The national carrier SAA emerged from three years under business rescue in April last year, thanks to a R10.4 billion bailout. However, it is still grappling with the effects of a turbulent history marked by financial distress, operational problems and allegations of mismanagement. (Delwyn Verasamy/M&G)
Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan will be called to appear before parliament to respond to claims by the department’s suspended director general, Kgathatso Tlhakudi, of impropriety in the SAA/Takatso Aviation deal.
Tlhakudi — who was suspended by Gordhan last year — claimed in a protected disclosure and in a letter to parliamentary speaker Nosiviwe Maphisa-Nqakula last week that SAA had been undervalued by R7 billion as part of the takeover of the national carrier by the Takatso consortium.
Tlhakudi also claimed that he was being targeted because of a protected disclosure about the deal and that the new SAA board was being appointed to cover up the undervaluation and to force through the deal.
On Wednesday, parliament’s public enterprises portfolio committee decided to call Gordhan and Tlhakudi to its next meeting to investigate the veracity of the allegations.
Committee chairperson Khaya Magaxa will “fast track” the process to allow both to make representations and be “interrogated” on the matter by MPs on the committee, after which a decision will be taken on the next step.
The meeting is expected to take place by Friday next week.
Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan
The SAA deal has been dogged by controversy since the public enterprises department announced two years ago that it had chosen the Takatso consortium as its equity partner to take over 51% of SAA, which had been placed under business rescue.
The opacity of the deal has been criticised by trade unions, opposition parties and now Tlhakudi, who also claimed that the new SAA board appointed this week by Gordhan, with former tourism minister Derek Hanekom as interim chairperson, had been put in place to force the deal through.
The airline relaunched its services in 2021 and is out of business rescue, but a R3 billion cash injection by Takatso had not been made and the deal has not yet been concluded, and is back under scrutiny over Tlhakudi’s allegations.
Tlhakudi, who was the director general during the deal, was suspended for allegedly refusing to appoint a qualified candidate as the department’s director of security, has since been involved in an ongoing court battle with the department and Justice Minister Ronald Lamola, who was appointed by the presidency to deal with the matter.
While some members of the portfolio committee had pushed for the appointment of a parliamentary inquiry on Wednesday, legal opinion it obtained had suggested that they allow Gordhan to respond — which he has done in writing — and Tlhakudi to provide further information before taking any decision.
Legal adviser Andile Tetyana told the committee they had the jurisdiction and authority to investigate the claims by Tlhakudi, which had first been referred to the committee last November.
Tetyana reminded the committee of the Zondo commission’s criticisms of the failure of parliament to play its oversight role during state capture by the Gupta family and others, along with similar criticisms by the courts.
It would “enrich” the process to allow Gordhan to respond to Tlhakudi — and to allow Tlhakudi to make further representations — before the committee took the decision whether to ask parliament to appoint an inquiry or take some form of action
Although ANC MPs were in favour of deferring any decision until Gordhan and Tlhakudi were given a hearing, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) Omphile Maotwe told the committee that a parliamentary inquiry should be appointed immediately.
The committee heard that Gordhan had responded in writing, and while discussions were taking place, an email was received from Tlhakudi in which he said he would not make further written representations, but would prefer to appear before the committee in person.
In the email, Tlhakudi said that the matter should be handled “transparently” and that “an open hearing is the only way forward”.
Tlhakudi said the matter was “not a bilateral discussion between myself and [the] minister and that the committee, which was integral to the process, “should make the ultimate determination based on information they would have gathered”.
Tlhakudi said the committee should invite all affected parties in the SAA transaction to “give their input” and should act “with haste” and could “direct that other parties within the state to take the work forward”, Tlhakudi said.
ANC MP Sibusiso Gumede questioned the veracity of Tlhakudi’s claims and said that although “we need to fast track a decision” it would be premature to talk about appointing an inquiry.
“In fact, any allegations of impropriety concerning SAA, its restructuring and the business rescue process are entirely without merit.”
Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan
Maotwe said the committee would be “mickey mouse” if it disregarded the allegations.
“We are here to serve the people of South Africa, from different political parties. Let us look at the issue on the table and let the people of South Africa know the truth of what happened,” Maotwe said.
In his response to parliament, Gordhan said the allegations by Tlhakudi were unfounded.
“In fact, any allegations of impropriety concerning SAA, its restructuring and the business rescue process are entirely without merit.”
Gordhan said Tlhakudi’s suspension was “entirely unrelated to the SAA matter” and was over alleged unethical conduct in refusing to appoint the successful candidate for the post of director of security and facilities in the department.
He said the other matters raised by Tlhakudi “appear to be intended to create atmosphere and detract from the real issues”.
It was “abundantly clear that the purported protected disclosure is not only without merit, but lacks the element of good faith”, Gordhan said.
The disclosure was not in fact protected, and had been made after the disciplinary action against Tlhakudi had been initiated, and not before.
Turning to the SAA deal, Gordhan said that Tlhakudi had been central to the business rescue process and had been the project lead of a team that was augmented with “additional resources” and which did not “marginalise his role whatsoever”.
Gordhan questioned why Tlhakudi was “raising it after the fact”.
“Surely as the director general, and having been intricately involved in the process since its inception, if there were something wrong, he would have blown the whistle at that point in time,” Gordhan said.