Sascoc legal body dragged feet in appointing members
Acting president Barry Hendricks’s hearing now set for Saturday
The SA Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee board finally ordained members for its judicial body — writing up appointment letters on July 31, the same day on which the charge sheet against suspended acting president Barry Hendricks was finalised.
Hendricks’s disciplinary hearing has been set for the Sascoc Johannesburg offices on Saturday, though nobody was willing or able to say who would play the roles of presiding officer and prosecutor.
The judicial body, which handles disciplinary and other legal-related issues for Sascoc, had supposedly investigated the Hendricks matter since he was placed on mandatory leave in mid-April.
But it emerged that the judicial body had never been set up, with four of the seven supposed members telling TimesLIVE in July that they had not been appointed since their names were put forward by the board at a council meeting in June 2019.
Some delegates at the 2019 meeting insist the general assembly rejected the seven names on various grounds.
Others deny this, saying the board merely had to reconsider names.
Either way, at least four of those seven had no idea about their appointments until a week or so ago.
This was confirmed last week by Chantelle Nkubungu, Sinawo Makangela, Willie Small and Ntsikelelo Manyisane. Their appointment letters, dated July 31, were signed by acting CEO Ravi Govender on behalf of the Sascoc board.
The letters stated further: “Adv Willem Edeling SC was appointed during July 2018 by the Sascoc board to chair the judicial body, and he has been mandated to co-ordinate and regulate its activities and to establish rules, procedures and processes, as enshrined in the Sascoc constitution for the effective functioning of the independent judicial body.”
The Sascoc constitution requires the judicial body to comprise at least seven members, each having one vote.
But with the appointment letters being issued so recently, sports insiders are wondering how many people, apart from Edeling, were involved in the decision to charge Hendricks.
Edeling did not respond to emailed questions.
Govender said the board wanted to be independent of the disciplinary process, just like they were independent of the arbitration into Ntambi Ravele’s allegations against Hendricks.
Ravele had accused Hendricks of conspiring with Tennis SA president Gavin Crookes to block her from standing in the Sascoc elections, which were delayed by the Covid-19 pandemic.
The arbitrator found no evidence of a conspiracy, nor did the Sascoc constitution offer grounds for Hendricks to face disciplinary action.
Yet Ravele’s claims form the basis of one of two charges against Hendricks.
The other is bringing Sascoc into disrepute for writing letters critical of the board after he was placed on mandatory leave in mid-April.
If found guilty, Hendricks could lose his Sascoc membership. That would disqualify him from the Sascoc election, where he is considered favourite to win the presidency.
His removal from the ballot would presumably suit the two elected and three co-opted members still serving on the Sascoc board.
All five are gunning for the top three executive posts.
nobody was willing or able to say who would play the roles of presiding officer and prosecutor