Masuku’s name cleared in court
Some political relief for former MEC
FORMER Gauteng Health MEC Bandile Masuku’s name was cleared yesterday after the North Gauteng High Court pronounced that it saw no evidence of corruption by Masuku.
Although Judge Roland Sutherland dismissed Masuku’s bid to challenge a report by the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) that led to his axing, the judgment brought Masuku some political relief.
Gauteng Premier David Makhura sacked Masuku last year after the SIU report found that he had not exercised enough oversight in his duties as MEC during the procurement of Covid-19 personal protective equipment (PPE).
In response, Masuku pointed out that it was he who had initially invited the SIU. The Star has learnt that the SIU was also investigating the accounting officer (HOD) Professor Mkhululi Lukhele, who quit during the investigation.
News of Covid-19 PPE corruption went viral after a dodgy multimillion-rand contract was awarded to Royal Bhaca, a company owned by the late Nkosi Madzikane Thandisizwe Diko II, the late husband of Khusela Diko, the suspended spokesperson of President Cyril Ramaphosa.
In his ruling, Judge Sutherland said that Masuku’s reputation as a public office-bearer had been dented.
“Whether in the long run his political career will suffer remains to be seen, but in the short term his political career has been clearly truncated.
“In the circumstances experienced by Dr Masuku, whose grievance is a shattered reputation, perhaps it could sensibly be asked whether he should be left to exercise a private law remedy for defamation rather than be entitled to utilise a public law remedy in the form of a review,” Judge Sutherland noted.
Masuku’s legal representatives, Motalane Incorporated, noted the judgment but specifically made mention that the court found that the SIU saw no crime committed by him.
Their statement read that Masuku “welcomed the conclusion that he is not accused of corruption or nepotism and that the so-called findings of the SIU were mere opinions that the premier should not have relied upon to make any form of decision against him”.
His legal team said it was studying the judgment and would communicate an appropriate course of action.
The judgment also found that Masuku was neglectful in his duties. “Dr Masuku was neglectful in his duties, as illustrated by his failure to attend to his e-mails, despite being in a critical leadership position. This conduct justifies an adverse inference about his lack of professionalism and lack of care in discharging his functions. What he is criticised for is not lying … but for neglect,” said Judge Sutherland.
Private investigator Paul O’Sullivan said they had found no evidence of unlawful activity on Masuku’s part.