Speaker 1: Right, Let's turn to one of today's biggest stories. For
Speaker 1: former senior Transnent executives Brian Morlife, Siabonga Gama, ANOJ Singh
Speaker 1: and Tamsanka Jiane have been arrested for allegedly moving ninety
Speaker 1: three million Rand through a company called Trillion Capital. All
Speaker 1: of this in the context of a locomotive purchase process
Speaker 1: that saw a massive contract to buy one thousand and
Speaker 1: sixty four new locomotives. One aspect of this case, by
Speaker 1: the way, is also the subjects of another matter that
Speaker 1: was underwey in the Johannesburg High Court where I think
Speaker 1: nine people are standing in the dock for that. It's
Speaker 1: hard to keep track of all of this. It's hard
Speaker 1: as well to look at this in the context of
Speaker 1: the larger issue of trying to find some kind of
Speaker 1: reckoning for the country in terms of justice for everything
Speaker 1: that happened in the state capture era. There are of
Speaker 1: course people who say the state capture era never really ended,
Speaker 1: it's just morphed, but that perhaps is something we can
Speaker 1: discuss at another stage. Let's look at this particular case
Speaker 1: and a transnet in particular as well. Michael Marchant is
Speaker 1: head of investigations at the organization Open Secrets and joins
Speaker 1: us now on seven h two drive. Mister Martin, and
Speaker 1: welcome and thanks very much for your time. If we
Speaker 1: were to locate things that went on a Transnet and
Speaker 1: how they were scrutinized at the zond Or Commission, my
Speaker 1: recollection is that Justice Raymond Zondor said that Transnet was
Speaker 1: a key nexus, a key hub for the corruption of
Speaker 1: that particular period of South African history. Why do you
Speaker 1: think this court case is so important?
Speaker 2: Afternoon, John, and afternoon to those that are listening. I
Speaker 2: think that you've kind of hit the nail on the
Speaker 2: head already, which is that the transmit cases are so
Speaker 2: important in terms of tackling state capture for I think
Speaker 2: two reasons. The one is that from a monetary perspective,
Speaker 2: Transnet was the central site of capture. So we're talking
Speaker 2: about just over forty billion Rand in terms of the
Speaker 2: value of the contracts and certainly the amount that was
Speaker 2: extracted kind of through the Gupta enterprise. Again, we're talking
Speaker 2: about seventy five eighty percent of all of the money flows.
Speaker 2: It's about what happened to Transnet and as you said,
Speaker 2: what the Zonder Commission kind of concluded is that what
Speaker 2: was happening at Transnet was the kind of emblematic example
Speaker 2: of how systemic capture was. So it was about the
Speaker 2: appointment of people like Molefe, Singh and Gama, two positions
Speaker 2: where they could manipulate procurement processes. And then it was
Speaker 2: also about how that money was then used and how
Speaker 2: it was laundered, and how it was then repurposed for
Speaker 2: other kind of activities within the so called Gupta enterprise.
Speaker 2: So I think kind of for those two reasons, these
Speaker 2: cases and the arrest of individuals that we shouldn't forget
Speaker 2: the Zonder Commission called kind of key architects of state capture.
Speaker 2: They become so important. Yeah.
Speaker 1: So, I mean, if we go back to the very
Speaker 1: basic deal that was being done, the locomotive procurement cost
Speaker 1: was initially I think thirty eight billion Rand. It eventually
Speaker 1: spiked up to fifty billion Rand. As I understand it,
Speaker 1: this case is not looking at that price increase. It's
Speaker 1: looking at advisory fees that were paid around this. I
Speaker 1: don't know why advisory fees needed to be paid in
Speaker 1: the first place, but by all accounts they were huge.
Speaker 2: They were and I think maybe just to say John,
Speaker 2: that I've also been trying to piece together this afternoon
Speaker 2: exactly what this case is about. Yes, and from the
Speaker 2: different reporting that I've seen, it does appear that it
Speaker 2: may be related to two different transactions. The one is
Speaker 2: the very early on transaction to purchase ninety five locomotives
Speaker 2: from China South Rail, and the allegation there is that
Speaker 2: Singh and others violated human practices and kind of unlawfully
Speaker 2: elevated the payments without border approval. And then separately, as
Speaker 2: you've said, it's the transaction advisory fees linked to the
Speaker 2: ten sixty four deal. Now, those transaction advisory fees are
Speaker 2: really important again for two reasons. The one is that,
Speaker 2: as you've said, the payment was very high, was around
Speaker 2: about ninety three million Rand. The allegation of the Zonder
Speaker 2: Commission is that that was for essentially consulting that never
Speaker 2: took place, and so it was an unlawful payment to
Speaker 2: Trillion simply to get the money into the GUPTA system
Speaker 2: in order to be laundered. A second part of that
Speaker 2: which is so important, and if that is what this
Speaker 2: case is about, it it really goes centrally to the
Speaker 2: allegation of racketeering against the Guptas is at that money,
Speaker 2: a lot of it from Trillion was paid to another
Speaker 2: company linked to the goods of the company called Alba Times,
Speaker 2: and ultimately through that process it was used in the
Speaker 2: now famous procurement at scom Or of Optimum Coal mine
Speaker 2: by together. So those who really know their state capture
Speaker 2: and are able to p see things together. It's about
Speaker 2: how those advisory fees from one site of state capture
Speaker 2: were laundered essentially into another part to allow for that purchase.
Speaker 2: And so again you know, some of these cases already
Speaker 2: before the courts, as you've mentioned, but this seems to
Speaker 2: go centrally to some of these allegations of the systemic
Speaker 2: nature of capture.
Speaker 1: Tell us a little bit about Trillion, because the name
Speaker 1: comes up, and the name comes up rather regularly. Who
Speaker 1: were they and what role did they play in this?
Speaker 1: And to the best of my knowledge, nobody from Trillion
Speaker 1: has ever been charged with anything. And unlike firms like McKinsey,
Speaker 1: perhaps was they had an international reputation such as it
Speaker 1: was to protect they went and made compensation and gave
Speaker 1: money back. But I'm not aware of Trillion ever being
Speaker 1: held to account. Please put me right if I'm wrong.
Speaker 1: But who are they and why do they matter?
Speaker 2: So Trillian was a company that emerged out of Regiments,
Speaker 2: which is another company I think people have heard about
Speaker 2: in relation to state capture. But it and some of
Speaker 2: its directors have actually been the site of or have
Speaker 2: been the subject of criminal investigations and charges. And so
Speaker 2: the really important thing I think to remember in this
Speaker 2: case that we are, of course, you know, making a
Speaker 2: big deal of the fact that Molefes Singh and others
Speaker 2: have been arrested, but of course they have already been
Speaker 2: arrested in face ongoing criminal charges in relation to Transmit
Speaker 2: in relation to their twenty twenty to sharing. Now, part
Speaker 2: of that twenty twenty two case also relates to the
Speaker 2: arrest and charge of Eric Wood, who was a long
Speaker 2: running director of Trillion, And the allegations are are twofold
Speaker 2: against Trillion. The one is that they were used to
Speaker 2: provide allegedly advice to Transnet and especially the trans Net
Speaker 2: pension fund that allowed money to be extracted from that.
Speaker 2: So that's the one allegation. But of course, as I've
Speaker 2: discussed already, the second allegation is that Trillion was paid
Speaker 2: inflated advisory fees from entities like Transnet and they would
Speaker 2: immediately make those payments on to other entities within the
Speaker 2: good to enterprise that would allow the funds to be laundered.
Speaker 2: What I would say to those listening who are interested
Speaker 2: in going back and really understanding the money flows part
Speaker 2: of the story. Paul Holden some might remember from giving testimony,
Speaker 2: was under commit really provided extraordinary detail, forensic detail about
Speaker 2: the money flows and how entities advisory firms like Trillion
Speaker 2: and Trillion Financial Advisory were involved.
Speaker 1: So when a case like this comes to court, Michael
Speaker 1: March and I think there may have been a time
Speaker 1: when people would have said, Okay, great. The zond Or
Speaker 1: Commission's work is manifesting itself in the criminal justice system,
Speaker 1: clicking or maybe creaking into action, but taking action. Nonetheless,
Speaker 1: the record that said on state capture cases in general
Speaker 1: or in particular, and forensic and white collar crime cases
Speaker 1: in particular is not particularly distinguished. And yet at something
Speaker 1: like the zond Or Commission, and I get that the
Speaker 1: burden of proof at a commission is very, very different
Speaker 1: to a court case. Nevertheless, the detail set down is
Speaker 1: so exhaustive in this plus in the investigations by groups
Speaker 1: like yourselves and I'm a bungane and yet and yet
Speaker 1: when it comes to court, it doesn't seem to stick.
Speaker 1: What's your take on that.
Speaker 2: Well, I think that John, the answer to that is
Speaker 2: that unfortunately most of these things have not yet been
Speaker 2: fully tested through the rights and the reason for that.
Speaker 2: I think the reason for the delays are multiple. The
Speaker 2: one is there's certainly there are allegations that the MPa
Speaker 2: has been very quick to arrest and much slower to
Speaker 2: move from arrest to the actual prosecution. So as I
Speaker 2: mentioned the very high profile arrests in twenty twenty two
Speaker 2: in relation to Transnet, there's still not been a court
Speaker 2: date with regards to that, and so what we've seen
Speaker 2: is we've seen lots and lots and lots of cases
Speaker 2: being enrolled but not moving forward. And of course the
Speaker 2: MPa would also say that sometimes that's because the accused
Speaker 2: try and slow down the process, and we know that
Speaker 2: our courts are very full. So there's a whole range
Speaker 2: of reasons for the delays in terms of the evidence.
Speaker 2: I think your point is so important is that the
Speaker 2: other thing that hasn't yet happened is there hasn't been
Speaker 2: a full test of the MPA's ability to enter the
Speaker 2: so called Gupta leaks as forensic evidence. So for those
Speaker 2: who've been involved in the investigations and looked at that detail,
Speaker 2: we certainly know that the amount of forensic evidence is
Speaker 2: absolutely overwhelming. But of course the NPA has to go
Speaker 2: through the proper legal process to get that admitted, and
Speaker 2: there hasn't been a case yet where that has happened.
Speaker 2: Now for Transnett's a good example. If you want to
Speaker 2: prove the money laundering and the racketeering charges, you're going
Speaker 2: to have to rely on that primary evidence. And our
Speaker 2: hope is still that a case like this and that case,
Speaker 2: like the previously enrolled trans Net case, they will be
Speaker 2: really the defining cases because if the MPa can make
Speaker 2: it stick on this, it will go a long way
Speaker 2: to a legal precedent on the fact that this was
Speaker 2: a systemic kind of enterprise of state cap to rather
Speaker 2: than kind of individualized cases of corruption.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much, Michael Marchant, head of investigations at
Speaker 1: Open Secrets. Long long way to go. It started today
Speaker 1: in the palm Ridge Magistrates called twenty seven minutes past five,