Investigations into the origination and fate of a $25-million (R210-million) loan to Guinea could cause serious problems for a company associated with Human Settlements Minister Tokyo Sexwale that stood to benefit handsomely from the deal. The opaque offshore company, Palladino Capital 2, which is fronted by South African Walter Hennig, lent the money to the cash-strapped small West African country last year, ostensibly to fund the start-up of a new state miner. But the cash appears not to have been used for the intended purpose, and the loan’s terms — distinctly prejudicial to Guinea — have sparked an international furore. Now former Guinean mines minister Mahmoud Thiam, a political opponent of President Alpha Condé, has claimed in an interview with the Mail & Guardian that the deal was a quid pro quo in return for Condé campaign support. Sexwale’s Mvelaphanda Holdings and Hennig’s Palladino Holdings, an obscure entity based in Turks and Caicos, a haven of corporate anonymity, are partners with United States investment fund managers Och Ziff in African Global Capital, a natural resources investment fund focussing on the continent. Palladino Capital 2, which signed the Guinea agreements, answers to the same brass-plate address in Gibraltar as Palladino Holdings. Hennig, a billionaire, is particularly close to Mvela chief executive Mark Willcox. Family interest Sexwale, who resigned his corporate directorships on becoming a Cabinet minister in 2009, retains a family interest in Mvela through a trust. Guinea’s Thiam implicated Sexwale in his claim, but this has been rejected out of hand by Sexwale as well as by Palladino Capital 2. However Palladino could find itself on the dark side of international anti-corruption legislation should its own suggestion, that Guinea did not use the money to fund the start-up of a state mining company, prove true. Legislation in the United Kingdom and the US requires active steps to know the true purpose of payments. Palladino said in a recent statement that its deal with Guinea had since fallen apart and it gave the state formal notice in January to account for how the funds had been used. At issue in any potential investigation could be whether the loan was indeed intended to finance a new state mining company — as outlined in the contract — or to benefit political or individual interests in return for outlandish mining concessions. Pre-elections Palladino’s contracts with Guinea were signed in the months shortly after Condé was elected as president in November 2010. This followed two turbulent years of military rule. Guineans went to the polls for a first round of voting in June 2010. A second round of voting was delayed for three months until November, and Condé took office on December 21. A first order of business for Condé’s government was an assessment of how the country’s mineral assets — vast bauxite reserves, high-grade iron ore, gold and diamonds — could be better managed as well as used to raise much-needed state funding. According to Palladino, it was invited in early 2011 to consult. In a statement this month, the company said that at the time it advised Guinea to review its mining code and existing contracts and establish a national mining company to participate in the sector. In March, Condé also invited financier George Soros to advise the state in this — or a similar — process. Soros’s spokesperson Michael Vachon told the M&G that at the time the financier’s team knew nothing of Palladino or its consultations with Guinea. The new mining code was published in September 2011, outlining a 15% free-carried state interest in mining assets, with further options to purchase shares. New state mining company A new state mining company, Soguipami, was formed the same day. But in March 2011 already, Palladino’s consultations culminated in a signed agreement between the company and Guinea that outlined Palladino’s proposed interest in the country’s mineral assets. Some of the framework agreement’s proposed benefits to Palladino were eye-watering in their scope:
- Palladino was to be granted as much as a 49% of the equity stake and voting rights in the state mining company.
- With no reference to a licence process open to all contenders, Palladino could choose to negotiate to acquire “minority or majority” stakes in any state-linked mining asset.
- Guinea could not sell any state interest in a mining asset without first offering the option to Palladino.
- Should Palladino wish to acquire a stake in a mining asset, it was granted the privilege of a six-month negotiating period. If a deal could not be struck, Guinea would be allowed to negotiate with a third party — but Palladino would retain first right of refusal on any deal less favourable to Guinea than the initial offer.
The M&G Centre for Investigative Journalism, supported by M&G Media and the Open Society Foundation for South Africa, produced this story. All views are ours. See our funding sources here: www.amabhungane.co.za/page/sponsors.