Tshiamo Sedumedi, a director at the law firm MNS, gave evidence before the Zondo Commission of Inquiry into State Capture in Parktown, Johannesburg. Picture: Karen Sandison/African News Agency(ANA)

Johannesburg - The Zondo commission will continue to hear from witnesses in relation to irregularities connected to tender contracts awarded by state-owned entity Transnet. 

On Tuesday the commission heard from Tshiamo Sedumedi, a director at MNS Attorneys, who detailed his law firm’s investigations into Transnet awarding of contract related to the procurement of locomotives. 

Sedumedi is expected to continue with his evidence this morning and will be followed by actuarial scientist Allister Chabi. 

Sedumedi explained that their investigation primarily focused on the tender to procure 1064 locomotives. The investigation then expanded to include the procurement of 95 and 100 locomotives. 

He said the investigation also expanded to include the Transnet Durban relocation project. These tenders have previously been mentioned at the inquiry by various witnesses. Sedumedi’s job was to fill in the gaps in relation to tenders and what MNS found during its investigations. 

Sedumedi focused first on Transnet procurement of 100 locomotives. The SOE had issued a tender in 2011 and called for bidders. MNS found that from the very beginning Chinese railway manufacturer China South Rail (CSR) received preferential treatment. He demonstrated this finding by explaining a series of emails between former Transnet group chief executive Brian Molefe and a representative from China South Rail. 


The email appeared to be thanking Molefe for a previous meeting, but it also asked to him organize that CSR is able to access Transnet facilities, that they create a working relationship and for Molefe to organize a local partnership for CSR. Sedumedi said this provides strength to the argument that Transnet favoured CSR. He said it also showed that Molefe played along with CSR and did not push back on these requests. 

“There were two persons that were responsible for the tender processes and questions had to be directed to. CSR seems to have had a direct line to GCE (Molefe). The GCE (Molefe) in his response doesn’t say sorry we are in procurement and please refer your queries to the people responsible for the RFP. Molefe responded that he will send the requests to Siyabonga Gama.”

“This confirms the view that CSR seemed to have benefited from this relationship. It creates the impression that CSR was favoured over other bidders. In the bidding space, fairness is key, you cannot as an organization be seen to be favouring a particular entity,” said Sedumedi. 

The inquiry resumes at 9 am.