Independent civil society institute Corruption Watch embarked on its outreach to the public today, launching a website and SMS hotline to receive reports of corruption and posting an online pledge for people to sign rejecting corruption.
The website will be a repository of stories from the South African public; a secure portal for evidence-based whistle blowing activity and a resource for information about corrupt activities in South Africa.
“By gathering, interpreting and acting on information from the public, the media and other sources,” Director David Lewis said, “Corruption Watch will expose the corrupt and the misuse in particular of public money. We have formed this institution to enable citizens to report and confront public and private sector individuals abusing their power and position.”
The data collected by the organisation will be used to reveal ‘hotspots’ of corrupt activity around the country at municipal, provincial and national level. Where corruption is rife, Corruption Watch will seek partnerships with powerful organs of civil society to effect change.
“We want to help move the national conversation about corruption from resignation to action,” said Lewis.
Funded principally by donations from charitable foundations, Corruption Watch was initiated by Cosatu’s office bearers, who were receiving an increasing number of complaints about corruption from its membership and the general public. It is a non-profit organisation and the board is comprised of the following individuals: Bobby Godsell, Adila Hassim, David Lewis, Mary Metcalfe, Mavuso Msimang, Archbishop Ndungane, Kate O’Regan, Zwelinzima Vavi, and is chaired by Vuyiseka Dubula.
The website will be the main interface between the public and Corruption Watch, though it can be reached via SMS, twitter and facebook. Through social media, people can share their stories about all manner of corruption, including but not exclusive to bribery, kickbacks and graft; influence peddling and patronage; corruption in the work place where they’ve seen or been victims of favouritism, nepotism, ghost workers and illegitimate absenteeism. People may be able to report instances of bid-rigging, price-fixing, arbitrage and profiteering, cartels and collusion and tender and procurement irregularities.
The personal details of anyone reporting an incident will be kept confidential, but the information collected will be aggregated, enabling Corruption Watch to analyse the data, spot patterns and draw a ‘heat map’ of when and where corruption is occurring.
“Information from crowd-sourcing offers a clear understanding of what is happening on the ground,” said Lewis. “While we won’t be in a position to investigate each and every report, the combined knowledge of people coming to our site will provide us with a powerful tool to build alliances with other institutions and NGOs. Strengthening the scale and voice of civil society will help South Africans defeat corruption.”
From some of the aggregated information – and occasionally a personal story that is representative of an endemic form of corruption – Corruption Watch will initiate research, commission reports and compile sufficient documentation to refer matters to the appropriate investigative or prosecutorial authority, or engage in policy-based advocacy work.
“Our first campaign,” said Lewis, “is asking people to sign a pledge online, or via SMS, refusing to participate in corruption and, if they are civil servants, committing to treating public resources with respect.”
The public can tell Corruption Watch about their experiences and sign the pledge on the website (www.corruptionwatch.org.za). To SMS, send the text “BRIBE” to report corruption or, to sign the pledge, type “PLEDGE” plus your first and last names to the number 45142 (the SMS costs R1). People can also talk about it on facebook (CorruptionWatch) and twitter (@corruption_sa), or follow #corruptionwatch.
“We are all degraded and affronted by corruption. It threatens our institutions, service delivery, public trust and indeed our democracy. Together we can reject the abuse of public money, which so disproportionately affects the poor,” concluded Corruption Watch Chairperson Vuyiseka Dubula.
Source: Corruption Watch
Showing posts with label Bobby Godsell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bobby Godsell. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Monday, December 13, 2010
Maroga's version 'just not true', says court
Eskom's disgraced former CEO Jacob Maroga was left without a leg to stand on when Judge Thokozile Masipa ruled against him in the R85-million lawsuit that he had brought against the power utility for unlawful dismissal.
The Mail & Guardian has chronicled Maroga's messy history with Eskom in the past in a dummy's guide to the Eskom crisis. This year, Maroga's battle for reinstatement only intensified. On January 23 the Sunday Times reported that Maroga had filed a civil claim against Eskom, its acting CEO and chairperson Mpho Makwana, as well as then Minister of Public Enterprises Barbara Hogan.
He asked that he either be reinstated as CEO of Eskom or that he be paid R85-million in compensation for being dismissed. He also accused Hogan of acting unethically and of colluding with the Eskom board by saying that he had resigned. Maroga's decision to file the lawsuit was widely slated by political parties and trade unions alike. Shortly thereafter, Eskom announced that it intended to contest the lawsuit.
In May, Maroga filed an urgent interdict to prevent Eskom from appointing a new CEO, but Judge Moroa Tsoka of the South Gauteng High Court set aside the application. Then in early June, lawyers for either side presented their cases at the South Gauteng High Court. Eskom maintained that Maroga had offered to resign and that the board had accepted his resignation, while Maroga argued that he had never offered to resign and that, even if he did, it had been "conditional".
Hogan's lawyers also said she had not been present at the meeting at which Maroga had offered to resign and had also not been involved when the board decided to accept his resignation. Two days later, on June 9, Judge Thokozile Masipa reserved judgement in the case. Meanwhile, on June 15, the power utility announced that it had appointed Eskom veteran Brian Dames as new CEO.
On December 11, after almost a year of legal wrangling, Maroga lost his claim for unfair dismissal and was ordered by Judge Masipa to pay the costs of the trial. Masipa was scathing of Maroga in her judgement, saying "it was argued on behalf of the respondents that Mr Maroga's version taken as a whole on affidavits was so contradictory, unreliable and so demonstrably lacking in credence that it should be rejected out of hand on affidavits. I agree. His version that it is Eskom's version that he resigned conditionally is just not true".
The case hinged on whether Maroga had indeed offered to resign on the night of October 28. Both parties agreed that Maroga, and Eskom chairperson Bobby Godsell had both recused themselves from a meeting of the board. Maroga maintained that this recusal was necessary to allow the board to deliberate on the roles of the CEO and chairperson. However, according to Eskom, both Maroga and Godsell had offered to resign and the recusal was to allow the board to decide whose offer to accept and whose to reject.
After it had made its decision, the board sent two directors to convey its decision to the pair and to accept Maroga's "generous offer" of resignation. However, Maroga said that the board had misunderstood its mandate and that during the conversation with the directors, he had no idea what "generous offer" they were referring to as no mention of the word "resignation" was made. Maroga claimed that he had "reflected" on the matter overnight before trying to correct the misunderstanding the next day.
On this matter, Masipa said it was strange that Maroga did not explain how and when he became aware that the "generous offer" the directors spoke of was an alleged offer to resign. She also questioned why Maroga, instead of asking for an immediate clarification, required an overnight reflection on the matter. "The court can safely conclude that Mr Maroga's version is a fabrication," she said. Furthermore, she pointed out, he also agreed to produce a media statement to announce his resignation and to meet with Godsell and the Human Resources and Remuneration Committee the next day to discuss the implementation of his resignation. "This, in my view, is what seals his fate," she concluded.
Instead of an R85-million windfall, Maroga will be left with a hefty bill to pay. The costs he was ordered to pay include the costs of the employment of five counsel.
Source: Mail & Guardian
The Mail & Guardian has chronicled Maroga's messy history with Eskom in the past in a dummy's guide to the Eskom crisis. This year, Maroga's battle for reinstatement only intensified. On January 23 the Sunday Times reported that Maroga had filed a civil claim against Eskom, its acting CEO and chairperson Mpho Makwana, as well as then Minister of Public Enterprises Barbara Hogan.
He asked that he either be reinstated as CEO of Eskom or that he be paid R85-million in compensation for being dismissed. He also accused Hogan of acting unethically and of colluding with the Eskom board by saying that he had resigned. Maroga's decision to file the lawsuit was widely slated by political parties and trade unions alike. Shortly thereafter, Eskom announced that it intended to contest the lawsuit.
In May, Maroga filed an urgent interdict to prevent Eskom from appointing a new CEO, but Judge Moroa Tsoka of the South Gauteng High Court set aside the application. Then in early June, lawyers for either side presented their cases at the South Gauteng High Court. Eskom maintained that Maroga had offered to resign and that the board had accepted his resignation, while Maroga argued that he had never offered to resign and that, even if he did, it had been "conditional".
Hogan's lawyers also said she had not been present at the meeting at which Maroga had offered to resign and had also not been involved when the board decided to accept his resignation. Two days later, on June 9, Judge Thokozile Masipa reserved judgement in the case. Meanwhile, on June 15, the power utility announced that it had appointed Eskom veteran Brian Dames as new CEO.
On December 11, after almost a year of legal wrangling, Maroga lost his claim for unfair dismissal and was ordered by Judge Masipa to pay the costs of the trial. Masipa was scathing of Maroga in her judgement, saying "it was argued on behalf of the respondents that Mr Maroga's version taken as a whole on affidavits was so contradictory, unreliable and so demonstrably lacking in credence that it should be rejected out of hand on affidavits. I agree. His version that it is Eskom's version that he resigned conditionally is just not true".
The case hinged on whether Maroga had indeed offered to resign on the night of October 28. Both parties agreed that Maroga, and Eskom chairperson Bobby Godsell had both recused themselves from a meeting of the board. Maroga maintained that this recusal was necessary to allow the board to deliberate on the roles of the CEO and chairperson. However, according to Eskom, both Maroga and Godsell had offered to resign and the recusal was to allow the board to decide whose offer to accept and whose to reject.
After it had made its decision, the board sent two directors to convey its decision to the pair and to accept Maroga's "generous offer" of resignation. However, Maroga said that the board had misunderstood its mandate and that during the conversation with the directors, he had no idea what "generous offer" they were referring to as no mention of the word "resignation" was made. Maroga claimed that he had "reflected" on the matter overnight before trying to correct the misunderstanding the next day.
On this matter, Masipa said it was strange that Maroga did not explain how and when he became aware that the "generous offer" the directors spoke of was an alleged offer to resign. She also questioned why Maroga, instead of asking for an immediate clarification, required an overnight reflection on the matter. "The court can safely conclude that Mr Maroga's version is a fabrication," she said. Furthermore, she pointed out, he also agreed to produce a media statement to announce his resignation and to meet with Godsell and the Human Resources and Remuneration Committee the next day to discuss the implementation of his resignation. "This, in my view, is what seals his fate," she concluded.
Instead of an R85-million windfall, Maroga will be left with a hefty bill to pay. The costs he was ordered to pay include the costs of the employment of five counsel.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Eskom board confirms Maroga's resignation
Jacob Maroga has resigned as CEO of Eskom, the electricity parastatal's board said on Thursday. "Eskom confirmed that Mr Maroga has resigned. His intention to resign was welcomed by the board," acting board chairperson Mpho Makwana told reporters at Eskom's Megawatt Park head office in Johannesburg.
The announcement ended days of speculation on Maroga's position at the parastatal after a power struggle between Meroga and former board chairperson Bobby Godsell. While Maroga's resignation was announced last week Thursday to Eskom's staff by Godsell, Maroga reportedly returned to work on Monday. On the same day, November 9, Godsell handed in his resignation, saying that the government had refused to support Eskom's board in resolving its dispute with Maroga.
In recent months, Maroga had been criticised for sacking international energy consultant Susan Olsen, who warned in a confidential memo that Eskom's coal-procurement practices were placing electricity supplies in jeopardy. Maroga seemingly ignored Olsen's advice and the country was then plunged into a period of load-shedding in January 2008. Other official Eskom documents were also leaked which painted a picture of its lack of understanding of coal markets and how skilled staff had departed from the parastatal.
The Democratic Alliance recently released a report by Eskom's technical corporate audit division, which highlighted the serious shortages in senior staff at the utility and supported Olson's earlier findings.
Source: Mail & Guardian
The announcement ended days of speculation on Maroga's position at the parastatal after a power struggle between Meroga and former board chairperson Bobby Godsell. While Maroga's resignation was announced last week Thursday to Eskom's staff by Godsell, Maroga reportedly returned to work on Monday. On the same day, November 9, Godsell handed in his resignation, saying that the government had refused to support Eskom's board in resolving its dispute with Maroga.
In recent months, Maroga had been criticised for sacking international energy consultant Susan Olsen, who warned in a confidential memo that Eskom's coal-procurement practices were placing electricity supplies in jeopardy. Maroga seemingly ignored Olsen's advice and the country was then plunged into a period of load-shedding in January 2008. Other official Eskom documents were also leaked which painted a picture of its lack of understanding of coal markets and how skilled staff had departed from the parastatal.
The Democratic Alliance recently released a report by Eskom's technical corporate audit division, which highlighted the serious shortages in senior staff at the utility and supported Olson's earlier findings.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Prosperity, identity, democracy
The December national conference of the ANC is an event of central significance for all South Africans. The ANC played the leading role in South Africa's transition to democracy and has been the massively dominant player in our first decade of freedom. Conference delegates will therefore be making decisions that touch and indeed shape the lives of the nearly 50-million citizens of our country.
While much speculation has understandably been focused on which individuals will be elected to key leadership positions, this citizen is much more interested in what the conference will say and do about how our country is to be governed. I am even more interested in the vision that emerges of the South Africa the ANC wants to build in this second decade of freedom. In particular three aspects of that vision interest me. These relate to prosperity, identity and the quality of our democracy.
The years since 1994 have seen dramatic and impressive improvements in the state of the South African economy. Our new democracy inherited a fortress economy on the verge of bankruptcy, in which the interest on national debt continued to rise each year, displacing all other spending priorities. High inflation, negative foreign reserves, a rapidly weakening exchange rate and an economy that was essentially ex-growth was the legacy. All this has changed in a way that should certainly qualify the economic management team for a global best-in-class award.
Impressive progress has also been made in extending basic services such as water, electricity, schooling and healthcare to millions previously existing on the periphery of our society. About 11-million people receive a social grant of one form or another, making South Africa's social support system one of the most comprehensive among developing countries.
That said, problems of both poverty and inequality exist and demand the nation's urgent and effective attention. The challenge for the next decade must be to translate sustained high levels of economic growth into increasing levels of productive employment.
If we are to meet the Millennium Development Goals set for 2014, we need to add about five million jobs, as well as address the issue of the working poor. In the tough and unsentimental global markets in which South Africa's very open economy must compete, most of our industries need to up their game, both to win and retain export markets, and to compete effectively against foreign participants in our domestic markets.
With regard to social services the critical challenge we face is about quality. Most children are in school. But what is the quality of their learning? Most citizens do have access to healthcare. But how effective is that healthcare? Intense challenges must be addressed in all aspects of our criminal justice system if we are to reduce the very real level of fear in which most South Africans conduct their daily lives.
None of these challenges can be met by government alone, even a government with the best possible policies and effective implementation.
All these critical challenges require a partnership between government, other actors in civil society and, crucially, the constructive activity of citizens themselves. These partnerships in turn require both some measure of shared goals and significant levels of mutual trust. This alone will achieve the increased levels of prosperity that will make a better life for all South Africans a reality rather than a dream.South Africa is in the very early stages of constructing a nation out of our fragmented and often bitter past. Central to this is the creation of a national identity that unites the subsets of South Africans.
Here, too, important progress has already been made and a promising foundation laid. Our national anthem consists of four of our national languages, and two important pieces of our musical heritage. More and more South Africans are able to sing all four stanzas. Our flag has captured the emotional loyalty of the vast majority of our people.
We still have a way to go. Our history indicates clearly that a good future will be the result of both unity and cooperation between all the peoples of our country -- all who live here and who want to live here.
Perhaps we need to develop a "pledge of allegiance" similar to that recited by all American school children at the start of each school day. The preamble to our Constitution provides good words. We need to encourage all South Africans to live the language of inclusive patriotism: in this regard "African" cannot be a synonym for "black".
Language is a critical tool in building a national identity. English will continue to be the lingua franca for much of our daily lives. However, vital and resourceful parts of our culture will continue to use the currency of what we often refer to as "vernacular" languages, which clearly include Afrikaans. In this regard we need a national project to encourage South African citizens to become multilingual. South Africans have a campaign culture. Can we not create a movement that encourages all South Africans to learn, at least to the degree of some conversational ability, a second language? This will be a particular challenge to English-language mother-tongue speakers. Their efforts will be well rewarded by the quality of their social interaction and they will quite literally define the parameters of a shared national identity.
The story of South African politics so far is the contest between the obviously desirable goal of greater national unity and the seduction of mobilising political power around sectional appeals. The way in which the delegates at Polokwane choose between these competing forces will have consequences for all South Africans.
What will the ANC conference do about the state of our democracy?
Here it seems two distinct challenges exist. What will be the quality of the internal debate within ANC structures? And how does the ANC see its role in the broader society?
On the first two, divergent trends are apparent. Over the course of this year very serious attempts have been made to offer the ANC, and the nation that it serves, serious debate. Policy documents have been made public which address all of the issues above, and more. ANC members and formations have been invited to engage with the critical issues in a spirit of free and real debate.
The contrasting trend, however, has also been evident. This has subsumed debate in the quest for power. Here what individual ANC members believed about the issues has become secondary to who they will support in election races. This is an inevitable tension in any political movement. The way in which it is resolved, though, shapes not only who gets power, but how those empowered use power.
The ANC was created as a parliament of the African people of South Africa. Today it also serves as the largest party in the Parliament.
Our Constitution sets out to build democratic institutions that have legitimacy and life beyond that of individual political movements.
Every member of Parliament, from whatever party, is part of this construction project. Democratic institutions have little real life outside the political culture that creates (and sometimes destroys) them.
We urgently need a culture that seeks and respects the robust contestation of ideas. No individual and no organisation has a monopoly on truth. Those who shut down debate with crude appeals to party or sectional loyalty do our Constitution, and the spirit of 1994, no favours.
Equally, debate and discourse can only thrive in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Opposition parties need to acknowledge the electoral support enjoyed by the ANC. They also need to treat the offices of our government with respect. It is their patriotic duty so to do. The ANC in turn needs to accept the decision of voters to elect representatives from organisations other than themselves. They need to treat opposition parties as part of the national and democratic project, who can and will make a contribution to building a better future. The recent respectful and constructive meeting between the South African president and the leader of the opposition is an encouraging start.
Source: Mail & Guardian
While much speculation has understandably been focused on which individuals will be elected to key leadership positions, this citizen is much more interested in what the conference will say and do about how our country is to be governed. I am even more interested in the vision that emerges of the South Africa the ANC wants to build in this second decade of freedom. In particular three aspects of that vision interest me. These relate to prosperity, identity and the quality of our democracy.
The years since 1994 have seen dramatic and impressive improvements in the state of the South African economy. Our new democracy inherited a fortress economy on the verge of bankruptcy, in which the interest on national debt continued to rise each year, displacing all other spending priorities. High inflation, negative foreign reserves, a rapidly weakening exchange rate and an economy that was essentially ex-growth was the legacy. All this has changed in a way that should certainly qualify the economic management team for a global best-in-class award.
Impressive progress has also been made in extending basic services such as water, electricity, schooling and healthcare to millions previously existing on the periphery of our society. About 11-million people receive a social grant of one form or another, making South Africa's social support system one of the most comprehensive among developing countries.
That said, problems of both poverty and inequality exist and demand the nation's urgent and effective attention. The challenge for the next decade must be to translate sustained high levels of economic growth into increasing levels of productive employment.
If we are to meet the Millennium Development Goals set for 2014, we need to add about five million jobs, as well as address the issue of the working poor. In the tough and unsentimental global markets in which South Africa's very open economy must compete, most of our industries need to up their game, both to win and retain export markets, and to compete effectively against foreign participants in our domestic markets.
With regard to social services the critical challenge we face is about quality. Most children are in school. But what is the quality of their learning? Most citizens do have access to healthcare. But how effective is that healthcare? Intense challenges must be addressed in all aspects of our criminal justice system if we are to reduce the very real level of fear in which most South Africans conduct their daily lives.
None of these challenges can be met by government alone, even a government with the best possible policies and effective implementation.
All these critical challenges require a partnership between government, other actors in civil society and, crucially, the constructive activity of citizens themselves. These partnerships in turn require both some measure of shared goals and significant levels of mutual trust. This alone will achieve the increased levels of prosperity that will make a better life for all South Africans a reality rather than a dream.South Africa is in the very early stages of constructing a nation out of our fragmented and often bitter past. Central to this is the creation of a national identity that unites the subsets of South Africans.
Here, too, important progress has already been made and a promising foundation laid. Our national anthem consists of four of our national languages, and two important pieces of our musical heritage. More and more South Africans are able to sing all four stanzas. Our flag has captured the emotional loyalty of the vast majority of our people.
We still have a way to go. Our history indicates clearly that a good future will be the result of both unity and cooperation between all the peoples of our country -- all who live here and who want to live here.
Perhaps we need to develop a "pledge of allegiance" similar to that recited by all American school children at the start of each school day. The preamble to our Constitution provides good words. We need to encourage all South Africans to live the language of inclusive patriotism: in this regard "African" cannot be a synonym for "black".
Language is a critical tool in building a national identity. English will continue to be the lingua franca for much of our daily lives. However, vital and resourceful parts of our culture will continue to use the currency of what we often refer to as "vernacular" languages, which clearly include Afrikaans. In this regard we need a national project to encourage South African citizens to become multilingual. South Africans have a campaign culture. Can we not create a movement that encourages all South Africans to learn, at least to the degree of some conversational ability, a second language? This will be a particular challenge to English-language mother-tongue speakers. Their efforts will be well rewarded by the quality of their social interaction and they will quite literally define the parameters of a shared national identity.
The story of South African politics so far is the contest between the obviously desirable goal of greater national unity and the seduction of mobilising political power around sectional appeals. The way in which the delegates at Polokwane choose between these competing forces will have consequences for all South Africans.
What will the ANC conference do about the state of our democracy?
Here it seems two distinct challenges exist. What will be the quality of the internal debate within ANC structures? And how does the ANC see its role in the broader society?
On the first two, divergent trends are apparent. Over the course of this year very serious attempts have been made to offer the ANC, and the nation that it serves, serious debate. Policy documents have been made public which address all of the issues above, and more. ANC members and formations have been invited to engage with the critical issues in a spirit of free and real debate.
The contrasting trend, however, has also been evident. This has subsumed debate in the quest for power. Here what individual ANC members believed about the issues has become secondary to who they will support in election races. This is an inevitable tension in any political movement. The way in which it is resolved, though, shapes not only who gets power, but how those empowered use power.
The ANC was created as a parliament of the African people of South Africa. Today it also serves as the largest party in the Parliament.
Our Constitution sets out to build democratic institutions that have legitimacy and life beyond that of individual political movements.
Every member of Parliament, from whatever party, is part of this construction project. Democratic institutions have little real life outside the political culture that creates (and sometimes destroys) them.
We urgently need a culture that seeks and respects the robust contestation of ideas. No individual and no organisation has a monopoly on truth. Those who shut down debate with crude appeals to party or sectional loyalty do our Constitution, and the spirit of 1994, no favours.
Equally, debate and discourse can only thrive in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Opposition parties need to acknowledge the electoral support enjoyed by the ANC. They also need to treat the offices of our government with respect. It is their patriotic duty so to do. The ANC in turn needs to accept the decision of voters to elect representatives from organisations other than themselves. They need to treat opposition parties as part of the national and democratic project, who can and will make a contribution to building a better future. The recent respectful and constructive meeting between the South African president and the leader of the opposition is an encouraging start.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)