Mpati Commission clears Iqbal Survé, Dan Matjila of wrongdoing – sources
CAPE TOWN/JOHANNESBURG – The Commission of Inquiry into allegations of impropriety at the Public Investment Corporation (PIC) has submitted a final report to President Cyril Ramaphosa which reportedly clears both Sekunjalo Investment Holdings chairperson Dr Iqbal Survé and former PIC chief executive Dr Dan Matjila of any wrongdoing.
Speaking to Independent Media on Tuesday, Advocate Phuti Setati, who has been dealing with media relations for the commission, confirmed that the process had been concluded but refused to be drawn into speculation on the key findings.
“The president established the commission of inquiry. We were mandated to investigate and develop the report. Only the President is in a position to talk about the details of the report,” Setati said.
However, a current affairs digital platform reported on Tuesday that the commission had cleared Survé and Matjila.
Africa News 24-7 said it had exclusive information indicating that the commission, which was headed by Judge Lex Mpati, “has cleared its former chief executive officer Dan Matjila and businessman Iqbal Survé, into whose technology firm AYO the state-run asset manager invested R4.3 billion”.
Among the allegations before the commission was that that Matjila had pressured junior staff to rush the AYO transaction without proper due diligence because of an alleged close relationship between him and Survé.
Instead, the report has allegedly found that the PIC's own governance processes were flawed and recommended that these be looked into.
Matjila, who in his testimony defended the PIC’s investment into AYO, was reportedly found to have been a credible witness.
In his testimony before the commission, Matjila said the PIC’s R4.3bn investment in Ayo was intact and earning interest at a bank.
“I don’t think the PIC has lost money,” he told the commission.
The report, which was originally meant to be completed by February this year, was finally handed to President Ramaphosa on December 16 after the deadline had been extended three times because of the scope of the inquiry and the amount of witnesses who testified at its public hearings.
In March, a North Gauteng High ruling set aside a compliance notice against the PIC by the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission to recover R4.3bn from AYO.
However, the PIC served AYO with a summons demanding it pay back the R4.3bn investment, citing misrepresentation.
AYO, in turn, announced its intention to sue the PIC and other entities for damages.