19 October 2016
THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
RE: REQUEST AND DEMAND FOR MR. GORDHAN IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY TO PROVIDE ANSWERS ON MATTERS OF WHITE CAPITAL ‘STATE CAPTURE’ AND R26 BILLION STOLEN FROM RESERVE BANK.
We are the Black First Land First Movement (BLF), a registered political organisation with the Independent Electoral Commission. BLF is currently led by Mr Andile Mngxitama, who is duly authorised to submit this letter of demand.
It is common cause that the Minister of Finance knows about a complaint we have lodged with the Office of the Public Protector relating to an amount of R26 billion stolen from the South African Reserve Bank by white capitalists including the likes of Johann Rupert. Further to this, we have since become aware of the fact that the Minister of Finance is a shareholder in the banks that were/are involved in the closure of the Gupta family linked businesses’ bank accounts especially Oakbay Investments (PTY) LTD. BLF believes that by virtue of being a shareholder in these banks the Minister is thus conflicted and therefore compromised in making findings or even taking decisions that relate to the closing of the Gupta accounts.
We demand that the Minister provides us with answers to the following questions:
1. Why has the Minister kept silent about the Oakbay accounts and the so called “suspicious” transactions until there were charges of fraud preffered against him? Furthermore, why did the Minister wait until the High Court application by Minister Des Van Rooyen to interdict the former Public Protector from releasing the so called “State Capture” report was heard on 14 October 2016? The timing of the lodgement of the application on 14 October 2016 with the High Court (Gauteng Provincial Division, Case Number 80978/16) – subsequent to the previous case by Minister Des Van Rooyen – for an order that he is “not by law empowered or obliged to intervene in the relationship” between the banks and Oakbay regarding the closing of the bank accounts held by Oakbay is suspicious and suggests malicious intent on his part, or alternatively suggests that he can be deemed to be acting as if he is part of a sinister agenda.
2. This High Court application (Case Number 80978/16) by Minister Pravin Gordhan raises many questions. It suggests a bid to divert attention from the fact that he is facing fraud charges and must consequently vacate his position as Minister of Finance. The questions arising in this context are the following:
2.1 Why does the Minister choose such an inappropriate time to throw only allegations and no fact in the said case? Is it because the outcome of the High Court application by Minister Des Van Rooyen interdicting the Public Protector from releasing her report on “state capture” on 14 October 2014 resulted in the report not being released? The timing and lack of facts in respect of the said case proves that the Minister of Finance is pursuing a vendetta.
2.2 Why is Minister Gordhan forcing and instructing the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC) and the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) to dig up dirt since July 2016 and saying that he will go to court? This clearly means that his actions have been premeditated and that he had no intention to act in good faith.
2.3 The Business Rescue Practitioners (BRP) clearly requested approval from SARB to transfer funds to the Bank of Baroda under a new account – so where is the so called tax loss and threat?
2.4 SARB clearly says that no complains or violations have been received. To this end, what further purpose is Minister Gordhan trying to serve by pressurizing the regulator?
2.5 Why are personal names and private names including those of minors being displayed with meaningless transactions? What’s the basis for suggesting that those are invalid transactions? A STR entry does not indicate a wrong transaction. All have reasons. It’s like reading a doctor’s script and guessing the diagnosis.
2.6 Why has Minister Gordhan incurred such costs on legal opinions and wasted the public and taxpayers’ money?
2.7 Why is Minister Gordhan silent on the R26 billion stolen from the Reserve Bank?
3. The Minister is a shareholder in companies owned by the same Johann Rupert who is implicated in the R26 billion stolen from the South African Reserve Bank, and it has transpired that Johann Rupert had a hand in the appointment of Pravin Gordhan into the post of Minster of Finance. As pointed out above, he is also a shareholder in the banks that have closed the accounts of the Gupta family businesses (Oakbay). As a result, Mr Gordhan cannot act in the matter that involves the closure of the Gupta family businesses’ bank accounts as he is a shareholder in the white capitalist businesses responsible for the closure of the said bank accounts. Furthermore these white capitalist businesses have for decades captured the state.
4. Why has the minister elected to approach the court instead of working through the cabinet established Inter Ministerial Committee (IMC) which was set up for the purpose of resolving matters related to the closure of the bank accounts of Oakbay?
5. Why has the minister, as a member of the IMC, not participated in the Committee’s work towards resolving the crisis created by the controversial closure of the bank accounts of Oakbay?
6. That since the Minister has interest in companies that have captured the state, the Minister must provide us with answers within 48 hours as to why we should not approach the court for an order that a conflict of interest situation exists between himself as Minister of Finance and himself as shareholder to the banks and other companies which have since captured the Republic of South Africa.
7. As further evidence of the prevailing conflict of interest situation, as Minister you have been unable to be impartial in the work of the inter-ministerial task team appointed by cabinet to resolve challenges related to the closure of the projects of Oakbay bank accounts. It is for this reason that you have not been able to participate in the work of the said task team. Did you or did you not disclose to the task team that you are conflicted since you are a shareholder in the banks which had closed the bank accounts of Oakbay?
8. Furthermore, your position has been compromised by the involvement of business entities you have shares in which are implicated in unlawfully benefiting from the R26 billion stolen from the South African Reserve Bank which is under your ministry. You also have shares in this same companies which have stolen from the South African Reserve Bank. Your lack of interest in pursuing the R26 billion stolen from your ministry further indicates your incapacity to be impartial because you are conflicted.
9. Note that the BLF appoints the offices of MB TSHABANGU INC. Kindly forward every correspondence to the below address:
404 Ancore Centre
Cnr. Robert Sobukwe and Steve Biko Streets
Tel: 012 341 4187
Fax: 086 558 6184