THEBE MABANGA
THE Eskom Board appears to have avoided acting against Chief Operations Officer Jan Oberholzer even though he was found to have breached the company’s policy on conflict of interest while Deputy President David Mabuza omitted this breach of policy in a reply to a parliamentary question.
In April this year, the Eskom Board released a statement declaring that Oberholzer had been cleared by a senior counsel of corruption, dishonesty, and abuse of power.
The charges emanate from a grievance brought by an executive Mark Chettiar as well as Oberholzer’s conduct around contracts with his former employers Stefannuti Stocks, Black & Veach and a payment to Aveng.
The investigation was conducted by former High Court Judge Nazeer Cassim.
Oberholzer was accused of having recommended an increase in payment to Stefanutti Stocks at a pint when he held shares whose value had collapsed from R600 000 to R6 000, representing a clear conflict of interest.
At the time of the release of the findings, the Eskom board declared: “The Senior Counsel has found no basis to the allegations of dishonesty, corruption, conflict of interest and abuse of power levelled against the COO.”
The board further stated: “With regard to the allegations of a conflict of interest regarding Stefanutti Stocks, the Senior Counsel found that proper disclosure had been made of Mr Oberholzer’s shareholding in Stefanutti Stocks, and that “this is not a matter in which he should face a disciplinary hearing”.
On Sunday, news outlet Bloomberg, claiming to have had sight of the report by Cassim, said it found that “Oberholzer breached the provisions of the Eskom policy and he should have abstained from the transactions in totality,” in relation to Sefanutti Stocks.
“I propose and recommend that the CEO or a nominated board member counsels Oberholzer on the matter,” said Cassim.
It is unclear of Oberholzer received such counselling and if so by who.
Eskom spokesperson Sikhonathi Mantshantsha confirmed that the allegations were those investigated by the board.
In its statement, the board said the Senior Counsel has found no basis to the levelled against Oberholzer.
Towards the end of June, Mabuza answered questions in parliament around Eskom and other matters.
One of the questions on Eskom related to “the contents of the internal report of Eskom into the investigation of allegations against the Chief Operating Officer”.
Mabuza started his reply by stating that, “we can confirm that we have through the Minister of Public Enterprises as a shareholder representative, have had sight of the contents of the internal report of Eskom into the investigation of allegations against the Chief Operating Officer.”
He went on to emphasise the importance of good governance at State Owned Enterprises, especially one as strategic as Eskom.
Mabuza then expressed support for the board and the process it followed, stating: “At all times, we look to the board to ensure that the affairs of the power utility are well managed, including dealing with allegations of corruption, abuse of power, dishonesty and conflicts of interest whenever such arise.”
Mabuza made no mention of the finding of a breach of policy.
Mantshantsha said Eskom provided all the required information to the Department of Public Enterprises
A further allegation against Oberholzer is that he instructed Chettiar to find employment within Eskom in Cape Town for his brother in law Gregory Jacobs. Oberholzer is said to have used abusive language in the process.
Oberholzer is alleged to have subjected Chettiar to an internal disciplinary hearing and transferred to the Human Resources Department.
The board said the investigation could “find no wrongdoing in the process followed by Mr Oberholzer in this regard.”
And although the relationship between Oberholzer and Chettiar is characterised by tension, the board said Cassim did “not find that there was victimisation or that any further legal processes should follow”.
But according to Bloomberg, Oberholzer admitted to giving the instruction on Jacobs but said there was “no pressure”.
He apologised for his language.
Cassim found that Oberholzer should not have initiated disciplinary action against Chettiar as he did so “hastily and emotionally”.
The board concludes that: “On all the other allegations against Mr Oberholzer that were put before the Senior Counsel, the Board is satisfied that these have been fully and adequately ventilated and investigated, and that there is no cause for any action against Mr Oberholzer.”
Mantshantsha did not respond to any further question, including whether Eskom would consider making the report public.
(Compiled by Inside Politics staff)
