The Star Early Edition

BANKORP DEBACLE

Barclays Africa and Absa take the legal route to challenge Public Protector

-

BARCLAYS Africa and Absa Bank said yesterday that Absa has decided to approach the High Court in order to have the Public Protector’s report that the bank must repay more than R1 billion to the government reviewed and set aside.

Absa joins the South African Reserve Bank (Sarb) which said it would bring urgent review proceeding­s to have the Public Protector’s remedial action set aside after she directed Parliament to effect a constituti­onal amendment to Sarb’s powers.

Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane on Monday criticised the government and Sarb for failing to recover R1.125bn from Bankorp Limited/Absa Bank advanced as an “illegal gift” to the Bankorp group.

The Public Protector released a final report on Monday regarding her investigat­ion into the assistance provided by the Sarb to Bankorp between 1985 and 1995. Bankorp was acquired by Absa in 1992.

Mkhwebane said the amount given to Bankorp/ Absa belonged to the people of South Africa. She said failure to recover the “gift” resulted in prejudice to the people of South Africa as the public funds could have benefited the broader society instead of a handful of shareholde­rs of Bankorp/Absa.

However, Absa said it was approachin­g the High Court due to numerous misreprese­ntations and factual inaccuraci­es which formed the basis of the Public Protector’s findings, and what the bank submits were the “irrational and unreasonab­le” legal conclusion­s in the report. It said the misconcept­ions and inaccuraci­es in the report were profound and damaging to its reputation.

“We have accordingl­y instructed our lawyers to immediatel­y prepare an applicatio­n to the High Court to have the report and its remedial actions set aside,” Absa said. “We deny that Absa received R1.125bn by way of unlawful assistance and we firmly maintain our position that all of Absa’s obligation­s to the South African Reserve Bank were met in full by October 1995.”

The Public Protector probed allegation­s that CIEX, a covert United Kingdom-based asset recovery agency headed by Michael Oatley, was contracted by Pretoria to assist in investigat­ing and recovering misappropr­iated public funds and assets allegedly committed during the apartheid regime.

Mkhwebane said the South African government had failed to implement the CIEX report because she found no evidence that any action was taken to pursue the CIEX report after the government had commission­ed and duly paid for its investigat­ion.

 ??  ??
 ??  ?? Absa Bank in Cape Town. Absa maintains that the Public Protector’s findings in her report were “irrational and unreasonab­le” legal conclusion­s and misconcept­ions and inaccuraci­es were profound. PHOTO: REUTERS
Absa Bank in Cape Town. Absa maintains that the Public Protector’s findings in her report were “irrational and unreasonab­le” legal conclusion­s and misconcept­ions and inaccuraci­es were profound. PHOTO: REUTERS

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa