Speaker 1: Seven, not Scene and current affairs. This is our current affairs,
Speaker 1: our right here on the Aubrey Masango show. My name
Speaker 1: is Komodo Moudis and i'm Infra brah OBEs today. Thank
Speaker 1: you so much for tuning in and thank you for
Speaker 1: your contributions. It is thirty nine minutes past nine pm
Speaker 1: and we are talking all things current affairs. Lots happened
Speaker 1: today and we just had this conversation with a freelance journalist,
Speaker 1: Quanity Hunter, on the developments with the DA at the
Speaker 1: weekend where we saw that press briefing that left me
Speaker 1: at least feeling a little underwhelmed. I don't know about you.
Speaker 1: I've been seeing some of your contributions, your WhatsApps right
Speaker 1: on the WhatsApp nine are really appreciated. Mabasa saying if
Speaker 1: the DA doesn't support budget for other ministers, who's going
Speaker 1: to support DA ministers in their own department budget? The
Speaker 1: DA is shooting itself in the foot. They're petty and
Speaker 1: throwing tantrums. And someone else said that, actually I think
Speaker 1: I saw it on X but someone asking was asking,
Speaker 1: if you're not going to vote for their budget, who's
Speaker 1: going to vote for your budget? I mean it's quite
Speaker 1: a you know, a threat to make. But again, is
Speaker 1: it an empty one? It sure sounds like it. I
Speaker 1: saw another comment a little earlier, someone saying someone alert
Speaker 1: much earlier, actually in the start of our conversation on
Speaker 1: the DA. I think it was Sepaul. Yes, he said
Speaker 1: Ramapasa took DA serious for the first time over the weekend.
Speaker 1: I did not believe till it was confirmed by his
Speaker 1: office that he was waiting for CNA's in's announcement. Both
Speaker 1: Ramaposa and DNA's need each other, while Paul and Zillah
Speaker 1: are questionable, and that's Sepul. Do you feel that the
Speaker 1: president is moved by what the DA has been saying.
Speaker 1: It certainly doesn't feel that way for me. You know,
Speaker 1: I found the article that I was speaking about in
Speaker 1: our interview with Quanita, where it's basically it's on e
Speaker 1: w N and it says withdrawal from National Dialogue likely
Speaker 1: to see DNAs in hot water. That's because as a
Speaker 1: as an organization, the DA could withdraw from the National
Speaker 1: Dialogue and it really wouldn't matter mean much. But if
Speaker 1: you're a minis Stern cabinet, that's very different, especially because
Speaker 1: siennais and is one of the ministers who have been
Speaker 1: appointed to head up the Interministerial Committee on the National Dialogue.
Speaker 1: And the President really is not having him sit this out,
Speaker 1: you know. So I'm not sure.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure the.
Speaker 1: President is bullied or really you know, scathed by what
Speaker 1: the DA has announced. And I think the ball is
Speaker 1: still in the DA's court, or maybe I should say
Speaker 1: Sienna is in court for now. All right, this is
Speaker 1: seven US and Current Affairs. All right, our second story
Speaker 1: in the Current Affairs feature this evening. Did you see
Speaker 1: the appearance of the four trans Net executives. For my executives,
Speaker 1: I should say Brian Maleffe have been one of them,
Speaker 1: as well as.
Speaker 2: Gama.
Speaker 1: Those names really having I don't want to say, become synonymous,
Speaker 1: you know, worth corruption matters. But we are seeing at
Speaker 1: least two corruption matters in different courts linked to Brian,
Speaker 1: Malifair and Gama, which really, you know is interesting. The
Speaker 1: ide pursuing them in a different court today in Palmbridge,
Speaker 1: and you know they appeared in court today. A from
Speaker 1: Eyewitness News was there and he joins us now Live Alpha,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for joining us this evening. Maybe
Speaker 1: talk us through this court appearance. What exactly were the
Speaker 1: former executives in court for today?
Speaker 2: Him? Yes, so former transmit executives appeared at the partage
Speaker 2: Magistran's quote and like you said, the facing broad corruptions
Speaker 2: and money laundering charges. Now these two are former CEOs
Speaker 2: or for my top executives a Transnitt and they currently
Speaker 2: member members of Parliament for the condoces A party. The
Speaker 2: other two Samsan Atli who was a top engineer Transnitt
Speaker 2: and a procurement officer at the part of Data when
Speaker 2: the aless corrupt activities happened. And there's also a notch
Speaker 2: thing who was the chief financial officer at trans Net
Speaker 2: at the time. So what's happening here is that between
Speaker 2: twenty fourteen and twenty fifteen is understood that a transaction
Speaker 2: advisory contract for about one thousand and sixty four U
Speaker 2: locomotives was awarded to a company called JP Morgan, and
Speaker 2: that very same contract was then reversed and reassigned to
Speaker 2: a company called Trillion Capital, which is a company that
Speaker 2: is linked to the Gupta controversial GUPA family. In just
Speaker 2: a few months later, Homoso about nineteen three million rand
Speaker 2: was moved from transmit acoust to that company that linked
Speaker 2: to the group the family, and seventy four million Len
Speaker 2: was then channels to some of the people who are
Speaker 2: linked to the Gupta brothers and the state is this
Speaker 2: is a direct violation of the Public Finance Management Act
Speaker 2: Money laun Drinks. They also say that the process of
Speaker 2: canceling the contract that was awarded to JP Morgan and
Speaker 2: reassigned to Chillian Capital, that process was flawed and several
Speaker 2: rules of flouted as well, which showed that there was
Speaker 2: some corrupt activities that happened here. So these for men
Speaker 2: appeared at the partments magistrates quote today and I understood
Speaker 2: that the CFO the former CFO are noting and was
Speaker 2: directly responsible for proving those payments to the company that
Speaker 2: linked to the group the family, and that's how they
Speaker 2: are linked to the case. The primarily who was the
Speaker 2: group's CEO at the time, is accused of turning the
Speaker 2: blind eye to these things as though we're happy. It's
Speaker 2: also achieved of mis leading the board when he was
Speaker 2: asked a treaty to account about how the Guda family
Speaker 2: got to be reassigned to this contract. Who was not truthful,
Speaker 2: According to the state about how that happened. And you
Speaker 2: also have Tam Sangachiani, the propurement officer, who also allegedly
Speaker 2: worked with Brian Mulci to ensure that that contract is
Speaker 2: reassigned to the Guda family. So it's a very complex case.
Speaker 2: And like you said, so we are facing similar charges
Speaker 2: in a separate case that also has to do with
Speaker 2: locomotives I mean Brian Mullesi and I'm not saying game
Speaker 2: as well are going to stand trials from February in
Speaker 2: a separate case that is also linked to locomotives that transmits.
Speaker 2: So it's a very complex state capture case that we're
Speaker 2: seeing that we saw play out today at the Partment's
Speaker 2: Magistrate's court.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's important that you mentioned that it's it's a
Speaker 1: state capture case because we heard Branler for a little
Speaker 1: earlier on speaking to journalists on the sideline saying that
Speaker 1: he's really written to the former Chief Justice at Raymond Zondo,
Speaker 1: who was heading up that Commission of Inquiry, to challenge
Speaker 1: some of the findings there and he feels it's unfair
Speaker 1: that he's now being charged with this matter while his
Speaker 1: submissions are still before Zonder.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, I mean that's you know, that's not you.
Speaker 2: Several other people who are implicated in state capture have
Speaker 2: tried in some way to challenge the findings. I mean
Speaker 2: Gueram Dasha himself was another person who tried to challenge
Speaker 2: the findings of the Zondo Commission of the Yeah, the
Speaker 2: Zlo Commission rather and Brian Malisia as well, saying that
Speaker 2: he's not happy with those findings and it's not a
Speaker 2: true representation of who he is and his tenure that
Speaker 2: transmit and I take it back to that Zondo Commission report.
Speaker 2: It found that Brian Moleskama and are not Sing should
Speaker 2: be prosecuted, should be investigated for allegedly channeling about ninety
Speaker 2: three million ran to come companies that are linked to
Speaker 2: the controversial with the family slouting processes as well in
Speaker 2: awarding them that contract. So the Zonder Commission did make
Speaker 2: those recommendations. The under Commission as well investigated them at
Speaker 2: links handed over the case to the Ideas which also
Speaker 2: made their own investigations. So he did say that he's
Speaker 2: not happy with the fact that he's facing two separate
Speaker 2: cases and he might, you know, end up facing two
Speaker 2: separate trials. That are linked to locomotives as well. So
Speaker 2: it's nothing new. We've heard it quite a number of times,
Speaker 2: people trying to challenge the findings of the report of
Speaker 2: the Commission of Inquiry int allegations of state capture. I mean.
Speaker 1: Also, you know, something that stood out for me during
Speaker 1: today's court appearance and bail application is just how the
Speaker 1: financial affairs of these accused were just laid bare. You know,
Speaker 1: we heard about school fees that Brian Fair has to
Speaker 1: pay for and their budgets essentially what came out of that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that was a very interesting part during
Speaker 2: today's court proceedings. It was their first appearance, by the way,
Speaker 2: so during the form of bail application because they were
Speaker 2: facing Schedule five senses they had to formally apply for
Speaker 2: bail and their lawyers were reading out their bail applications
Speaker 2: and their affidavits in court today and then that there
Speaker 2: were a number of details to me that were quite interesting.
Speaker 2: So for context, the state had requested the court to
Speaker 2: release them on bail off two hundred thousand rands, but
Speaker 2: Brian Mulasi and the other court acqus for telling the
Speaker 2: court that they cannot afford you know, two hundred thousand
Speaker 2: rands for bail, and Brian Mulissi himself asked the court
Speaker 2: to release them on twenty thousand and bail. He was
Speaker 2: essentially given fifty thousand bail, but in making the point
Speaker 2: that he can't afford two hundred thousand land for bail,
Speaker 2: he told the quote that he earns about forty four
Speaker 2: thousand ran a month. He takes home forty four thousand
Speaker 2: rans a month as a member of Parliament for the
Speaker 2: Kondo Sea Party and broke down quite extensively where each
Speaker 2: and every single pay from that forty four thousand goes.
Speaker 2: Seventeen thousand rand goes to the school fees that he's
Speaker 2: paying for his children, spending three thousand rands for Grosi
Speaker 2: three thousand and for additional grozie at another property, he says,
Speaker 2: a farm that he owned. So there are a number
Speaker 2: of places where his money is going at the end
Speaker 2: of the month, and that includes a majority of it
Speaker 2: is going to his family, and he says he could
Speaker 2: not afford two hundred thousand rands because of that. He
Speaker 2: has other responsibilities and he can't just neglect his family
Speaker 2: just to try and get money for bail. The state,
Speaker 2: the judge ended up giving them a sixty thousand event bail,
Speaker 2: but he was initially requesting twenty thousand bail, which he
Speaker 2: said that it's what he a fought. So we heard
Speaker 2: today about their financial matters, how much they earned as
Speaker 2: members of parliament as well. So I think it was
Speaker 2: quite of an interesting revelation in court.
Speaker 1: Yeah, especially because I mean when sib Gama was sitting
Speaker 1: next to he was the one who was okay with
Speaker 1: the two hundred thousand reds, was he not?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean you know it was. It was very interesting.
Speaker 2: So Sibonga Gama and Brian Mulifu was sitting next to
Speaker 2: each other in court in the dock. There were four
Speaker 2: accused and Siawonga Gama Brian mulif were in the middle
Speaker 2: and the two kept on sharing jokes throughout the court
Speaker 2: proceedings that they kept on consulting each other, talking to
Speaker 2: each other as court proceedings goals. I mean at some
Speaker 2: point or even frustrated at what the state prosecutors were
Speaker 2: submitting before the court, and when that part, the financial
Speaker 2: aspect of it came out, I could see them becoming
Speaker 2: more tense as a Gama told the court that he
Speaker 2: finally paying two hundred thousand men, you know, for bail.
Speaker 2: I could see. I mean I remember Prime really shaking
Speaker 2: his head and telling his lawyers that I'm not okay
Speaker 2: with that. And then that's when we hit the lawyer
Speaker 2: saying that they want twenty thousand and bail. So there's
Speaker 2: a massive difference between that two hundred thousand percent that
Speaker 2: the Overcama was willing to accept. I mean, he ended
Speaker 2: up paying one hundred and fifty thousand less than what
Speaker 2: he said he could afford. So you could tell just
Speaker 2: judging from the as frustrations their body language, who is
Speaker 2: okay with what and who isn't okay with what?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Yeah, And maybe just finding the demeanor. You know,
Speaker 1: it's always interesting for me to look at the demeanor
Speaker 1: of the accused, but also just you know, the sense
Speaker 1: that you were getting in the courtroom. Was the state prepared,
Speaker 1: you know? And and how are you accused?
Speaker 2: In the dock? The state seemed very much prepared to me.
Speaker 2: The prosecutor that is dealing with this case, there's the
Speaker 2: same prosecutor that dealing with the other corruption and sword
Speaker 2: case that Brian Mulisi are not saying and facing. So
Speaker 2: he extensively researched. He knows his word. He's dealing with
Speaker 2: the cases. You know, he's been dealing with it for years,
Speaker 2: so he knows what he's talking about. And we could
Speaker 2: tell and at some point, I mean apposted these views
Speaker 2: on Twitter Brime Mulifi and was so frustrated with what
Speaker 2: he were saying that they were even shaking their head.
Speaker 2: And the group is back in quote on the sixth
Speaker 2: of October, and the defense made a submachine quote that
Speaker 2: by the next appearance, the state needs to be ready
Speaker 2: in terms of further particulars need to be the doctor
Speaker 2: needs to be handed over to the defense. And the
Speaker 2: we heard the state saying that they can't be you know,
Speaker 2: given orders by the defense, and that's really angered Brian
Speaker 2: muli It angered as well, even shaking their heads standing
Speaker 2: up in court. It was quite of a dramatic day,
Speaker 2: I might say. As far as the two other accused,
Speaker 2: the concerned, I'm not just saying and Tam san KIAI
Speaker 2: pretty much quiet to out the whole proceedings, did not
Speaker 2: try to object, say anything, not even you know, calling
Speaker 2: their lawyers to consult with them or to reject something.
Speaker 2: So the other two pretty much were accepting whatever was
Speaker 2: happening in court, but Brian Mulifi and Kama were visibly frustrated,
Speaker 2: shaking their head a number of times. I mean, in
Speaker 2: the videos you can see Brian Mulich is sitting down,
Speaker 2: putting his hands on his head. At some point, I'm
Speaker 2: just telling his lawyers that he can't accept it, you know.
Speaker 2: So it was it was interesting to see them. A
Speaker 2: person like Brian Mulish has been in caught a number
Speaker 2: of times before. It's interesting to see him in the stake.
Speaker 1: Yeah, awful. It looked very interesting and it looked very
Speaker 1: dramatic from where I was. Alframshana is a e W
Speaker 1: AND reporter who