There is much heat and smoke blown at and around Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan at the moment. To establish the truth, the agendas behind those claims must be examined carefully to determine what motivation lay behind them. At the same time, it should not be forgotten that the future of the Zondo Commission of Inquiry into State Capture may hang in the balance here. If Gordhan leaves office, the Commission itself may fail as a result. That in turn could mean the ANC itself loses the best chance it currently has of dealing with the Zuma era’s State Capture.

On Sunday morning Gordhan’s ministry made public a letter sent by his lawyers to Mkhwebane. The letter takes serious issue with some of Mkhwebane’s public comments around the complaint laid against him. The complaint was lodged in November 2016, and stems from the early pension pay-out given to then Deputy SARS Commissioner Ivan Pillay which Gordhan oversaw. What is, of course, important is that this is precisely the same matter which the National Prosecuting Authority under Advocate Shaun Abrahams tried to prosecute Gordhan for in 2016, but then withdrew, because it did not meet the requirements for a successful prosecution. In other words, there was no criminal case.

Mkhwebane then issued a subpoena for Gordhan to appear before her to answer to this complaint this Wednesday. Coincidentally, supposedly, he is due to give his own testimony to the Zondo Commission on Thursday. Considering Mkhwebane’s past history, her links with the State Security Agency, her conduct in the ABSA/Bankcorp case (where her findings were overturned after she herself abandoned them in court), this has given rise to suspicions that she is playing a political role here. On Thursday morning her spokesperson Oupa Segalwe gave a robust defense of her conduct to SAfm, denying there was anything suspicious regarding the timing. Later in the day, her office tweeted that they had tried to make contact with Gordhan no fewer than four times before issuing the subpoena.

Did you know that PP @AdvBMkhwebane wrote to Minister Gordhan 4 times between February 2018 and July 2018, requesting a response to the allegations leveled against him. When the responses were not forthcoming, she issued a subpoena on 02 October 2018? #LetsGetOurFactsRight https://t.co/mAowTwIyeb

— Public Protector SA (@PublicProtector) November 9, 2018

That is now disputed by Gordhan’s lawyers, who say that in fact there were only two communications from her office, and that the claim of four communications is “simply deceptive, false and incorrect”.

Interestingly, Segalwe did not refer to those four claimed attempts at communication during his earlier interview. While it is entirely possible that he was not aware of them, or did not think it appropriate to mention them, his failure to do so may be used by Gordhan to bolster his claim.

At the same time, the Economic Freedom Fighters are once again gunning for Gordhan. They say that in his submissions to the Zondo Commission he confirms meeting with a member of the Gupta family while he had previously denied such a meeting. The history is slightly convoluted, but it appears on the face of it that this will be a difficult claim for the EFF to sustain. First, Gordhan appears to have already suggested in another parliamentary question that he had met the Guptas in certain instances (where he arrived at meetings to find them already there, there is no publicly available evidence suggesting that he ever arranged a meeting with them or discussed anything of substance with them). The party has now sent a list of questions to Gordhan.

Second, the EFF may battle to prove that a meeting is necessarily evidence of ill-intent. It appears that they are hoping to repeat the success they have tried to claim with former finance minister Nhlanhla Nene. He resigned, ostensibly after telling the Zondo Commission he had met with the Guptas several times, after previously denying in a television interview that he had met them. However, it is possible that while that is the publicly stated reason for his resignation, there were other factors at play. These may include a report that his son, Siyabonga Nene, received Public Investment Corporation funding for a project in Mozambique while Nhlanhla Nene was the chair of the PIC through his position as then deputy finance minister.

However, it is important here to examine what may be motivating the EFF.

While the party publicly states that it is all about fighting corruption, it may be guilty of demanding higher standards from others than it does from itself. It has said that ministers who lie must be removed. But its own deputy leader, Floyd Shivambu, has lied to a court about a paternity case, and once told a court in formal proceedings that he was formally apologising for calling a journalist a “white bitch”, only to leave the courtroom and then publicly proclaim that he did not mean the apology.

At the same time, the party’s leader, Julius Malema, has yet to publicly explain how it came to be that he ended up with a tax bill of R18-million by 2014. His only publicly stated income at the time was from his monthly salary as the leader of the ANC Youth League, which was stated at R20,000 a month. Any attempt to request information about how his income led to this tax bill is met with the charge that the questioner is attempting to “police black wealth”. Gordhan, through his various previous roles at SARS and as finance minister, is likely to be well aware of the real source of this money. He may also know all of the financial details of the case, which may make him dangerous to Malema.

It is important to note that at the same time, it was reported that Malema had received this money through what appeared to be his political management of government tenders in Limpopo. Malema was then charged by the NPA with corruption. Those charges were dropped after it was reported to the court that his co-accused was ill, who now appears very much alive and well. The NPA has failed to reinstate those charges. This appears, on the face of it at least, inexplicable. AfriForum has threatened a private prosecution on these charges. The NPA then said it would make a formal decision by August, but there is no public record of a decision to prosecute Malema.

At the same time, the EFF also appears to be under pressure over the VBS scandal. It is now known that Shivambu’s brother, Brian Shivambu, received R16-million from VBS, while it was being looted. While Brian Shivambu says that this was for services rendered to the group which owns (or owned) VBS, his attorney has been unable to explain what services those were.

Meanwhile, Malema and Gordhan have a long and difficult history. These tensions go back at least as far as 2011. It was then that Cabinet decided to take most of the departments in the Limpopo province under administration. This was sparked by a request from Limpopo’s treasury for more funds from the finance ministry, to help it pay salaries. This, in turn, led to the finance minister investigating the province’s finances and establishing that the provincial government was broke. The minister of finance at the time was, of course, Gordhan.

At the same time, the EFF may also have other agendas.

One of the biggest threats to the party may well be a strong interrogatory media. It is striking that the EFF has launched personal attacks on journalists over their reporting of these issues.

It also coincides with a volley of personal attacks against these journalists on Twitter. These tend to refer to the race and identity of the journalist concerned and occasionally lack coherence. Meanwhile, Twitter itself has launched one of its periodic attempts to remove fake Twitter accounts. Western Cape Premier Helen Zille said over the weekend that almost 7,000 accounts were removed from her list of followers alone. This may lead to suspicions about the EFF and the use of Twitter as a weapon. It is also possible that this is the work of third-party actors, people or countries who simply benefit from chaos and disruption in South African politics generally.

The EFF also, last week, lodged defamation proceedings against the political analyst Prince Mashele. The party claims that he must either publicly apologise, or pay them R500,000. The cause of their action is that in television interviews Mashele said the party was only formed to pursue corrupt activity. This may be the first time in democratic South Africa that a political analyst has been sued for expressing what appears to be an honestly held view of a political party. This action would appear to strengthen the claim that the EFF may have something to fear from political analysts and journalists who speak their mind about the party.

However, in the end, the EFF’s biggest problem may well be an ANC that is united and able to reform itself. In the quest to gain votes and the support of voters, the EFF would benefit from a divided and fractured ANC, which has not been able to show that it is reforming itself. At the moment, perhaps the strongest forum it has to do that is actually the Zondo Commission, which allows people to testify in public and under oath. This, in turn, leads to consequences which may see those implicated in State Capture eventually leaving their positions. This would then strengthen President Cyril Ramaphosa, and ultimately the public image of the ANC.

However, the Commission is itself vulnerable. Nene testified, and then resigned, ostensibly as a result of that testimony. If another serving Cabinet minister were to follow his example, that may have a chilling effect on others planning to testify. This would mean the Commission would be unable to make much progress. That could then rob the ANC (or those in it who want the Commission to continue) of what could be a chance at reform. This, in turn, could lead to Ramaphosa standing firm in the face of those who call for Gordhan to leave office. (Although, curiously, there has been no public gesture of support for Gordhan from Ramaphosa.)

With all of that said, it is also important to remember that if Gordhan is guilty of wrongdoing, he should be held accountable. But it is surely also the case that anyone making those claims needs to bring proper evidence, not just public suggestions, as Shivambu has, that he’s planning to “retire” to Canada.

What is clear, for the moment, is that there are still important and difficult battles under way in our politics. These are difficult for those involved, and perhaps, for many bystanders. There is just so much at stake. DM