Gangster State

by Pieter-Louis Myburgh

  For example, on Sunday 30 July 2017, just five days after Kaykaysim received more than R1 million from 605 Consulting, Sothoane posted a picture on Instagram of herself sitting in a camp chair somewhere near Parys. Magashule was due to attend an ANC PEC meeting in his hometown the following morning, according to his diary. In the background of the picture is a VW Golf with a clearly visible number plate. I established that the car belongs to Lerato Mofokeng, an ANC

  member from Parys who once worked in Magashule’s office. Like most of the operators in Magashule’s sphere, Mofokeng hails from Tumahole. His Facebook profile reveals the extent of his involvement in ANC activities.

  According to sources familiar with the province’s political landscape, Mofokeng performed ‘political tasks’ for Magashule when he worked in the premier’s office. He later moved to the Masilonyana local

  municipality, and in early 2017, he joined the FSHS, just before Kaykaysim became a subcontractor on projects for the department.

  One source told me that Mofokeng was a ‘fixer’ for Magashule.

  Sothoane’s link to Mofokeng was an important discovery. The young businesswoman, who now sat with at least R1 million of FSHS funds channelled to her through the Mpambanis’ 605 Consulting, was spending time in the company of one of Magashule’s alleged fixers.

  Politically, this was a crucial period for Magashule. Like Igo Mpambani before her, Sothoane seemed to be ideally positioned to help finance the premier’s political campaigns.

  Sources who attended a Provincial General Council gathering in Parys in November 2017 alleged that Sothoane had been present on the sidelines. As we’ll see in the next chapter, the PGC was apparently called in a last-minute effort to validate the Free State’s support of Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma for the upcoming elective conference at Nasrec.

  By the time the PGC commenced, Sothoane was driving around in a sporty white-and-red Mini Cooper, which she had presumably bought with a portion of Kaykaysim’s windfall from the FSHS. One contact said she was ‘very busy’ during that time, driving around Parys in her conspicuous Mini.

  I asked Sothoane if she attended the PGC or any other ANC

  gatherings after her company received money from 605 Consulting.

  ‘Why would I be at that meeting? I don’t recall going to any ANC

  meeting. I don’t even have a membership,’ she replied in a text message. I also asked about her relationship with Mofokeng, the former staffer in Magashule’s office, but she did not respond.

  Like the #GuptaLeaks, the IgoFiles have a cut-off point. The

  documents reflect 605 Consulting’s financial dealings only up to and including October 2017. Nevertheless, the company concluded a very interesting transaction that month. On 29 September, the FSHS

  effected a smaller payment of just over R2 million to 605 Consulting.

  Over the following few days, Michelle Mpambani, or whoever controlled the company’s bank account, made several payments to third parties, including a neat payment of R220 000 to Kaykaysim and just under R500 000 in two tranches to Ramtsilo Trading. This company’s directors are Kekeletso and Kedibone Tsiloane, sisters in their twenties who hail from Sasolburg. Unlike Sothoane, the Tsiloane sisters have documented links to Magashule’s family. According to company records, they are directors in a non-profit called Yetsang Empowerment Bato. This entity’s registered address is in Parys, and one of its other directors is Thato Magashule, the former premier’s son.

  A source who was previously close to Ace Magashule claimed that he once saw the Tsiloane sisters in Ace Magashule’s company at a restaurant in Bloemfontein. ‘Those are Ace’s girls,’ he told me.

  Kedibone, the older of the two, told me their company was ‘privileged’

  to have been commissioned as a subcontractor to 605 Consulting following the latter’s appointment by the FSHS to connect RDP houses to sewer and water pipes in Sasolburg. When I asked to see proof of the work Ramtsilo Trading had supposedly done, Kedibone referred me to Michelle Mpambani, who did not respond to any of my queries.

  Kedibone, who defended her company’s work for 605 Consulting, remained mum when I queried her and her sister’s ties to Magashule’s son.

  Nearly two years have passed since Mpambani’s murder without anyone having been brought to book. When I first tried to get an

  update on the police’s investigation, a SAPS spokesperson told me the matter was being investigated by the Hawks. The Hawks then told me the matter was with the SAPS. I finally determined that the docket had been passed on to a lieutenant colonel at the Tembisa police station on the outskirts of Johannesburg. The last time I checked, Mpambani’s killers were still at large.

  PART VIII

  TOP SIX FIX

  29

  Nas(w)rec(k)

  Ace Magashule found himself in perhaps the most important battle of his long, conflict-ridden political career in the period leading up to the ANC’s December 2017 national conference at Nasrec. The first indications that he would campaign to become the party’s new secretary-general surfaced in around June that year. 1 His drive to occupy this position could be viewed as at once a power play and a fight for survival. The politically ambitious premier had probably always intended to one day rise to higher stations outside of his home province.

  Having cast his lot with the Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma slate, Magashule fought hard for the faction, but his personal campaign to become secretary-general was much more consequential. Magashule no doubt knew that he needed to make it into the ANC’s Top Six if he were to prolong his political life, regardless of whether Dlamini-Zuma prevailed over Cyril Ramaphosa or not. With the latter’s promises of a

  ‘new dawn’ in South Africa, an all-out defeat for the Dlamini-Zuma slate could have been the end of the road for Magashule. Developments after Ramaphosa’s victory gave a good indication of what his fate might have been had he not squeezed himself into the Top Six. The new ANC president was quick to pounce on one of Magashule’s old

  ‘premier league’ buddies, North West premier Supra Mahumapelo, after violent protests in his province called for him to step down. With pressure from Ramaphosa, Mahumapelo took ‘early retirement’ in May 2018. 2

  Becoming secretary-general therefore offered Magashule a chance to secure one of the party’s most powerful positions and, more importantly, to avoid being swept into political oblivion by the brooms of change Ramaphosa threatened to wield. With such high stakes, it is no wonder the political machinery that propped up Magashule’s rule in the Free State kicked into overdrive in the months before Nasrec. The intense campaign was accompanied by the same sort of mischief that came under fire in the Constitutional Court’s ruling in 2012. This latest wave of unscrupulous political manoeuvring would also eventually be subjected to a legal lashing.

  The earliest and most prominent objection to Magashule’s bid for secretary-general came from fellow Free State local Fikile Mbalula.

  After the ANC Youth League and the Umkhonto we Sizwe Military Veterans Association (MKMVA) announced their support for Magashule in mid-2017, Mbalula posted his tweet that Magashule was

  ‘a definite no no no’ and that he would ‘finish what is remaining of our movement. He will kill it. ’3 Magashule retaliated at a Provincial General Council meeting in Bloemfontein, 4 but his squabbles with national party figures like Mbalula were of secondary concern. It was in his home province that Magashule needed to lay the foundation for his ascent to the party’s Top Six. But his path was strewn with obstacles. In fact, as Nasrec drew closer, it appeared at times as if the wheels were coming off.

  In November, a group of disgruntled ANC members sought to stop the very processes that would see Magashule nominated by the Free State for his preferred position. The dissatisfied party members took Magashule, in his capacity as provincial chair, and his PEC to court. 5

  The ANC in the Free State was due to hold a provincial conference on

  the first weekend of December, but the applicants wanted
to prohibit the gathering from taking place. They argued that a series of branch general meetings (BGMs) and biannual meetings in four of the Free State’s regions, held between August and November, had been replete with irregularities.

  The BGMs were extremely important, as it was during these meetings that branch members nominated their preferred candidates for the ANC’s NEC and Top Six. These decisions would then be consolidated and affirmed at the provincial conference scheduled to take place just before the national gathering at Nasrec. The branch meetings also determined which party members would attend both conferences. In a particularly hefty court application of nearly 1 000 pages, the twenty-six dissatisfied party members laid bare the astonishing level of skulduggery that still prevailed in the party’s provincial structures. This time around, some of Magashule’s closest political associates were fingered as the alleged perpetrators of blatantly undemocratic and unlawful acts that barred certain branch members from participating in the nomination processes.

  It is worth delving into some of the myriad examples cited in the court documents. In late October 2017, one of the party’s branches in the Lejweleputswa district municipality (Welkom and surrounds) held its BGM. Sizwe Mbalo, the provincial legislature’s deputy speaker and a staunch Magashule ally, 6 attended the meeting as a representative of the Magashule-led PEC. He was supposed to merely observe the proceedings, but he did much more than that. According to the court filings, Mbalo arrived with a ‘pre-signed attendance register’. Some of the branch’s legitimate members were not listed on this form and therefore could not vote for their preferred candidates. ‘Despite the fact

  that the meeting was never formally quorate, nominations were accepted. Mrs Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma was nominated as a candidate, which nomination was accepted without counting the votes.

  Another member nominated Mr Cyril Ramaphosa, but that nomination was completely ignored by the chairperson. Tempers consequently flared and a violent altercation broke out.’7

  Another Magashule ally did something similar at a BGM in Koffiefontein, located in the province’s Xhariep region. This meeting was attended by provincial spokesperson and PEC ‘deployee’ Thabo Meeko. ‘During the counting of the votes for the presidential candidates the said deployee deliberately distorted the figures in favour of one presidential candidate [Dlamini-Zuma],’ read the court application. There was also meddling from a senior provincial party leader at Ward 1 in the Xhariep region. Thandiwe Reachable, mayor of the Letsemeng local municipality (Koffiefontein) and one of Magashule’s fellow PEC members, ‘chaired the [branch] meeting in clear violation of the guidelines which specifically states that the [PEC]

  deployee should not chair the meeting’. Reachable certainly made her presence felt. ‘When the deployee realised that the voting numbers were tipped in favour of one presidential candidate [presumably Ramaphosa] she sabotaged the meeting and the vote counting process by starting several vote counting processes until members got so frustrated that they left the meeting.’8

  The ‘bare denials’ proffered by the respondents did not convince the High Court that the irregularities did not occur. The court found that Magashule and his fellow respondents ‘also failed to deal with the conduct of the respective PEC deployees’. The court case also highlighted the troubling phenomenon of prohibiting certain branch

  members from attending meetings. For example, branches in the eastern Free State’s Thabo Mofutsanyana region were subjected to

  ‘extreme gatekeeping’. At one branch, a private security firm

  ‘controlled … who entered the venue of the meeting’. The security guards allegedly allowed ‘people who were not [branch] members, and whose names did not appear on the attendance register … to enter the venue’, while ‘members in good standing were denied access despite having had proof of their credentials and copies of their membership forms’. Things subsequently got out of hand. ‘As a result of an altercation that ensued because of the refusal of [the security firm] to allow access to members in good standing, [the security guards] fired rubber bullets. A member in good standing … was pepper sprayed and his wife was shot in the back with a rubber bullet. ’9

  Sources told me that the security firm mentioned in the court filings was allegedly loyal to Vusi Tshabalala, the mayor of the problem-ridden Maluti-a-Phofung local municipality. Maluti-a-Phofung falls within the Thabo Mofutsanyana region. Branded as a ‘gangster mayor’

  by opposition politicians, Tshabalala was one of Magashule’s foremost political allies. 10 The same security firm was called into action at another BGM, this time in Ward 17 in Thabo Mofutsanyana. ‘A councillor … accused one of the applicants … as being part of the

  “CR17” faction, which is a general reference to members who support Mr Cyril Ramaphosa … The … applicant was then intimidated by [the security firm] because of the association with Mr Ramaphosa. Any person belonging to the “CR17” faction or who raised a contentious issue relating to the procedural irregularities at the meeting was removed by [the security firm] and, at times, in a violent manner. ’11

  This tactic seemingly became the norm at branches all over this

  region. ‘Similarly, in wards 6, 8, 13 and 22, if members were suspected of belonging to the “CR17” faction or indicated so during the meetings, they were excluded from partaking in the meeting or removed from the venue. ’12 Magashule and his fellow respondents tried to convince the court that the security firm had been appointed ‘to secure all members of the ANC’, but the High Court would have none of it. ‘[C]ontrary to the alleged reason why [the firm] was appointed, they were part of the cause of violence and became part and parcel of it, instead of preventing it,’ the court found. 13

  The court case also exposed the pro-Magashule camp’s other preferred methods of sidelining rivals. In this regard, ‘inadequate notice and/or a complete failure to notify members of an upcoming BGM’

  were the order of the day, as was ‘the manipulation of membership numbers in certain wards’. The latter ploy allowed certain branches ‘to reach the required quorum or appoint more delegates than [the] branch would legally be entitled to’. What transpired at a branch in the Mangaung region illustrates this tactic. According to the court papers, Ward 8 was scheduled to hold a BGM on 21 October 2017, but ‘the venue was changed without proper notice’, which resulted in many branch members not attending. And those members who did make it to the BGM were barred from entering. ‘The meeting was scheduled to start at 9h00, but when members arrived, they were informed that the process had already begun at 6h00. [Other] people were allowed to enter and participate without proper credentials. The gate that allowed access to the venue was locked before all members could enter.’ The unnamed PEC member who presided over the meeting was either up to some serious mischief or was in desperate need of an eye examination.

  ‘Ward 8 has 426 audited members. The PEC deployee announced that

  there were 214 signatures on the register and that a quorum had therefore been reached. However, there were only approximately 80

  people at the venue. Despite the fact that there was no quorum, a delegate from this ward was chosen. ’14

  Magashule and co.’s reply in this regard did not impress the High Court. ‘The respondents attached the attendance register for Ward 8 in an attempt to refute the allegations pertaining to the lack of a quorum.

  However, in addition to the fact that the contents thereof were again not confirmed under oath, the attendance register in fact did not confirm that a quorum was reached,’ the court found. 15 The applicants highlighted similar problems at a number of other branches in the Mangaung region, and each time the respondents failed to convince the court that such irregularities did not occur. In fact, the High Court had few kind words for the manner in which the respondents tried to defend themselves. They ‘attempted to present countermanding evidence to rebut allegations made by the applicants, but dismally failed to do so,’ the court found. Their ‘bare denials’ were �
�vague, lacking in specificity and made in a generalised fashion’. Their answering affidavits therefore ‘failed to raise genuine bona fide disputes of fact’. As a result, the court ruled that the applicants’ rights to participate in the ANC’s democratic processes were ‘blatantly and grossly violated by the occurrence of the established irregularities’. 16

  The court further ruled that the provincial conference could not go ahead until the affected branches held new meetings that were in line with the ANC’s rules and the country’s Constitution. The decision had a bearing on twenty-nine branches in four regions.

  This placed Magashule in a bind. The provincial conference was scheduled to take place over the first weekend of December, and

  Magashule and his supporters needed the gathering to proceed in order to formalise the province’s support for the Dlamini-Zuma slate. They must have suspected that the court would rule against them, because they concocted another plan to ensure that their slate got some form of official backing from the province before Nasrec. Two days before the judgment, the party sent out a notice that there would be a Provincial General Council meeting in Parys the following day, Tuesday 28

  November.17 The PGC had the power to rubber-stamp the disputed branch decisions to support Dlamini-Zuma and Magashule. According to a former Magashule backer and erstwhile MEC in the province, this move was vintage Ace. ‘Whenever he felt that his leadership or power was being threatened, he convened meetings or conferences in his hometown,’ this person told me. ‘He felt that he had more control over things in his own backyard.’