State witness reveals shocking details in Zandile Gumede's R320 million fraud trial
Former eThekwini mayor Zandile Gumede and second accused Mondli Michael Mthembu.
Image: Nomonde Zondi
In an emotional testimony, a State witness told the Durban High Court on Wednesday that in December 2017, she was forced to issue letters of award to service providers to collect waste without allowing the 14-day cooling-off period.
She was testifying in the R320 million Durban Solid Waste (DSW) tender fraud trial involving the former mayor of eThekwini, Zandile Gumede.
Gumede and her 21 co-accused are facing numerous charges, including money laundering, racketeering, fraud, corruption, and contravention of the Municipal Finance Management Act and the Municipal Systems Act relating to the tender.
The State witness served as a senior official in the tenders and contracts unit around December 2017, which is a period during which the State is alleging that the offences were committed by the accused.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
She said she was forced to break internal controls by issuing letters of appointment to companies that had been recommended to collect waste without the signature of former city manager Sipho Nzuza. The witness, who cried while testifying in virtual court, said this was a breach of protocol.
However, things took a sharp turn when advocate Jay Naidoo SC, counsel for Gumede, put the witness in a corner about why the December reports from the Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC) did not reach the advisory committee led by former city manager Sipho Nzuza on December 21, 2017.
The witness was part of the Executive Acquisitions Committee (EAC), an advisory committee, formed by Nzuza. She was on this committee in her capacity as a financial officer.
As a secretariat at the BAC, she crafted and prepared the agenda of all the committees, including the EAC.
She told the court that the reason the BAC's December reports did not make it to the EAC was that one report that was tabled at BAC on December 14, 2017, was the same as the one tabled on BAC on November 27, 2017.
In November, the Solid Waste Unit sought authority from the BAC to advertise the tender contracts for waste collection.
Upon realising that they had received a lot of tender applications, the unit went to the BAC on December 14 to seek authority to invite experienced service providers to collect waste.
This was approved on December 19, and the unit had come back to the BAC with all the particulars of the experienced services.
The court has heard that only compliance checks were not done.
When Naidoo asked her if, at the BAC meeting on December 14, the Solid Waste Unit stated why it came to the committee for the same thing, she said the December report was addressed to Nzuza, not the committee.
'It is not my fault that the line department came to BAC with the same thing,' she said.
However, after a while, she agreed with Naidoo that the report tabled on December 14 included illegal dumping and it was different from the November one.
'It is slightly different,' she said.
She further changed her answer to say that the reason why the decisions made by the BAC on December 14 and 19 did not reach the EAC meeting on December 21, 2017, because compliance checks were not conducted..
She said in the next meeting of the EAC, which was on January 29, 2018, the December reports made it to the meeting.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
8 hours ago
- IOL News
Ecentric Systems ransom attempt: Cyber extortionist jailed for cyber crimes
A cyber terrorist has been sentenced in the Bellville Specialised Commercial Crimes Court in Cape Town after trying to hold a company to ransom after breaching its security. A cyber terrorist has been sentenced by the Bellville Specialised Commercial Crimes Court in Cape Town for attempting to extort a company following a security breach. Lucky Majangandile Erasmus, 36, was charged with 20 offences, including cyber fraud, data theft, and attempted cyber extortion, and was convicted on 17 of those charges. He entered into a plea and sentencing agreement with the State. The Western Cape spokesperson for the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (known as Hawk), Warrant Officer Zinzi Hani, said Erasmus and his co-accused, both ex-employees, loaded software onto the Ecentric Systems, which allowed them remote access.
Eyewitness News
12 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
State to appeal ruling on Moroadi Cholota's extradition from US
JOHANNESBURG - The State in the Free State asbestos trial has confirmed that it plans to appeal the Bloemfontein High Court judgment that overturned Moroadi Cholota's extradition from the US. Cholota, who is the former personal assistant of former Free State Premier Ace Magashule, was let off on a technicality when the court ruled that her 2024 extradition was unlawful and unconstitutional on Tuesday. Before then, she was among more than a dozen accused facing corruption charges in the R255 million asbestos case. ALSO READ: • Lawyer says it's up to Moroadi Cholota on whether she'll sue State for her unlawful extradition from US • FS asbestos corruption trial resumes in court without Cholota • State prosecutors and investigators' conduct under scrutiny after Cholota extradition overturned At the start of Wednesday's proceedings, State prosecutor, Advocate Johan de Nysschen, asked for another postponement to deal with the possible appeal. "The prima facie view is that we shall appeal this judgment, either by joining the Schultz matter, which is already before the Constitutional Court, or by approaching the SCA because we are of the view that the facts of this matter and the Schultz matter differ, so the Supreme Court of Appeal could come to a different conclusion in this matter." A frustrated Magashule stood up before court and protested the request. "The State has been saying it's ready but every time there is a postponement. It looks like we don't have rights because even next year, there will be postponements."
IOL News
17 hours ago
- IOL News
Thales's appeal for permanent stay in Zuma arms deal trial rejected
Former president Jacob Zuma's attempt to escape prosecution has failed. Image: Tumi Pakkies / Independent Newspapers Former president Jacob Zuma and his co-accused, Thales, are yet to decide whether they will file an appeal against the Pietermaritzburg High Court ruling to dismiss the arms deal case against them. Zuma, who now leads the Umkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP), had piggybacked on the French arms manufacturer's application for the permanent stay to escape being tried for fraud, corruption, racketeering, and money laundering charges. Zuma was not in court on Tuesday. The charges dated back to the 1998 arms deal, which the government had entered into with Thales. The trial has been delayed due to many factors, including attempts to get state prosecutor Advocate Billy Downer off the trial following allegations of bias, which Judge Nkosinathi Chili had rejected in September last year. After Judge Chili's ruling on Tuesday morning, the State and defence teams agreed to postpone the case to December 4. The postponement would give Thales time to decide whether to file an appeal against Judge Chili's ruling. Zuma would also get time to go to a higher court to appeal against Judge Chili's ruling that Downer should continue prosecuting the matter. Regarding the stay of prosecution application, Thales's legal team had, on April 24, argued that continuing with the trial would be constitutionally unfair since its client's former directors, Pierre Moynto and Alain Thetard, who were its prime witnesses, had died. Moynto had been the director of Thales and the executive officer of the African Defence Systems, another entity, 'which featured prominently in the State case against Thales'. He died on December 31, 2020. Thetard, who died in September 2022, also served as Thales's director. Both accused had contended that without Moynto and Thetard's testimony, their defence would be severely prejudiced. 'In support of its case, Thales alleged that the importance of Moynto and Thetard in the criminal trial against Thales was unquestionable, (as) they are the only individuals who would be able to testify on behalf of Thales and also to assist Thales in challenging any evidence led by the State against it,' said Chili. Zuma and Thales said that had the case against them not been delayed, Moynto and Thetard would have been available to testify. Zuma had said that if Thales succeeds, he would also apply to have his charges dropped because the alleged corruptor would no longer be on trial. However, that hope was dashed when Judge Chili rejected Thales' argument that Moynto and Thetard's testimony was important. 'The question of whether they would prejudice, which might result in Thales not receiving a constitutionally fair trial, is a matter for the trial court. 'Whether the right to a fair trial is infringed, the matter would be best decided by the court,' said Judge Chili. He agreed with Zuma's argument that his prosecution was conjoined with that of Thales and could not be separated, and that 'if Thales's case fails, Zuma's case must also fail'. He read an extract from the Criminal Procedure Act, which states that the decision to stop the prosecution rested with the State. 'There is nothing in the Act that empowers the court to direct the State to either withdraw a charge or stop the prosecution against an accused person. 'I am therefore satisfied that it would be incompetent of this court to grant the relief sought in prayer one of the main applications (brought by Thales),' said Judge Chili. The judge said Thales was shifting the goalposts by claiming that Thetard and Moynto were its invaluable witnesses. He said that its May application contradicted another permanent stay of prosecution, which it made in November 2018, where it stated that Thetard was not prepared to come to South Africa to testify in the trial. He said Thales had at the time supported its argument by giving the court Thetard's affidavit, which was dated March 11, 2009, that he was not available to testify. He said Thales should have indicated in its latest application that Thetard had at some point changed his mind and was ready to testify. 'Without such evidence, one is tempted to conclude that Thales conveniently decided to move the goalpost.' He said the State had previously stated that Moynto was not important because he was not a central actor in the event, giving rise to the charges against Thales. 'It was the common course that he was not an officer or an employee of Thales in April 1998 and the third quarter of 2000, during which most of the events occurred. 'He only represented Thales before April 1998 and thereafter late in the year 2000 onwards,' said Judge Chili. Cape Times
