SA ‘still in danger of state capture’
STATE capture could happen again in South Africa, exiled whistle-blower Athol Williams has warned.
He was speaking to The Independent on Saturday in a Zoom interview from London where he fled for his personal safety after spilling the beans about the company, Bain, before the commission of inquiry into allegations of state capture.
“What underpins state capture is an ethical code in our country that actually endorses it,” he said.
“Underneath, there is a sense that we all have done what Bain has done because we’ve all been out there to grab for ourselves without much consideration for others.”
He said even motorists shooting red robots shared the mindset “my time is more important than yours”.
“It’s not just an ANC thing or a Bain thing. It’s become a culture.”
Williams, 52, stressed that South Africa needed a moral revolution to avoid a bloody revolution.
In his recently launched book Deep Collusion: Bain and the capture of South Africa, he writes that South Africa needs to enter an era of the brave to “stop the bullies” and bring about a more ethical basis in everyday decision making.
Recently, on hearing former anti-apartheid campaigner Lord Peter Hain and Williams’s account of Bain’s role in state capture, the UK suspended the company from operating there.
Williams’s concern is that Bain is present in South Africa – not at parastatals like Sars, where a six-month R2.4 million consultancy turned into one lasting 27 months worth R164m – but with Sasol.
Winning over British cabinet office minister Jacob Rees-mogg took half an hour, Williams said.
“He (Rees-mogg) said he had met Bain numerous times and that his advisers concluded there was no basis for action by the UK government. We gave him half an hour. Half an hour later, he was convinced to take action within a few days.”
“What was the magic? Just presenting the facts.”
Williams, after a life of earning corporate salaries, is living on his rand savings “in a student dorm” and would like his campaign against Bain to see the company out of SA first.
“I’m entirely perplexed with the SA government’s position of not doing
anything. For me, it’s an embarrassment that the UK acted when SA had this information for four years. Rather than being dismayed, we, as South Africans, have to ask serious questions about Bain’s influence in the current government. Why no action? I have never been approached by anyone in government. Not for information, documents or an opinion.”
Williams said he was scheduled to hold talks with the EU yesterday and also hoped to urge Washington to follow London’s example.
“Many South Africans don’t appreciate that Bain isn’t just one of the labelled companies but the only one that could meet with former president Jacob Zuma up to 18 times, and the only one that has the influence and power to ensure inaction by the South African government.”
Williams said he believed South Africans should use their voices against antics that could lead to state capture, stressing that it was not just corruption and looting.
“State capture is more than corruption. We focus too much on looting and corruption but there are also
aspects of a coup, undermining of democratic institutions that should get us up in arms: a foreign company and Zuma trying to take over the country while we sit in our armchairs. We need the civic society of the anti-apartheid movement. They wanted to disable our tax authority. How do you then run a country?”
He said people needed to start speaking up more about big companies and government entities involved with Bain.
He said that just as people rallied against Shell’s exploration for oil and gas off the Wild Coast, the same action should be applies to companies that propped up Bain in SA.
“Right now, I made it very clear that Sasol does business with Bain.”
Ideally, with such civic action, SA should not even need to ban Bain. “We should just have ethical companies.”
Sasol confirmed that Bain was one of its service providers.
“Bain was readmitted as a service provider to Sasol in 2020, following its suspension in 2018,” said spokesperson Alex Anderson.
“Bain’s re-admittance followed a
thorough due diligence process and took into account a number of critical factors, such as the remedial measures taken to address governance, risk and compliance lapses in its South Africa practice and paying back with interest fees it had earned from work undertaken at Sars, among others,” he said.
“We will study the UK cabinet office’s decision in respect of Bain and assess whether it is premised on any factors not previously considered by Sasol.
“Any decision in this regard would be made in Sasol’s best interests.”
This week, Stephen York, Bain’s managing partner in South Africa, said in a media advertisement that it was appealing for “constructive dialogue” with South Africans.
He said that out of more than 80 staff, only two were involved – as junior staff members in Bain’s work at Sars, from 2015 to 2017.
“We apologise to you. Bain made serious mistakes in the procurement and execution of our work at Sars, and we kept working even as it became clear that the Sars leadership had a different agenda. Our work was used by others to further their agenda of state capture at Sars,” it said.
“In 2018, prior to the conclusion of the Nugent commission (of inquiry into Sars), we apologised and repaid all fees received from Sars. We installed new local, regional, and global leadership and upgraded our governance processes to ensure this could never happen again.
“We stopped all public sector work in South Africa and have not done any since. The private sector reacted swiftly, stopping work with us and insisting that we address our shortcomings. Some companies have resumed work with us, but only after rigorously reviewing our remedial actions.
“Unfortunately, a false narrative has emerged about Bain that goes far beyond our actual failures and paints us as the embodiment of all state capture that occurred during the Zuma administration. This story is speculative and has been provided by people with no first-hand knowledge of the work.
“No matter the narrative, we are accountable for our mistakes at Sars. We detail our mistakes and separate the fact from the fiction at www.bain. com/sars.
“We want to improve our standing in the community. We started proactively reaching out to South African authorities in 2018 to offer our cooperation. We are prepared to have the tough conversations and we appeal to government, the business community, and civil society to engage with us on a way forward. We are ashamed of what happened at Sars, but we would like to get back to the work of helping the South African economy grow.”
Williams called the advert a cheap publicity stunt and a denial dressed up as an apology.
“They are (also) insulting the Nugent and Zondo commissions, saying they are spewing fake news.
“For me, it’s crystal clear. Zondo said Bain acted unlawfully. It’s clear that they colluded with Zuma and (Sars’s former commissioner) Tom Moyane, that they were involved in state capture, and there is evidence to show it. The idea that now they want constructive dialogue is completely insincere. They have had numerous opportunities over the past four years to do so and never done so despite appeals and calls.”
¡ Published by Tafelberg, Deep Collusion: Bain and the capture of South Africa by Athol Williams retails for R320.