Church accused of enriching whites only

Commission to probe allegations that majority were kept out of property ownership worth millions

THE Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities (CRL Rights Commission) has launched an investigation into allegations that the white minority in the Old Apostolic Church of Africa (OAC) are using the church as a vehicle to enrich themselves at the expense of their majority non-white members.

In a complaint submitted to the commission last month, attorney and former priest Mark Hess detailed alleged irregularities in the governance of the church along with systemic discrimination.

The complaint reveals a number of church properties in areas including

Constantia, Bergvliet and Stellenbosch sold for far below the market value to management staff who later sold it at a profit. It also details an alleged lack of action taken against an employee who had embezzled more than R500 000 over a few months from the church.

While CRL spokesperson Mpiyakhe Mkholo confirmed the probe, priest Edrick Ipland for the OAC, said: “We will not comment at this time.”

Hess said the OAC was arguably the richest church in Africa, with vast amounts of real estate throughout South Africa, neighbouring countries and farther afield with a membership totalling several millions.

“Assisted by the apartheid laws, the control of the church would remain among the white church council members and their family, even beyond the birth of our democracy. Although the black apostles are in the majority, they are only token appointments.”

Hess said he initially became suspicious of church officers working at head office in Sonstraal Heights, Durbanville. “They were able to maintain lavish lifestyles which I considered to not be commensurate with church officials of any other denominations,” Hess said, adding that members were excluded from any decision-making regarding the church finances.

The complaint details that in February 1989, the church bought a 760sqm² property in Kirstenhof for R137 000. In July 2003, the church’s provincial district account and management purportedly executed an agreement of sale of the property for R450 000. Transfer of ownership was registered in the accountant and his wife’s name in November 2003.

A copy of the resolution for the sale of the house recorded by the church’s governing body, called the Apostolate, states: “The District Western Cape be authorised to sell the property… to the best benefit of the church per resolution of the district finance committee.”

The document is dated “18/9/2003”, however, the property had already been sold to the accountant in July 2003. The property was given to the accountant’s wife in a divorce settlement the next year. In April 2006, the house was sold for R1320 000.

“(The employee) bought the church property (in) July 2003 for R450000. In less than three years, the house was sold for R1320000.” The sale was done without the knowledge of the members or inviting them to tender, Hess said. “The profit made, including interest, must be repaid to the members,” he said.

The church also bought a 952sqm² property in Bergvliet for R285000 in February 1989. In March 2003, the church’s IT manager bought the house for R490 000. He allegedly sold the property in 2012 for R2250000.

When a Stellenbosch property was offered to a non-white apostle following his appointment in 2008, the house was offered to him at market value at just over R3million. He declined to purchase. “Those that bought church property under market value are allowed a huge housing subsidy to pay for these houses which is tantamount to a double benefit at the expense of the members,” Hess alleged.