South Africa’s communications regulator has been rocked by allegations that councillors regularly violate the Icasa Act by participating in activities of stakeholders in the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector.
Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (Icasa) councillor Mamodupi Mohlala included the allegation in a letter of response to an inquiry about her work as a legal representative of ICT companies.
Mohlala is the sole director of law firm Mamodupi Mohlala Inc, which trades as Mohlala Attorneys, and was registered five days before she began her term as an Icasa councillor in July 2002.
A member of the Black Information Technology Forum (BITF), Tebogo Khaas, faxed an inquiry to Icasa’s chairperson, Paris Mashile, earlier this month, after Mohlala had acted on behalf of one faction of the BITF in an urgent interdict application and had personally signed the legal papers.
The Mail & Guardian has documentary and anecdotal evidence that Mohlala has represented ICT stakeholders in at least three different legal proceedings, including a matter before the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA). In her letter to Khaas, she denied involvement in the CCMA matter.
These allegations occur against the backdrop of an internal crisis and mass exodus at the regulator that has seen 14 senior managers resign since January, citing council interference in management’s affairs and Mashile’s leadership failures.
This week Parliament’s communications committee discussed a review process to look at the current crisis at the regulator, ”out of the glare of the media”.
An independent analyst has been appointed to study the exit reports of the senior managers who have resigned.
Mohlala’s involvement in legal proceedings on behalf of ICT stakeholders appears to be in direct violation of the Icasa Act. The Act states that a person may not be appointed councillor if he or she ”or his or her family member has a direct or indirect financial interest in the telecommunications or broadcasting industry; or his or her business partner or associate holds an office in or with, or is employed by, any person or body, whether corporate or unincorporated, which has an interest contemplated in paragraph ff}”.
Mohlala defended her involvement by claiming she was on leave from Icasa duty on the day in question, received no remuneration and declared her interest to council. She said other councillors were also moonlighting for ICT stakeholders.
”It is important to note that there are other councillors that are involved in other external activities in excess of their Icasa work as councillors. Specifically, they participate in activities of other entities that are actively involved in the sector,” said Mohlala in her letter.
Khaas said Mohlala’s defence was inadequate. He had lodged a complaint with the portfolio committee and Minister of Communications Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri.
Said Khaas: ”It reminds me of a colleague who got caught with his pants down and said to his wife: ‘But so and so is doing it, and he gets away with it.’”
He said Mohlala’s claims that moonlighting for stakeholders was rife raised serious questions about the conduct of Icasa councillors.
”BITF is involved in the same sector that is regulated by Icasa,” said Khaas, who added that the forum had made submissions to Icasa’s public hearings in the past. In his letter of complaint, Khaas said Mohlala’s response was ”at best vague, incomplete, contradictory and misleading”.
”It is inconsequential whether or not Ms Mohlala was personally remunerated for her participation in this matter. Ms Mohlala does not even proffer any information on whether or not her firm was remunerated.”
In another legal matter BITF executive member Jane Mosebi said this week that Mohlala had personally contacted her lawyer to inform her that she had been instructed by her client, Ms Tebogo Maktatho, to take legal action regarding Mosebi’s company, Forge Ahead.
Mosebi also claims that — contrary to Mohlala’s letter of defence, where she claimed she was trying to broker a settlement — she appeared to be handling the interdict hearing and personally instructing the senior counsel.
Khaas backed this version of events. ”As far as I could see, councillor Mohlala was in court and was giving instructions to senior counsel of the applicants, the BITF,” he said.
Khaas said Icasa had stalled its response to his enquiry for three weeks and had only responded on June 15 this year, after he threatened to complain to Parliament and Matsepe-Casaburri.
He received a response from Mohlala three hours after sending the letter threatening to complain, despite being told that she was on a trip and would only be back later in the month.
Khaas described Mashile as ”someone with no spine”, adding that his handling of the matter had made him question his leadership.
Asked to respond, Icasa merely confirmed that the complaint from Khaas had been received and that a response from Mohlala had been forwarded to him.
”Icasa is not aware of any other complaints against councillor Mohlala,” said Icasa spokesperson Jubie Matlou.