File image: IOL.

CAPE TOWN - Global consultancy firm McKinsey allegedly admitted that it found violations of its professional standards but denied any acts of bribery, corruption, and payments to Trillian. 

In a statement on Tuesday, McKinsey said it has never made payments directly or indirectly to secure contracts. 

The firm further denied assisting other companies in doing so and dismissed claims that it had introduced Eskom to Trillian, according to reports. 

McKinsey's global chief risk officer, Tom Barkin said that McKinsey rejected the conception that it was involved in any acts of bribery or corruption related to its work at Eskom. 

Barkins further dismissed allegations of corruption and bribery through its interaction with Regiments or Trillian. 

"But we were not careful enough about who we associated with, did not understand fully the agendas at play, and should not have worked alongside Trillian, even for a few months, before completing our due diligence", said Barkins. 

McKinsey announced last week that it would pay back in full a R1 billion fee if a court determined that Eskom had acted unlawfully. 

This follows Eskom's earlier announcement that it would seek assistance from McKinsey and Trillian in returning R1 billion and R564 million respectively. 

The money is believed to have been "unlawfully paid out in 2016 and 2017". 

Vikas Sagar was the partner who drafted the 9 February 2016 letter that authorised Eskom to pay Trillian directly for services rendered. He has subsequently left McKinsey.

McKinsey said Sagar's letter firstly did not provide authorisation for Eskom to pay Trillian. Secondly, the alleged conditions that were set out in the letter, unfortunately, had not meet met.

McKinsey further admitted that it should have worked alongside Trillian in 2015 before it had completed its due diligence. 

"We deplore corruption and we will cooperate fully with relevant authorities and any official inquiries and investigations into these matters", said McKinsey & Company's global managing partner, Dominic Barton. 

"We acknowledge that there are more than just legal issues at stake and that many have raised – sometimes with significant emotion – concerns about our broader practices in, and commitment to, South Africa. We assure you that we hear you". 

In addition, McKinsey on October 11 defended the work it did for Eskom. 

The global firm still believes it did nothing wrong, citing that Eskom was solely responsible for getting the approvals or consent in terms of the Public Finance Management Act. 

"We were advised by Eskom on 5 February 2016 that it received National Treasury approval and we have reviewed Eskom’s Steering Committee minutes from 9 February 2016 that confirm that fact. Eskom now contends the contract should be held invalid because Eskom did not, in fact, receive the necessary approvals. We want this issue resolved and we have no interest in benefiting from an allegedly invalid contract", said McKinsey. 

READ ALSO: McKinsey defends the work it did for Eskom