NewsOpinionPoliticsState Capture

What’s the endgame for Thuli in State Capture Probe

PRETORIA, SOUTH AFRICA – JULY 14: Public Protector Thuli Madonsela announcing her findings on scandalous lease dealings at the National Press Club on July 14, 2011 in Pretoria, South Africa. (Photo by Gallo Images / Foto24 / Liza van Deventer)
By Pinky Khoabane

Public Protector Thuli Madonsela is rushing to ensure she finalises the report into the now famous state capture by the Guptas. Recent media reports say such is the pressure on her to present this report before she vacates her office in mid October that leader of the Democratic Alliance, Mmusi Maimane is said to have written her a letter recently, asking for an update.

It was Maimane who also updated the media on the public protector’s response. She will present the findings before she leaves office.

The public protector’s office had pleaded poverty at the time the DA laid a complaint about the Gupta family’s alleged undue influence on the state and much to the surprise of many, Treasury advanced her the money for this particular case.

The intervention by Treasury is interesting if not simply curious.

It’s no surprise though given that it is here that the rumours of the Gupta state capture emanated; it was after all the deputy finance minister Mcebisi Jonas who said the Guptas had offered him a job as finance minister, which had a domino effect that led to a few others who claimed the family had offered them jobs or bullied them during their time as public servants.

The response by Jonas at the time was also curious. His statement, after days of dodging the media, came through Treasury’s letterhead. One would have thought this was a personal matter between him, the Guptas and the ANC.

Jonas doesn’t have too clean a record either but hey, when you say anything implicating the Guptas, you literally don’t have to provide proof and your checkered past of corruption doesnt really matter. And for the record, he has not given any evidence maybe he will tell Thuli what happened. But he hasn’t really been asked to provide the proof by those who carried his story as fact.

Treasury’s recent attacks on State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) at which Oakbay has tenders is an indication of how personal some at Treasury are taking the matter.

It’s not as if the state capture case is the only one for which the public protector didn’t have resources. There are many cases which she has decided not to investigate because she had no resources. Then there are those like the R3.2billion lifeboat to ABSA which Heath Commission found to be illegal, on which she has not pronounced despite it being five years since she started the case.

The question is why the state capture case which is seemingly going to focus purely on the alleged Gupta influence cannot wait for the next public protector like all the other cases Madonsela hasn’t been able to investigate during her tenure?

Since I expanded the state capture debate in February when I exposed Rupert’s intervention in the lastest appointment of Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan, it has now become clear that state capture has been in existence since Jan Van Riebeck entered our shores and brutally raped our mothers, sisters and our land. It’s a historical fact that the broedebond captured the Nationalist Party and the state to further Afrikaaner nationalism and to unduly influence the state for its own interests.

We have on this platform shown that the British American Tobacco (BAT) in which Johann Rupert has a stake, has captured the state security cluster. We have shown how Rupert has captured Treasury and the media.

So why is there this narrow focus on Gupta’s as sole capturers of the state?

There has been this manufactured tale about this family appointing cabinet ministers, influencing tenders, and so forth. And yet there has been no stitch of evidence to prove the allegations. To date, with the exception of this complaint by DA, there has been no other. The ANC’s probe into state capture elicited one written response by Themba Maseko and frankly, kudos to him for putting forth “evidence” for his claims.

So in effect, this probe if done fairly and above board, would be great for the country as the Guptas would finally have to answer.

So who’s the public protector going to be interviewing in the short space of time before she leaves? I put this question to her and at the time of filing this article, there was no response from her office. Media reports say its cabinet ministers and obviously the people who had already made the allegations.

I asked the Public Protector if the Guptas and Oakbay would be interviewed. Surely, a court, unless it is a kangaroo court, allows the accused the right of reply. It is a basic tenet of finding truth. The Guptas say they haven’t been invited and you then have to ask about the agenda of the investigation. Is it to rubber-stamp the agenda of the neo-liberal media now known as Ruptists, together with their handlers that the Guptas have captured the state? Let’s at this point deal with the fact that Bidvest gets more tenders from government than most organisations and are they part of the probe or even concern? Of course not?

Was it Gordhan’s concern in his previous tenure as finance minister that companies like Exarro, Anglo, South 32 and Glencore had 40 year contracts at double the price of the 15 black coal mining companies that Eskom introduced last year? It’s never been. He only raised his head when Oakbay got the 5% or so coal tender.

There are already allegations on social media that the DA has promised Madonsela the position of premier of Gauteng in 2019.

I put this to her office and this too was not answered by the time I filed this report.

Madonsela has a lot at stake regarding her reputation. Already she was the recipient of a R150 000 cash bonus for winning the Person of the Year Award at ANN7’s SATY Awards. ANN7 is owned by the Guptas.

If these allegations of a DA promise of a position within its party are true, and we only have to wait until 2019, her actions would constitute the corrupt practice known in the US as “swing door”. It is unlawful for a public official to accept payment or employment from a contractor or organisation with whom they had been doing business on behalf of the state. It could be construed as a reward for favours.


Show More

One Comment

  1. So basically the Gupta’s are a scapegoat a small fish in a big ocean, since reading your articles I’ve started to take an intrest in the Ruperts and other big name players in this monopoly country of ours, so thank you for opening my eyes to whats really happening.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button

For As Little As A Monthly Donation or Subscription of R150,00 You can Keep UnCensored Alive

For those of you who read UnCensored regularly, we implore you to donate. For those who donate, we thank you greatly. 

%d bloggers like this: