Zondo Report: Zuma followed Gupta instructions by axing GCIS head
The first part of the State Capture Commission’s report has made damning findings against several prominent figures, including former president Jacob Zuma, the Guptas and former GCIS boss Mzwanele Manyi.
This section of the report, which Acting Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo handed to President Cyril Ramaphosa on Tuesday, 4 January 2022, is in three volumes: The first being national carrier South African Airways (SAA) and its subsidiaries including SAA Technical and SAA Express. The second volume of the 874-page report zeroes in on the Gupta-owned The New Age media entity, which unduly enjoyed government business via its business breakfasts with different government departments. Finally, the third volume focuses on the South African Revenue Service (SARS) as well as public procurement.
STATE CAPTURE COMMISSION FINDS AGAINST ZUMA
The State Capture Commission’s report found that Jacob Zuma had in orchestrated the removal of GCIS head Themba Maseko, a move which it found, started a web of corruption.
Zuma is said to have instructed then minister in the presidency Collins Chabane in 2010 to remove Maseko and replace him with Manyi, who is coincidentally now the spokesperson of his foundation. The reason for Maseko’s axing is because he refused to follow the Guptas’ instructions
“On the evidence heard by the Commission there is absolutely no doubt that President Zuma did, indeed, instruct Minister Chabane to fire Mr Themba Maseko or move him from his position as DG and CEO of GCIS. There is also no doubt that in giving this instruction, President Zuma was giving effect to the wishes of the Guptas or was complying with their request or instruction to him to remove Mr Maseko because he had refused to co-operate with them.”
State Capture Commission’s Report
The commission has also found that Maseko fought fiercely to prevent state capture, particularly by the Guptas, and that corruption at GCIS would have been unlikely to flourish had he stayed.
“He was summarily removed from his important position for his act of opposition. Had he remained in his position, it is unthinkable that he would have approved the payment of millions of rands of public money on a media business with no verified readership and no credible circulation figures simply because a family with close ties to the then president demanded that he do so.
No comments: