Fightback against Gordhan heats up

Minister faces at least three complaints by public protector EFF leads the allegations charge

The fightback against public enterprises minister Pravin Gordhan, who has made it his mission to clear out the rot in state-owned enterprises (SOEs), has intensified as he now faces at least three complaints by the public protector.

It came to light last week that public protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane was investigating Gordhan’s role in the earlyretirement package offered to former SA Revenue Service (Sars) deputy commissioner Ivan Pillay in 2010. This is based on a complaint lodged by Lebogang Hoveka in November 2016, an employee in the office of the deputy president.

The EFF this week lodged two complaints against Gordhan with the public protector, accusing the minister of lying to parliament about his interactions with the controversial Gupta family and for his role at Sars and the establishment of the so-called rogue unit.

The party also sent the minister a number of questions regarding certain allegations. Since Friday, social media has been awash with versions of the allegations.

The fightback by those embroiled in allegations of state capture has become politically charged, with the EFF leading the charge.

The party is dredging up allegations against Gordhan that were used by former president Jacob Zuma and his allies in the ANC to fire him as finance minister in 2017.

The red berets have accused Gordhan of implementing a “reign of terror” at SOEs.

Since his appointment as public enterprises minister in February 2018, he has replaced a number of boards at state entities, notably Transnet and Denel. His return to cabinet has also seen a number of public servants and executives implicated in state capture stepping down.

The EFF has accused Gordhan of violating his oath of office after he omitted in parliamentary questions in 2016 that he had met with an Indian businessman and one of the Gupta brothers. In his statement to the Zondo commission of inquiry into state capture, Gordhan said

he forgot about the meeting and had to be reminded by his then chief of staff, Dondo Mogajane. He is expected to testify about this at the inquiry this week.

EFF deputy president Floyd Shivambu also wrote to Mkhwebane asking that she investigate Gordhan’s role in setting up the high-risk investigation unit and issues relating to intelligence gathering at the revenue service. This despite the Nugent inquiry finding that the rogue unit was not unlawful.

Gordhan’s spokesperson Adrian Lackay confirmed the minister had received Shivambu’s letter and was seeking legal advice.

Gordhan has been subpoenaed to appear before Mkhwebane on Wednesday, the day before he testifies at the Zondo commission, in relation to the complaint around Pillay’s early retirement. Gordhan’s lawyer Tebogo Malatji said the minister would appear before Mkhwebane, but the protector had yet to provide particulars and evidence of “maladministration, dishonesty or impropriety” referred to in a letter she had sent to Gordhan.

Mkhwebane has accused Gordhan of not responding to four letters sent to him between February 2018 and July 2018. Her office said Gordhan had to be subpoenaed as a result.

Malatji said on Sunday the comment by the public protector was “simply deceptive, false and incorrect”. He said Gordhan had received a letter on February 5 2018 and a response was sent on February 16, asking that she provide particulars and evidence of the alleged dishonesty and impropriety.

Malatji said to date no such evidence and particulars had been provided and that in a February 28 2018 letter, the public protector “indicated that her office had no evidence implicating minister Gordhan of any wrongdoing”.

In 2016 the National Prosecuting Authority criminally charged Gordhan, Pillay and former Sars commissioner Oupa Magashule, but withdrew the charges in October 2016.

Public protector spokesperson Oupa Segalwe said the first four letters requested documents as part of a preliminary probe to establish the veracity of allegations against Gordhan and to determine if there were grounds for a full investigation.