Two of the country's opposition parties are baying for communications minister Siphiwe Nyanda to come clean on his Transnet contracts, with the Congress of the People (Cope) calling for him to pay back R55 million.
The furore centres on contracts issued to General Nyanda Security Risk Advisory Services (GNS), a firm in which Nyanda is a shareholder. It is alleged GNS received tenders worth several million from state-owned enterprise Transnet, in an irregular fashion.
According to Transnet, these contracts were awarded as part of an overall strategy to safeguard the group's copper cable assets.
Meanwhile, spokespeople for the communications minister insist there is no conflict of interest in the awarding of the tenders, as this occurred 18 months before Nyanda assumed his current role in Cabinet.
This week, Transnet said it had fired two senior managers at its freight division on grounds that they had allegedly awarded the contracts irregularly. The issue also led to the suspension of Transnet Freight Rail CEO Siyabonga Gama late last year. Gama has been waging a battle on the political front for reinstatement - a position Nyanda firmly endorses.
Cope communications spokesperson Juli Killian laid a substantive complaint for investigation by the Public Protector on Wednesday regarding the issue.
Killian says that, while she welcomes the decisive action by Transnet to act against officials involved in corruption and irregular tender practices, the beneficiary of the illegal contract must now also be held accountable.
Corrupt transaction?
“The next step would be for minister Nyanda to refund the R55 million proceeds from what was essentially a highly-irregular, if not blatantly corrupt, transaction,” Kilian says.
In terms of the Executive Member's Ethics Act, the Public Protector now has 30 days to investigate Cope's complaints and report to president Jacob Zuma. He must then report to Parliament.
Kilian says this case should be seen as an acid test for the independence of the newly-appointed Public Protector and the validity of the president's often declared resolve to stamp out corruption.
“It also underscores the urgency of lifestyle and in-depth asset declaration of political executives in influential positions in all spheres of government, including that of their immediate family and business associates,” she says.
Democratic Alliance shadow deputy public enterprises minister Pieter van Dalen has also pointed a finger at public enterprises minister Barbara Hogan for not being forthright with her answers to his parliamentary questions.
Van Dalen says Transnet had refused to state what companies were awarded tenders and that the reply he received said: “The protection of copper cables is outsourced in order to enhance the existing physical conventional guarding and other security measures in place. Names of companies that are providing security services at Transnet cannot be made public for commercial reasons, and to protect the companies involved and their modus operandi from the crime syndicates which operate in SA.”
Van Dalen says that, surprisingly, when the exact same question was posed to Eskom, the parastatal did in fact answer the question.
“Surely there is no difference between the type of criminal organisation involved with cable theft (and, therefore, risks involved in divulging information) from Eskom or Transnet? Why then the incongruity? This is especially problematic since the minister of public enterprises, Barbara Hogan, was responsible for answering both sets of questions in one document,” he says.
Share
