Home | News | WHO SAYS I GOT E3M? ASKS ROBERT ZWANE

WHO SAYS I GOT E3M? ASKS ROBERT ZWANE

17/03/2019 00:17:00 BY WELCOME DLAMINI

Font size:

SICUNUSA –Where is the money? Former Senator Robert Zwane and his son, Boy Boy, are unaware of E3 million paid to their company styled Sicunusa Investments (Pty) Ltd as compensation for ceding a portion of their farm in respect of a public road construction.

Reacting to Auditor General (AG) Timothy Sipho Matsebula’s revelation that Zwane’s company was overpaid by E2.8 million for ceding the land to give green-light to the controversial Sicunusa-Nhlangano road, the former lawmaker’s son said his personal account could even show that he never received even a cent of the spoken-about money or dividends for that deal.

For the record, it was not stated in the AG’s report that Farm 1077 was owned by a company directed by the Zwanes.
However, investigations by the Times SUNDAY unearthed that the directors were Robert Lobi Zwane and Bongani Boy Boy Zwane.
“This issue must be thoroughly investigated because I don’t recall myself receiving part of the money they are talking about or dividends derived from that deal,” he said.

He conceded that Robert is his father, but would not talk about the company because he did not know anything about it. Actually, he said he did not know that there was a farm which he owned in Sicunusa.

He said he knew about some farms, which they owned in Mankayane as a family – not the one in Sicunusa.
Boy Boy was told that government records show him as a co-director with his father. Reacting to this, he said his father could be the appropriate authority over the issue – not him.

He was further told that this company, which he purportedly co-owned with the former senator, was supposed to get E191 132.88 from government as indicated in the AG’s report, but ended up getting E3 million.
In response, he maintained: “I am not aware of that payment. I never signed for that transaction.”
He added with emphasis: “I never received such a big amount of money since I was born.”

He said the best person to shed light on what really happened could be his parent.
Reached for comment, Robert advised this newspaper to get the truth of the matter from government. He said there was no way his son could possibly know a matter that involved government. In fact, the owner of the defunct Ekhaya Butchery, did not understand how such a matter concerned him.

origin of the matter

He said he did not know the origin of the matter, and the intention of using his name to justify such transactions. He said Matsebula, the Auditor General, should be the ideal person to state how and when he received the money on behalf of his company.

When he was told that the auditor general had since preferred an audit query on Farm 1077, which he co-owned with his son, he put his foot down, insisting that any person in interested in getting facts should approach government, not him.

After he had made this point, he did not want to entertain any further question. Robert now spends part of his time in South Africa.
Meanwhile, Matsebula, the Auditor General, reported that two valuation certificates for the compensation of farm number 1077 belonging to Sicunusa Investments (Pty) Ltd were signed on the same date.

He said it showed the same page number with different compensation amounts. He pointed out that one of the valuation certificates valued at E191 132.88 was part of a valuation report submitted to the employer by Christian Amoako (Pty) Ltd, the evaluator of ‘project affected properties’ in May 2015.
The auditor general mentioned that the other valuation certificate of the same property by the same evaluator with a compensation amount of E247 727.45 was not part of the report.

He said this valuation certificate was found attached to a letter from Makhosini Mndawe, the Principal Secretary in the Ministry of Public Works and Transport addressed to Sicunusa dated October 19, 2015.

“My concern is the difference in the valuation amounts for the same property and the authenticity of the certificate is doubtful,” he said.
“This is presenting itself as a strategy to exploit public funds, thus indicating a discrepancy and possible collusion.”

misappropriation of funds
Despite the valuation certificate exhibiting red flags of misappropriation of public funds, he said property was eventually compensated at E3 million. He said the compensation was way above the evaluation amounts.
Based on the valuation report, the auditor general said there was an overpayment of E2 808 867.12.
“It is disturbing and inexplicable how the decision to pay E3 000 000.00 was reached and its basis, since the valuation report priced the compensation of Sicunusa Investments (Pty) Ltd at E191,132.88,” he raised a concern.
In his conclusion of the matter, he said the overpaid public funds should be recovered and all who participated in this transaction should be brought to account for their actions.
Makhosini Mndawe, the Principal Secretary in the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, said he would address the matter when called upon to do so by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
The PAC is chaired by Phila Buthelezi, the Deputy Speaker. It must be mentioned that the report of the AG is being treated as allegations whose veracity is yet to be tested.
The 42.5km road is still incomplete despite the fact that the project began five years ago. Three quarters of the road is gravel. This is regardless of the fact that government has already paid the contractor a sum of E576 million for works being done.
There is nothing much that has been done except to level the ground, set up bridges, which are on the brink of collapse because they are incomplete and exposed to rain. Kukhanya Civil Engineering and Gabriel Couto were contractors engaged to build the road, with the latter holding 70 per cent shareholding.
The majority shareholder pulled out of the project, leaving behind Kukhanya clutching at straws.
A similar project was undertaken in the late 1990s when a certain local company built a substandard road – the Mahlanya-Malkerns road. The road cost E5 million. This was revealed in Parliament. MPs of that time called for the surcharge of the company’s directors.
The road developed serious potholes a few months after its unveiling and it had to be upgraded at an additional cost to the taxpayer.