Delinquent for Life

Judge backs enforcement order that will see Dudu Myeni abandon her directorships, including that of the Jacob G Zuma Foundation

By Justin Brown 22 December 2020

Former SAA board chairperson Dudu Myeni. (Photo: Gallo Images / City Press / Muntu Vilakazi)

Myeni will have to abandon all of her directorships, including her role as chairperson of the Jacob G Zuma Foundation and her position as deputy chairperson of Free State electricity distribution company Centlec.

A high court judge today issued a ruling that dismissed former SAA chairperson Dudu Myeni’s appeal against the declaration the judge handed down on 27 May that made Myeni a delinquent director for life.

Read the declaration here.

Judge Ronel Tolmay wrote in her May ruling that Myeni was dishonest, grossly abused her power, was grossly negligent, reckless, and that her actions inflicted substantial harm on SAA. 

“She was a director gone rogue,” Tolmay wrote.

In today’s ruling, Tolmay also upheld the enforcement order brought by the Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (Outa) and the SAA Pilots’ Association (Saapa).

Myeni must abandon her directorships

As a result, Myeni will have to abandon all of her directorships, including her role as chairperson of the Jacob G Zuma Foundation and her position as deputy chairperson of Free State electricity distribution company Centlec.

“The order granted will be immediately enforceable, pending the finalisation of all appeal processes,” Tolmay added.

She agreed with Outa that the court would best serve the public interest by ordering swift and effective remedies when maladministration and mismanagement came to light.

Myeni questioned the judge’s imposition of a lifetime declaration of delinquency.

The court made its ruling because of all the evidence that came to light in the trial, Tolmay said.

“An appeal court will not lightly substitute its own decision with that of the lower court,” she added.

Myeni alleged bias on Tolmay’s behalf

Myeni alleged bias on Tolmay’s behalf as the judgment of 27 May was a “carbon copy” of Outa’s heads of argument.

“A perusal of the transcript and the judgment will put any fear of bias to bed,” Tolmay added.

The trial lasted five weeks, and the full transcript was not available at the end of the court proceedings, she said.

Work pressure does not allow a judge to wait for the transcript before writing the judgment, Tolmay added.

“In such circumstances, a judge must rely on her handwritten notes and the heads of argument,” she said in her ruling issued today.

A party can only criticise a court when it failed to consider the law and relied on an incorrect summary of the legal framework or facts, Tolmay said.

Myeni attacked the court in her appeal application, but did not provide a single example of where the judge erred in law or made a factual mistake, she added.

No grounds for allegations of bias

Tolmay said it was “unfathomable” that Myeni could raise bias, whether real or perceived, as grounds for an appeal, given the evidence before the court.

“There is no reasonable possibility that another court would come to another conclusion on the evidence led at this trial and that a court of appeal would come to a different conclusion,” the judge wrote.

There was no compelling reason for the court to grant Myeni leave to appeal, Tolmay said.

However, Myeni’s legal representatives indicated during a court hearing in November that she was digging in for a three- to four-year fight to overturn the delinquent director declaration.

Advocate Dali Mpofu told Tolmay on 20 November, during a court hearing in the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria, that his client was ready to take the matter of the 27 May ruling to the Constitutional Court.

“Whether it is them or us, the case is not going to end here,” Mpofu told the judge.

As a result, Myeni is likely to petition the Supreme Court of Appeal to appeal Tolmay’s 27 May ruling following Tolmay’s dismissal of her leave to appeal application.

Advocates Nqabayethu Buthelezi and Nosisa Kekana assisted Mpofu.

Myeni’s application to introduce fresh evidence dismissed

Tolmay also dismissed Myeni’s application to introduce fresh evidence, with costs.

Myeni in November applied to Tolmay to introduce additional evidence from the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture chaired by Judge Raymond Zondo.

The extra evidence was “extremely relevant” to the case at hand, and it was in the interests of justice that Tolmay allowed the introduction of evidence, Myeni said in November.

The evidence that Myeni sought to introduce to her appeal related to the testimony by former SAA non-executive director Yakhe Kwinana at the Zondo commission on 7 November.

Tolmay said in her ruling that she accepted that Kwinana’s evidence only became available on 7 November. However, she noted that Myeni could have called Kwinana as a witness during the trial as she mentioned Kwinana’s role during her evidence, and Myeni made no explanation about why she failed to call Kwinana as a witness.

No special circumstances exist for the judge to allow the inclusion of new evidence

Myeni provided no special circumstances for why the court should admit the new evidence, the judge added.

Kwinana’s evidence had no bearing on whether or not Myeni was a delinquent director, Tolmay said.

“The evidence of Ms Kwinana would not likely have changed the outcome of the matter,” the judge added.

Tolmay said that Myeni’s application to introduce the new evidence was “ill-advised”.

Myeni remains a director of five companies

She remains a director of five companies – Maydeo Nineteen, Hope Fountain Investments 54, the Jacob G Zuma Foundation, Orestitrix and Centlec, according to the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission.

Centlec is a state-owned company that distributes electricity to 177,000 customers in the Mangaung, Kopanong, Mantsopa and Mohokare municipalities in the Free State.

Myeni joined the Centlec board in 2016 and earned a salary in the 2018 financial year of about R274,000.

Indications of poor management at Centlec

Advocate Chris McConnachie, for Outa and Saapa, during the November court hearing highlighted that while Myeni was a Centlec director, there were indications that her directorship coincided with the poor management of Centlec.

Over the past four financial years, the Auditor-General found that Centlec had engaged in wasteful and irregular expenditure of R231-million, he pointed out.

In Centlec’s 2017/18 financial year, the Auditor-General issued a disclaimer audit opinion after finding limitations when reviewing the company’s financial records, McConnachie said.

But Myeni said that while she had been a director of Centlec, it had performed well and received unqualified audit reports for the last four years.

Tolmay wrote in the judgment issued today that the success or not of Centlec should not be the yardstick for deciding Myeni’s sustainability to act as a director.

The public will suffer harm from the failure to implement the order

“I am of the view that the public will suffer irreparable harm if the court order is not implemented, pending the completion of the appeal processes,” the judge wrote.

Myeni had argued that she would suffer “potential harm” if the court enforced the 27 May ruling, as she would lose her Centlec earnings.

“Temporary loss of income from a public institution does not constitute irreparable harm,” Tolmay said.

Outa proved exceptional circumstances of irreparable harm for the public if Myeni remained a director and that Myeni would not suffer irreparable harm if the court enforced the 27 May ruling, she added.

“A consideration of the judgment and the evidence enforces the conclusion that Ms Myeni’s prospects of success on appeal are weak,” Tolmay said. DM

Gallery

Comments - share your knowledge and experience

Please note you must be a Maverick Insider to comment. Sign up here or sign in if you are already an Insider.

Everybody has an opinion but not everyone has the knowledge and the experience to contribute meaningfully to a discussion. That’s what we want from our members. Help us learn with your expertise and insights on articles that we publish. We encourage different, respectful viewpoints to further our understanding of the world. View our comments policy here.

All Comments 8

  • There are parts of companies act that would make her liable for the company’s debt in the circumstances affirmed by the court. She will claim she has nothing but perhaps such a liability will also ensure she NEVER has anything.

  • Great ruling and about time that such deceitful, corrupt and evil monsters masquerading as well-to-do individuals face the music and consequences of their theft, machinations and misdeeds. How does she afford to pay for the equally obnoxious, mercenary and depraved legal team when she claimed that she has no money- couldn’t even afford the plane ticket to JHB to appear at the Zondo Commission. It would really be interesting to find out. The out of work SAA employees, who haven’t been paid for 8 months, should be suing her, Zuma, Gigaba etc and they should be made to cough up instead of the overburdened, exploited and fleeced taxpayer.

  • We need to see more robust action like this from the courts to put a stop to the endless appeals and justice delayed. Favorite advocate and multiple loser Mpofu arrogantly stated that was his strategy.

    • I’ve been thinking about this as well. They keep on appealing. I would think it would be appropriate to have them pay back ALL the money they have received during their appealing process if they lose the case! I am sure they would think twice in appealing if that would be the case. Or is it?
      Another thing I have been wondering about is the fact that by their fraudulent and or any criminal conduct money received fraudulently be used to defend themselves. I’ve got nothing basically to defend myself with, but the crook who stole MY money can defend themselves with the loot (My money).
      I think it would be fair to allow them only so much money as they would have earned as an ordinary person in their position and the case where the (possibly fraudulent) income is derived from cannot be used for defense, this way it would level the playing field somewhat. At least I can have the satisfaction that I did not lose the case because of the money stolen from me. As we are supposed to be equal under the law, that equality doesn’t really seem to work too well (not at all) when the frightfully expensive court cases are concerned.

  • Astonishing that someone of her particular “proclivities” got to be in the driver seat of so many vehicles. Was she pushed into them, or did she jump into them I wonder ?

  • The odious Mpofu and his ilk. Protecting, delaying and doing all possible to prevent justice of these renowned scumbags and scoundrels involved in grand theft and corruption. Treasonous! Obviously birds of a feather flock together.

  • Interesting to note that Myeni only on appeal want to fight the big fight. She will have to convince the Supreme court that her election to not participate at times must in the Supreme court not be held against her. She will effectively want a new trial of the matter in the SC! Her prospects ought to be non existent for such a venture. It does not end there Mpofu wants to go to the ConCourt. Grandstanding and a circus act more accurate of what Mpofu and Myeni doing.

  • These Court cases must be very expensive and it would be interesting to know if the legal bills for all these court cases are paid by “sponsors” and to know who they are.

  • ANALYSIS

    Stuck between irrelevance and a hard place, Malema screams conspiracy, calls for violence… again

    By Stephen Grootes