Ex-SABC chief disavows 2013 DStv contract
CEO ‘concerned at unlawful clauses’
FORMER SABC chief executive Lulama Mokhobo has insisted she never supported the SABC’s 2013 deal with pay provider MultiChoice because of “unlawful clauses’ that would disadvantage the public broadcaster.
Mokhobo took the stand at the Zondo Commission of Inquiry yesterday.
The former chief executive said that she had always been in support of digital migration and the benefits it would have for the country.
She said it was from this perspective that she took issue with the offer proposed by MultiChoice to the SABC for a commercial agreement.
The agreement offered the SABC a news channel on the DStv platform, an entertainment channel and the organisation would receive R553 million over five years.
Mokhobo said she raised her concerns with former MultiChoice chief executive Imtiaz Patel about the inclusion of two clauses that stated that the SABC would not encrypt its broadcasts.
Mokhobo said this clause had raised her concerns because it went against SABC policy. She expressed her concerns in a meeting with Patel on June 6, 2013.
“The last meeting we had with MultiChoice was when I and Mr Mavuso raised our discomfort with the two clauses.
“The fact of the matter was that they would be reviewed or removed because there was no way I could have been party to that happening, where the law would be broken.
“There was a clarity of the things that had not to be included in the contract.
“That is why it was surprising when I read the letter that was sent to (Hlaudi) Motsoeneng. There was a veiled threat that either you agree to these clauses, or we walk away. I think it would have been better to walk away,” she said.
Former minister of communications Yunus Carrim had expressed similar concerns about the clause and its impact on the SABC when he appeared at the inquiry on Tuesday.
Mokhobo was shown a letter she wrote to Patel on June 19 2013, which she said has been used as an indication she had supported the deal and the
SABC board supported it too.
The letter read: “The board and executive management have duly considered MultiChoice’s proposal regarding the SABC’s 24-hour news channel and the entertainment channel, and we are pleased to inform you of the decision to proceed in accordance with the proposal on terms that will be agreed between the SABC and MultiChoice. “We look forward to a mutually rewarding relationship for the coming five-year period.”
Mokhobo said this letter had been misrepresented and used against her. She insisted it was in no way agreeing to the terms of the agreement, but was rather notifying MultiChoice of the board’s interests on discussing the matter further.
“The terms had to be agreed and at this point, the terms had not been agreed to. This was certainly nothing approving the terms of the agreement,” she said.
Mokhobo also explained how the SABC’s subcommittee on finance and procurement gave former SABC chief operating officer Motsoeneng the go ahead to sign the agreement without authority from the board, Treasury or Communications Department.
“This was not an approving board, they were supposed to scrutinise and then send the approval up to the board. And even then it would have to include the Treasury and communications department.
“They had no right to approve the signing,” she said.
The deal with MultiChoice was signed in July 2013 while Mokhobo was away on leave.
She said there was a toxic environment at the SABC with both former SABC board chairperson Ellen Tshabalala and Motsoeneng pushing for the deal to be signed.
“There was a veiled threat that either you agree to these clauses, or we walk away Lulama Mokhobo former sabc chief executive
BALDWIN NDABA
LAWYERS for former SAA board chairperson Dudu Myeni and Outa, and the SAA Pilots’ Association (SAAPA) will square off in the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria tomorrow.
The parties are due to make their final arguments following the conclusion of Myeni’s cross-examination, which lasted for four days and ended yesterday.
Yesterday, Myeni’s lawyer, Daniel Mantsha, was adamant that she will survive the application by Outa and SAAPA to declare her a delinquent director.
The parties are alleging that Myeni, while at the helm, was responsible for plunging the national airliner into a financial crisis.
But Mantsha said that his client’s accusers had failed to make a formidable case against Myeni which could justify a high court ruling “declaring her a delinquent director”.
“My client feels that she was victimised and targeted by this application for simply exercising her fiduciary duties as a member of the SAA board.
“This case was simply an ego battle between SAA executives and board members.” He was adamant that the court was not likely to rule in favour of Outa and SAAPA.
Mantsha made these remarks despite claims that Myeni had ignored two instructions from two former finance ministers Nhlanhla Nene and later Pravin Gordhan to sign the SAA/ Airbus deal.
The court heard that Myeni refused to sign the deal as she allegedly wanted an African Aircraft Leasing Company to complete the deal with Airbus, a proposal Nene rejected.
Gordhan – now Public Enterprises Minister – issued a similar instruction to Myeni on December 15, 2015, a day after he was reappointed as finance minister following the sacking of Nene on December 9, 2015.
Gordhan, in his maiden letter to Myeni wrote: “The developments that took place last week and the response of the markets are well known.
“The South African rand depreciated significantly against major currencies, the stock market fell and bond yields shop up by over 150 basis points.”
In his letter, Gordhan also said that a considerable amount of the “speculation which fuelled the crisis we witnessed last week centred on SAA” saying state-owned companies were certainly one of the key risks to the fiscal framework and SAA was foremost among them, given its “unstable financial position”.
In his first day of office, Gordhan supported the signing of the SAA/ Airbus deal.
He, however, organised a meeting on December 16, 2015, with National Treasury and Myeni’s board to discuss the board’s proposed involvement of the African Aircraft Leasing Company.
The court heard that Myeni and non-executive directors failed to attend the meeting.