Gordhan on the back foot

Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan leaves the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria. Picture: Thobile Mathonsi

Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan leaves the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria. Picture: Thobile Mathonsi

Published Mar 29, 2017

Share

Pretoria – Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan was in a bad space on Tuesday; he was first summoned to Luthuli House shortly after he arrived from London, before Pretoria High Court Judge President Dunstan Mlambo struck another blow later in the day.

Gordhan has approached the court, seeking a declaratory judgment endorsing that he cannot intervene in the dispute between Gupta-owned Oakbay Investments and South Africa’s major banks.

Judge Mlambo ordered that references made in his papers to 72 suspicious transactions involving the Gupta family and their companies be struck from his court papers. This means the Gordhan camp cannot use the certificate issued by the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC) in advancing their main application.

It in turn meant that the sting is out of his application, legal experts said, as the certificate highlighted the various flagged transactions made by the Gupta family and companies associated with them.

A tense-looking Gordhan made a quick turn at the high court to listen to a few minutes of argument advanced on his behalf by his senior counsel, advocate Jeremy Gauntlett.

Gordhan, with his deputy Mcebisi Jonas by his side, confirmed he was still minister of finance despite rumours that he had got the boot. “You should not believe rumours. Rumours are rumours,” Gordhan told a group of reporters.

Making his way out of court, he did not want to answer questions as to why he was called back by President Jacob Zuma from London, where he was meeting with investors.

“I have not been told yet, ask the Presidency,” he responded to questions.

Gordhan confirmed he was earlier in the day called to Luthuli House, but refused to divulge what was discussed. “I was there to have discussions and we had discussions,” he said. Gordhan said that if there was anything official to say, it would be said.

Also read: 'Gordhan, Jonas are definitely out'

Gauntlett was grilled by the full bench of three judges as to why he had included the FIC certificate in his application as it had nothing to do with the order he wanted the court to grant.

Counsel for Oakbay Investments, Cedric Puckrin SC, at the start of the proceedings asked that references to the report be removed. He said it had nothing to do with the main application.

Gordhan asked the FIC to investigate the Gupta-related accounts several months after he launched his application for a declaratory order that he could not interfere with the decision of the country’s four major banks not to do business with the Guptas and their companies.

But Gauntlett said the FIC investigations showed the magnitude of the matter. He said it was the minister’s duty to bring this to the attention of the court.

Judge Mlambo, however, said Oakbay’s application to have the portions “struck out” held merit.

However, Gordhan also scored a point when the court ordered that certain portions in Oakbay’s affidavit, suggesting a “political conspiracy theory” by Gordhan, had to be struck out. Gauntlett argued that this accusation was vexatious.

A preliminary point taken by Gupta-owned company Sahara that Gordhan had to use his own private lawyers in bringing this application and not make use of the state attorney’s office was also turned down by the court.

Zuma withdrew his application to enter the fray as an interested party to the proceedings.

Judge Mlambo, after ruling on the interlocutory applications, urged the parties to try to settle the matter. He also called counsel into chambers.

The matter was delayed for about an hour while the parties huddled together in court, seemingly to try to find common ground.

Gauntlett, when the proceedings resumed, told the judges that there was unfortunately no settlement on the table.

He concluded his arguments on behalf of Gordhan in less than an hour. Gauntlett said while it was conceded by the respondents that the minister could not interfere with the decision of the country’s four major banks not to do business with the Gupta family, it was still necessary for the court to issue a declaratory order in this regard.

“No harm can come of this. Only good if affirmation is given by this court,” Gauntlett said. He said such an order would then be binding on certain parties.

He said the case concerned the legal question whether the minister or any member of the executive was authorised or obliged to intervene in banker-client relationships if bank accounts are closed.

Judge Mlambo remarked that all the parties agreed that the minister was not obliged to interfere.

The banks were expected to present their cases on Wednesday.

Pretoria News

Related Topics: