| Publication |
Sunday Times |
| Date | 2011-11-27 |
| Reporter |
Stephan Hofstatter Mzilikazi wa Afrika Rob Rose |
| Web Link | www.timeslive.co.za |
Presidential spokesman Mac Maharaj said in Pretoria yesterday he was not
guilty of any wrongdoing
Picture: LEBOHANG MASHILOANE
Law-enforcement authorities are refusing to say if they will reopen their
corruption probe into Mac Maharaj, despite new evidence linking the
president's spokesman to secret payments by French arms company Thales.
Last week the Sunday Times revealed how Thales had signed a secret
consultancy agreement with Schabir Shaik's company, Minderley Investments,
to help negotiate a driver's licence technology contract with the Transport
Department, which Maharaj headed at the time.
A paper trail showed Minderley's Swiss bank account was used to transfer
more than R2-million from Thales to offshore accounts in Switzerland and the
Isle of Man controlled by Maharaj's wife, Zarina.
Investigators believed the money was destined for Mac Maharaj, documents
show.
The secret deal was signed just two months before the Prodiba consortium, in
which Thales's predecessor, Thompson CSF, held a one-third stake, was
officially awarded the technology contract.
Maharaj was never formally charged and the corruption probe was abandoned.
The consultancy agreement obtained by the Sunday Times was the "missing
link" that showed the flow of money between Thales, Shaik and Maharaj.
But, a week later, the National Prosecuting Authority and the police have
yet to consider reopening the case.
NPA spokesman Mthunzi Mhaga said it was up to the Hawks to decide.
"[The] NPA has no investigative mandate so if there is 'new evidence' the
police are better placed to respond," he said.
Hawks spokesman McIntosh Polela declined to comment.
During interviews this week, Maharaj denied being involved in "any bribery".
But he repeatedly dodged questions over whether he received cash payments
from Thales.
He also complained the Sunday Times had failed to publish his three-sentence
reply - to detailed questions that ran to two pages - in full.
Explaining his reluctance to explain the payments, he said: "These issues
belong to matters that were investigated by the DSO [Scorpions].
''Neither Zarina Maharaj nor I are prepared to subject ourselves to a
separate and additional investigation by a member of the media based on
isolated aspects of a comprehensive investigation conducted by institutions
empowered by law to do so.
"The fact that the DSO did not bring any charges against us should make you
alive to the fact that the insinuations and allegations of unlawful conduct
of the kind implied by you may once again result in, and subject us to,
character assassination and trial by a media consciously making use of
selective information only."
See the full list of questions sent to Maharaj and his wife as well as his
response
QUESTIONS TO MAC MAHARAJ AND ZARINA MAHARAJ, 18/11/11
Hi Mr Maharaj,
As discussed on the phone, the questions we have are very simple. Please
would you come back to us as soon as possible – at the latest, tomorrow
morning by 10am. First, the background to our question is that we have
evidence that your wife, Zarina, indirectly received money from IDMATICS SA,
a company owned by Thales (formerly Thomson-CSF) in two tranches – in
October 1996 and March 1997.
The information we have is a consulting agreement between IDMATICS and
Minderley for Francs-1,2million to be paid to Schabir Shaik’s company
Minderley in 1996. This states that IDMATICS will pay the money to “keep our
company regularly informed of all operational, financial, technical and
commercial matters pertaining to the above business”, and to provide
“assistance for any negotiation”. The money was paid from Thales’ BNP
Parabas account to Minderley Investment Inc’s account 95436 at Banque
Alliance SGS in Geneva on 11 October 1996 and 11 March 1997.
The further evidence we have is in the form of an order from the District
Attorney’s office in Zurich which shows that this very Fr1,2-million that
was deposited into Minderley’s swiss bank account was then transferred into
a bank accounts belonging to your wife. The first payment of Fr-579,000 was
paid from Minderley’s account (number above) to Zarina’s account (number
95437) also at Banque Alliance SCS in Geneva on 16 October 1996. The next
payment from Minderley to that same account held by Zarina was of $100,000,
and this took place on 13 March 1997.
From there, the money was then transferred from Zarina’s account at Banque
SGC to her account at Allied Dunbar, Isle of Man (account number 11444107).
The first payment of $96,000 was made on 22nd October 1996, and the second
of $65,000 was made on 10th of April 1997.
When these documents are seen together, it appears to create a clear trail
of payments between Thales and Zarina Maharaj.
So, given the background stated above, our questions are:
a) Do you not consider it inappropriate that your wife received Fr1,2m a few
months before your department – when you were minister of transport –
awarded them the credit card licence contract as part of the Prodiba
consortium? To compound this problem, a few months later Thomson-CSF was one
of the companies awarded the N3 toll road tender.
b) In a request for mutual legal assistance made by the Scorpions to the
Swiss justice department in 2007, investigators made it clear that they
believed the money paid through Shaik (and which we now know came from
Thales through its IDMATICS subsidiary) was meant for you, and not for your
wife as compensation for work she did for Schabir Shaik. The implication of
this is that money was passed, via Shaik and your wife, to you – a clear
suggestion of a bribe. What is your view of this allegation?
As a reasonable person, would you not agree that this trail is suspicious at
best?
c) You made mention on the phone of the articles written about gifts you
supposedly obtained from Schabir Shaik and his companies, at a time when his
companies were bidding for tenders from your department. Do you deny this?
Again, would this not be considered highly inappropriate?
The questions we had for Zarina Maharaj, which we said we’d pass through
you, are:
a) Why were payments made to you from Shaik’s company Minderley?
b) On the above point, the way I understand it, any arrangement you had to
work for Mr Shaik only commenced in 1997. If so, why was Minderley making
payments to your bank account a year before that arrangement came into
being?
c) The way the money was channelled from IDMATICS to Minderley, and then to
your Swiss account, and from there to your Isle of Man account creates an
impression that you are trying to disguise the origin of the money. This
impression is fuelled by the fact that the Isle of Man is a notorious tax
haven. What is your view on this?
d) Again, and this relates to the question posed to your husband above, do
you not consider it inappropriate that money paid to your account from
Minderley originated with IDMATICS SA (a division of Thomson-CSF) at a time
when it was bidding for business from your husband’s department, business
which it obtained soon after?
Thanks for your assistance on this,
Investigations
RESPONSE FROM MAC MAHARAJ, 19/11/11
From the information contained in your questions these issues belong to
matters that were investigated by the DSO (Scorpions). Neither Mrs Zarina
Maharaj nor I are prepared to subject ourselves to a separate and additional
investigation by a member of the media based on isolated aspects of a
comprehensive investigation conducted by institutions established and
empowered by law to do so. The fact that the DSO did not bring any charges
against either of us should make you alive to the fact that the insinuations
and allegations of unlawful conduct by us of the kind implied by you may
once again result in and subject us to character assassination and trial by
a media consciously making use of selective information only. -- Mac Maharaj.
Related News
With acknowledgements to Stephan Hofstatter, Mzilikazi wa Afrika, Rob Rose and Sunday Times.
Look at this
one's eyes.
It makes Pinnoccio look like the guardian angel of Truth.
Probably trained by Alec Erwin whom he has now superseded in the art.
And protected by the guardian angel of juriprudence, Mokotedi Mpshe.
Skermokels.