegedly failed to return the companies’ documents, a matter that gave rise to Daleyot’s complaint.
Daleyot’s affidavit mentions that the conduct possibly contravened at least 10 provisions of Saica’s code of ethics and rules.
Earlier this month, Swirsky wrote to Saica, lambasting it for the delay.
“I have never wanted to bring Saica into disrepute, but this is either gross incompetence or gross negligence,” read part of the email, which City Press had sight of.
In the interview with City Press, Swirsky said he thought that the delay in hearing or dropping the charges may discredit his testimony against Daleyot.
Swirsky is set to testify in two cases involving Daleyot, one in the country and another in Belgium. He also pointed out that he may have to testify in a third case against Daleyot in New York.
Saica’s communication with Daleyot’s lawyer was provided to Swirsky as part of the Belgian case’s discovery processes.
The interview came against the backdrop that he was allegedly threatened by Saica not to talk to the media.
Swirsky said he first heard about the charges from friends, who are members of Saica, after the organisation issued a circular to its members and subsequently a media statement, announcing that he would be appearing before a public hearing on June 22 to answer to a number of charges they were charged with separately.
Saica subsequently said that it could not trace Swirsky in order to give him notice of the hearing, despite his residential address being close to Saica’s head office.
“After I contacted them and engaged my lawyers and when I got the bundle from Saica, I saw that the complainant was Daleyot and he filed an affidavit on April 1 2016, more than two years ago.
“Daleyot had been charged and arrested in December 2015 for fraud. He was released on bail and I was a state witness,” said Swirsky.
He claims that Saica’s charges against him are a copy and paste replica of Daleyot’s complaint.
Swirsky said he was taken aback by the organisation’s new rules that provided for such hearings to held in public.
At the hearing, Swirsky, represented by his lawyer, was granted a postponement as he was not in the country.
“I submitted [a response to the complaints] on August 8 because they are actually quite complex. I had to be specific and had to run them by advocate Barry Roux because the majority of the charges that Erez raises are the subject of legal and criminal investigations, so I had to be very careful,” he said.
He was assured by Saica’s Alicia Daniels that, by the end of August, a decision would be made.
“I have been very pleasant up until now but my reputation and name have been destroyed. I am an independent consultant. I am actively looking for employment but everywhere I go I am told of the cloud over my head. I can’t even defend myself,” he said, adding that he also noted that ever since the public announcement of public hearings involving him and Khaya Sithole, a fellow CA, there have not been any other publicly announced hearings.
Swirsky said he also penned a plea to Daniels asking Saica to either continue with the hearing or drop the charges, but was told they were too busy.
“It appears to me, Saica wants to keep these names there to show the world they are doing something, but in my matter they are not doing anything,” he said, adding that the delay has also led to tension-filled email exchanges with Daniels, which City Press has had sight of.
In the email Swirsky wrote to Saica earlier this month, he gave Saica a deadline of Friday, October 5 by which to apologise and withdraw the charges.
“Given my comprehensive representations, the evidence, and the adequate time that Saica has had to review and deal with this historic ‘name and shame’ case, I give Saica till 4pm tomorrow – Friday October 5 2018 – the opportunity to publicly apologise and publicly withdraw the charges,” it further reads.
Saica responded with an email saying that he would be contacted once Daleyot had responded.
“Saica will place this matter before the disciplinary committee once all the information requested from the concerned parties has been provided to enable the disciplinary committee to adjudicate on the matter. Saica will contact you once we have received a response from Mr Daleyot,” the email read.
Willi Coates, a Saica senior executive, indicated that the organisation could not fully respond to the questions sent by City Press as the matter was still in progress and detailed responses would “compromise the administration of justice”.
Coates said Swirsky’s matter would be re-enrolled for hearing in “due course”.
“The response needs to be analysed in detail and the matter prepared for re-enrolment before the disciplinary committee.
“It is the Saica disciplinary committee and not the Saica secretariat which is responsible for deciding whether or not to withdraw a charge against a member. This matter will be re-enrolled before the disciplinary committee in due course,” he said.
In response to a list of questions sent to Daleyot, his lawyer, Kevin Hacker, only confirmed that he was the complainant and had laid a criminal case of theft of documents in 2016.
 |
| ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
