Publications
Partners
Not only were former minister of finance David van Rooyen’s advisers appointed by the Gupta family, but they called the shots once Van Rooyen assumed his short tenure at Treasury.
Standard Bank chief executive and former Treasury director-general Lungisa Fuzile gave testimony before the state capture commission on Thursday. Fuzile revealed to the commission that Van Rooyen’s three advisers were “illegally appointed” and proceeded to call the shots once they got to Treasury.
Fuzile said warning bells began to ring as early as December 10 2015. This was the day when Van Rooyen’s swearing-in ceremony took place as he officially replaced fired minister Nhlanhla Nene.
He said he received an invitation to the ceremony, and the first person he met in the premises of the Union Buildings was Mohamed Bobat.
“He told me immediately that he was the adviser to Mr van Rooyen. I was taken aback… all the advisers the department had prior to him had signed contracts with me,” said Fuzile.
Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo asked Fuzile why he was astonished because, as he had indicated in his testimony yesterday, ANC national executive committee member Enoch Godongwana had given him prior warning about Van Rooyen’s advisers.
Fuzile said this was the first time “it was really sinking in that there may have been some truth to Godongwana’s allegations”.
He explained that he was also perplexed by the fact that “here was an individual whose appointment papers I had not signed as DG and yet he was saying he was the minister’s adviser”.
The three advisers that Van Rooyen “was provided with by the Gupta family” were Bobat, Ian Whitley and Malcom Mabaso.
“I proceeded to have a meeting with Van Rooyen on December 11 2015, in which his advisers were present, and he instructed me to fast-track their appointments and ensure they had access,” said Fuzile.
He explained that Van Rooyen instructed him “not to worry about Mabaso” because he would not be paid by the ministry and “would not have a specific role, however he would be around” the premises.
Fuzile also explained that Bobat tried to tell him how to do his job, instructing him to “start writing a media statement that would calm the markets”, which had taken a knock following Nene’s dismissal.
This was in direct contrast to what Van Rooyen had indicated – he had said he was not willing to meet with Nene for a handover, takeover meeting or to send out a media statement.
“It is therefore safe to say that Bobat was now a law unto himself and was giving instructions without even consulting with the minister whom he claimed to advise,” said Fuzile.
Bobat went as far as contacting then head of communications Phumza Macanda and “told her that all communications would be now going through him,” added Fuzile.
Macanda, who was sitting in the gallery, nodded in agreement with what the former director-general was saying.
Leading the evidence, advocate Vincent Maleka asked Fuzile if the minister had followed the proper procedures in appointing his advisers.
“As far as I know he did not. Determination has to be made by Cabinet and there is an upper limit of two advisers that can be appointed by a minister.
“Should a minister need more than two, then a special dispensation needs to be given by Cabinet,” said Fuzile, who added that he was never provided with proof of such procedures having been followed.
He also added that some of the requirements of an adviser included that they had to be “South African and have security clearance”.
Fuzile also revealed to the commission that Bobat and Van Rooyen seemed to not be familiar with each other and to have a tumultuous relationship.
He also indicated that a lot of what Godongwana – who had told him that Nene would be replaced with a Gupta Minister and advisers of Indian descent handpicked by the family – had warned of had come to pass.
 |
| ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
