First published in Daily Maverick 168

As someone who has spent untold hours writing about, talking about and investigating issues at CSA over the past 11 months, I’m both fascinated to see the contents of the Fundudzi report, but also daunted. I’ll explain the latter in due course.

A 46-page summary released this week gave the media and the public a peek into what the report contains, but the real meat probably lies within the 470-odd pages of the full report.

I have been as critical of CSA as anyone – for good reason. The board and leadership have displayed arrogance and disdain for stakeholders. Fundudzi, as far as we can tell, confirms what has been written for months thanks to sources that have approached the media to try to stop the board from pushing the sport over a cliff.

It was no secret that former CEO Thabang Moroe was out of his depth and that he ran CSA like a personal fiefdom. Former president Chris Nenzani and the complicit board allowed it to happen. Claiming ignorance is no excuse for the board. They are as culpable as Moroe, and the small part of Fundudzi that has come to light confirms this.

It has also been confirmed that general standards of good corporate governance were ignored and that agendas, favours and personal ambitions superseded almost everything. Company secretary Welsh Gwaza, who is still on the CSA payroll, is claimed to have misled the board over a contract with commercial rights company Global Sports Commerce (GSC). Gwaza, Moroe and COO Naasei Appiah are said to have told the board that due diligence on GSC had been done when it had not. That was misleading.

Moroe and Appiah have been fired and if Fundudzi’s conclusion is to be believed (and there is no reason to think it is inaccurate) then Gwaza has some serious explaining to do.

But this is the problem. Gwaza and the surviving original board members have not stood down because they claim to want to be part of the solution. But how can they?

Which brings me back to my earlier point about being “daunted” by the details of the full report. It’s going to be easy for the media to latch on to aspects of the report and write sensational headlines about nefarious acts contained in the report. But the reality is that this is not a complete picture. Also, so much information being put into the public domain in snippets, without context, could be damaging for those factions of CSA that really do want to clean it up.

In the best legalese contained in a document in my possession, here is part of the reasoning of why CSA’s lawyers, Bowmans, advised their client not to make the report public.

“There is a perception that a report of this nature comes to conclusive findings and that is not the case at all. It is a comprehensive report and there is lots of work to be done in relation to the report. Part of that work requires further investigation before it’s ready for action.

“A report in that context and covering the breadth of matters that it does, the first question in deciding whether it is in the best interests of CSA to release the report now, is the risk that the report would come into the hands of the public at large and in particular, various people CSA is litigating against.

“In Bowmans view, if the report were to fall into those hands, it would compromise CSA’s ability to investigate matters in the report and would expose CSA to unnecessary and avoidable litigation and would jeopardise the prospects of success in litigation.”

That is vital to consider. To what extent is Fundudzi’s report conclusive? Their work is going to be scrutinised. People’s reputations are on the line. There was a great deal of pressure on Fundudzi to conclude the report and if they didn’t sufficiently investigate certain aspects, or drew conclusions without interviewing people, or seeking explanation, Fundudzi and CSA could be open to lawsuits.

A Parliamentary Sports Committee badgered CSA into handing over the full report during a fiery session this week. But what exactly are the committee members going to do with the information they will (hopefully) read and consider? How will they use it to improve CSA’s situation without overstepping into the realm of political interference, which would put CSA in breach of the International Cricket Council’s regulations?

It’s one thing to demand the evidence; it’s quite another to know what to do with it. That is something both the parliamentary body and the media will have to consider, as they use Fundudzi as a stick to beat CSA with in the coming weeks and months.

To paraphrase Spider-Man’s uncle: With great knowledge comes great responsibility. DM168