Sibanye taken to court over tender
Framework, failing which the intent as mentioned herein will not be effected, and no contractual relationship will commence between Sibanye Gold Shared Services (Pty) Ltd and Parabats Security (Pty) Ltd,” the letter further states.
Mini said after the letter was issued, he and a fellow Parabats director were invited to an information session with Sibanye-Stillwater where they were inducted in how, when and where to collect the metals destined for Richards Bay, invoicing, and the type of personnel protective equipment required to handle the goods.
Mini said based on the letter and the information session, he sought office space, placed adverts in newspapers and on social media sites seeking applicants interested in driver and security guard positions, and also sought quotations for light delivery vehicles for the security detail.
He also appointed three people as truck drivers as he believed Sibanye had given his company all indications that it would start work soon.
“As a matter of fact, it was expressly mentioned to the applicant’s representatives [me and my colleague] by the respondent’s team that at the latest the applicant should start with its first load on or before December 14 2022. Further, that the applicant must continue to plan accordingly so that it is not found wanting when the date of the first load arrives.”
But upon inquiring in January 2023 why Parabats hadn’t been sent a vendor contract, Mini said a Sibanye executive he spoke to, Nash Lutchman, hinted the contract wouldn’t be awarded. He then wrote to CEO Neal Froneman.
On April 17, 2023, he received an email informing him the mining company was withdrawing the letter of intent and would not enter into a contract with Parabats.
Mini told Business Times that Parabats understood the tender process, and interpreted the letter of intent from Sibanye and all the preparatory sessions he attended as an expectation that a contract would be entered into with the miner.
“The letter of intent will never be issued to someone or a company that holistically does not meet the minimum requirements of any tender process,” he said.
“A letter of intent is meant to alert the preferred person/bidder that they need to ready themselves to start performing on the contract pending administration processes of preparing a formal contract start date. It’s a formal resource mobilisation call to a preferred bidder.”
He also insinuated that Sibanye discriminated against black suppliers.
Sibanye-Stillwater spokesperson James Wellsted said the company was investigating the tender process after receiving an anonymous tip-off implicating some of its senior officials. It has asked PwC to conduct a forensic investigation.
“We confirm that the tender process was suspended and subsequently cancelled as a result of irregularities that were picked up during the screening process. These irregularities relate to the process as a whole.
“As per our ethics policy and good governance, such a matter requires an independent third-party investigation of which PwC was commissioned to conduct the investigation. The investigation isn’t yet completed, and we cannot comment further.”
Wellsted said Sibanye’s procurement policies require all potential vendors to be screened and vetted before any contract can be concluded.
“Therefore the notification was intended to provide [Parabats] with the next steps of vetting and screening in line with the company’s policy. Other governance requirements would have also been required to be met, which would have followed the screening and vetting process.”
He denied allegations that the miner discriminated against black suppliers.
“The teams managing the procurement and tender processes have no insight into the directorship of the vendors. Any information provided by the vendors are screened and verified by another independent department, having no supply chain responsibilities. Any assertions of preferential treatment along racial lines are rejected with contempt.”
Wellsted said a new tender process was initiated and another service provider was subsequently appointed.
“That tender was adjudicated and awarded in accordance with our sourcing policy. As per the Popia [Protection of Personal Information Act] we are not at liberty to disclose information on who the new tender was awarded to.”
The court is set to hear the matter on May 15.