Moyane gets his bout against Gordhan, but it could backfire

Fired Sars commissioner Tom Moyane’s attorney yesterday welcomed his chance to question State Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan following Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo’s conditional granting of Moyane’s application – and it may come back to bite Moyane.

Zondo yesterday directed Moyane must give a statement in which he responds to allegations made by Gordhan to the effect Moyane was in part abusing “a legal process for his own personal goals” and that as Sars commissioner Moyane “sought to advance the State capture project”.

Moyane was also granted leave to cross-examine Gordhan on the same issues, and has been restricted to questioning Gordhan on the above.

“Our version is that in laying the charges Mr Moyane acted as any reasonable Sars commissioner would do when faced with the serious allegations of rogue unit, the Sikhakhane report, etc,” Moyane’s lawyer Eric Mabuza told The Citizen.

“Mr Gordhan’s version is that the charges were purely motivated by malice and the need to pursue state capture.

“It is also significant that the recently declassified report of the Inspector General of Intelligence (IGI), of which Mr Moyane was not even aware, independently also came to the very same conclusion as Mr Moyane that Mr Gordhan should be criminally charged for the rogue unit,” Mabuza said.

However, it may be that Moyane has forgotten he apparently had a copy of the IGI report back in November 2014, which it is believed he refused to share with anybody after he announced he had it at an Exco meeting to all members, allegedly noting the IGI had specifically recommended “criminal proceedings”.

“One of the most obvious questions which Counsel will put to Mr Gordhan under cross- examination is: Was she (the Inspector General for Intelligence) also motivated by state capture or by the objective evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Mr Gordhan regarding his role in the setting up and criminal activities of the rogue unit,” Mabuza questioned.

Where Moyane may come unstuck, is that whole pesky Nugent Commission, and that all the reports being referred to have either been withdrawn, disowned, apologised for, or discredited – either in whole, or in part.

The rogue unit narrative has been dismissed, withdrawn by the Sunday Times and apologised for, the Sikhakane report disowned by retired Justice Frank Kroon, parts of their report withdrawn by KPMG, and more.

“… they have been thoroughly discredited in many ways. The so-called ‘findings’ of the ‘Kroon media statement’ and ‘KPMG SARS report’ have been disowned and repudiated and both have been admitted as having been the results of substantial and procedural unfair processes and due process failings, including not hearing those pronounced upon or affording them a right of reply,” former Sars group executive Johan van Loggerenberg wrote in a repudiation of a Noseweek story.

“To this end, I have personally sought and received formal apologies from various persons that were involved.”

Former Sars executive Gene Ravele has rejected the IGI report in as much as it relates to him, while Van Loggerenberg is taking the IGI report on review.

“It is nothing but a concoction of lies, disinformation, fraudulent claims and a complete cover-up of evidence and facts that implicate persons associated with the State Security Agency, its Special Operations Unit and other branches, as well as other state intelligence operatives and private entities and persons associated with the ‘Services’,” Van Loggerenberg said when he announced his plan recently.

The Nugent commission found Moyane “arrived without integrity and then dismantled the elements of governance one by one”.

“This was more than mere mismanagement. It was seizing control of Sars as if it was his to have,” Justice Robert Nugent wrote.

“In a tax collecting agency … the development of its sophisticated information technology, which has inbuilt checks, was summarily stopped, and the organisational structure of SARS, that provided oversight, was pulled apart.

“Dissent was stamped out by instilling distrust and fear. Accountability to other state authorities was defied. Capacity for investigating corruption was disabled. On the eve of his suspension Mr Moyane was about to dismantle governance over the settlement of major tax disputes.”

Gordhan welcomed the news, and noted he too would be applying to cross-examine Moyane.

It is likely Moyane will have to defend “what … can fairly be described as a premeditated offensive against SARS, strategised by … Bain & Company Inc … for Mr Moyane to seize SARS … Mr Moyane’s interest was to take control of SARS …,” Nugent wrote in his damning findings.

Bain SA under Vittorio Massone, Moyane, and removed president Jacob Zuma met on numerous occasions, Nugent found, before Moyane became Sars commissioner.

“Minister Gordhan welcomes the direction from the Chairperson that Mr Moyane must, finally, produce his full version on oath by 15 January 2020 on the identified issues,” spokesperson Sam Mokeli said in a statement.

“Today’s ruling by the Deputy Chief Justice will be a welcome opportunity for Mr Moyane to explain why he should not be held accountable for the ‘massive failure of integrity and governance at SARS’ and the ‘reckless mismanagement on the part of Mr Moyane’ that the Nugent Inquiry established, occurred under his tenure.”

Moyane has until January 15 to comply with Zondo’s directive.

For more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.