Former Eskom CEO André de Ruyter. Image: Gallo Images.
Head of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) Advocate Lekgoa Mothibi has told the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (Scopa) Eskom did not “authorise” the intelligence report into corruption by former CEO André de Ruyter.
Mothibi said legal action could not be ruled out against De Ruyter over the Eskom probe.
“The former GCEO did not have authority to investigate the affairs of Eskom and it does appear he had a distrust of law enforcement agencies.
“As the GCEO, it was incumbent on him to raise the distrust appropriately but he commissioned a parallel investigation.
“Consideration should be given to holding the former GCEO to account. It becomes a legal question as he is no longer employed by Eskom, and in this regard, we will consider the options available, together with the board, and advise accordingly,” Mothibi said.
Mothibi said whatever good intentions there were, governance and policies applicable to the actions of de Ruyter to gather intelligence on Eskom would be assessed and appropriate action would be taken based on legal advice gathered.
The SIU and the Hawks shared their findings of the intelligence report commissioned by De Ruyter during the Scopa meeting on Tuesday.
Mothibi said de Ruyter had no authorisation from Eskom to conduct a probe of this nature. He said the contract was entered into between Business Leadership South Africa and George Fivaz Forensic and Risk.
Mothibi said the latter should have known it could not investigate a state institution without proper authority.
“It was during a committee meeting where the former chair of Eskom, Professor Malegapuru Makgoba said the GCEO [requested] to gather intelligence and they in a way allowed him to proceed as he sought to.
“So, it is clear that the intent is there to gather intelligence on Eskom. In fact the GCEO in his book says when he left, the gathering of intelligence was not completed.
“He says that is the legacy he wanted to leave behind in gathering intelligence so it could assist with the investigation,” Mothibi said.
ALSO READ: WATCH: Eskom a ‘feeding trough’ for ANC – De Ruyter
Mothibi, however, said the report was not authorised by Eskom.
“The commissioning of the report itself from Eskom as a corporate, did not authorise that report.
“Because he went on his own, he did not inform the board. It seems like at the time the chair of the board was aware, but there is no official minutes or records of the authorisation of that kind of an investigation,” Mothibi said.
Mothibi said while the report may have been unauthorised, it does “prove useful”.
“It may be unauthorised, but the usefulness of the information has to be treated differently. So, we are using it as a source of information that could enable or even assist the investigation and indeed we are doing so because there are indications of matters that require investigation.”
Hawks boss Lieutenant-General Godfrey Lebeya said he was committed to pursuing all information on Eskom, some of which comes from suspects themselves.
Lebeya said evidence still needs to be gathered to link politicians and others mentioned in the private intelligence Eskom report to the crimes at the power utility in terms of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act.
“Multiple groups involved in illegal coal yards were identified in the intelligence report. Specific groups operating in and around power stations in Mpumalanga were in this report identified.
“There were also prominent and influential persons that were mentioned. As the SIU indicated there are names mentioned in this report. We have analysed them, but we need is evidence to link them to specific crimes,” Lebeya said.
De Ruyter appeared before Scopa in April. This was after allegations he had made in an interview with Annika Larson on eNCA.
While De Ruyter admitted he failed to solve the load shedding crisis during the interview, he lashed out at corruption within government and governance around Eskom.
When asked by Larsen whether he believed those in the ANC saw Eskom as a “feeding trough”, De Ruyter said the evidence suggested so.
“I would say the evidence suggests that it is. I expressed my concerns to a senior government minister about attempts, in my view, to water down governance around the $8.5 billion that by large through Eskom’s intervention we got at Cop26.”
“And the response was, essentially, you have to be pragmatic. In order to pursue the greater good, you have to enable some people to eat a little bit. So, yes, it is I think entrenched,” De Ruyter said.
ALSO READ: Whistle-blower crisis: De Ruyter’s departure exposes safety concerns
Download our app and read this and other great stories on the move. Available for Android and iOS.
