12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21

COMMISSION OF INQUIRY INTO STATE CAPTURE
HELD AT
PARKTOWN, JOHANNESBURG

10
21 NOVEMBER 2018

DAY 21

20

Page 1 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
PROCEEDINGS HELD ON 12 NOVEMBER 2018
CHAIRPERSON: Good morning Mr Pretorius. Good morning everybody.
ADV PAUL PRETORIUS SC: Morning Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV PAUL PRETORIUS SC: Today Ms Barbara Hogan will be led by Advocate
Mokoena.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Before, Mr Mokoena before you do that, I just want to
attend to one matter that I want to deal with and basically it relates to the media
statement that the Commission issued on Thursday.
10

I want to read this media

statement again and make an appeal to the public and to the media to please respect
the processes of the Commission and to abide by the law. The statement reads:
“Since the commencement of the public hearings of the
Commission in August 2018, various sections of the media
have disseminated and published contents of witnesses
statements submitted to the Commission in connection with the
inquiry the Commission before witnesses give evidence before
the Commission and without the written permission of the
Chairperson.
The latest incident relates to the statement submitted to the

20

Commission by Minister Pravin Gordhan, Minister of Public
Enterprises. The same thing also happened with the statement
submitted to the Commission by former minister of Public
Enterprises, Ms Barbara Hogan. Both minister Gordhan and
Ms Hogan are yet to give evidence before the Commission.
An investigation is to be conducted to try and establish the

Page 1 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
people responsible for the leaks of witnesses’ statements,
however, in the meantime I wish to draw the attention of all
media houses and the public to the provisions of regulations
11(3) and 12(2)(c) of the regulations governing

the

Commission.“
Regulation 11(3) reads as follows and I quote:
“No person shall without the written permission of the
Chairperson
(a) disseminate any document submitted to the Commission by
10

any person in connection with the inquiry or publish the
contents or any portion of the contents of such document or
peruse, that is b;
(b) peruse any document including any statement which is
destined to be submitted to the Chairperson or intercept such
document while it is being taken or forwarded to the
Chairperson.”
Regulation 12(2)(c) reads and I quote:
“Any person who contravenes a provision of regulation 11…”
which includes the regulation I have just read.

20

“…is guilty of an offence and liable on convictions (ii) in the
case of an offence referred to in paragraph (b) or (c), to a fine
or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding twelve months.”
Paragraph 3 of the media statement reads - and 4:
“These regulations make it clear that it is a criminal offence for
anyone, and that includes the media, to disseminate or publish,

Page 2 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
without the written permission of the Chairperson, any
document which includes a witness’s statements submitted to
the Commission by any person in connection with the
Commissions inquiry.”
Paragraph 4:
“After a witness has given evidence in public before the
Commission and his or her statement has been handed up at
the public hearing, the media may publish his or her statement
or portions thereof, unless the Chairperson orders otherwise.”
10

Paragraph 5:
“I urge the media and everyone to observe Regulation 11(3)
and desist from disseminating, or publishing witnesses’
statements, or portions thereof, before the witnesses have
given evidence at a hearing of the Commission, unless the
Chairperson’s written permission has been obtained.

I

therefore trust that in support of the work of the Commission,
all media houses, journalists, commentators, analysts and the
public at large will not act in breach of the regulations and will
show respect for the processes of the Commission.”
20

I just want to appeal to the media and the public again to say, in support of the
work of this Commission, please just exercise patience. We are not saying that you are
not going to be allowed to publish these statements. I am giving permission. I have
given permission that once the witnesses have given evidence, you may publish the
statements.

Page 3 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
I just want to point out that, when witnesses have given their statements to the
Commission, those statements are still the subject of investigation within the
Commission before the witnesses give their evidence. The legal team looks at the
statements, looks at issues that are covered in the statements and may themselves or
through the investigators of the Commission seek to check certain things and discuss
the statement with the witness in regard to anything that they might have picked up in
terms of checking certain things covered by the statement.
So, in terms of public interest, I do not think that there is really any special
public interest that dictates that they should be published before the witnesses give
10

evidence. Whatever they say in the statements, it means it has been taken care of and
will be published and made known to the public. It is just a matter of time. It is not that
it is going to be swept under the carpet and therefore that is why it is necessary for the
media to publish it ahead of the witness giving evidence.
So, I really appeal to all concerned to just exercise patience and give the
processes of the Commission space so that we can do our job properly. Thank you
very much. Yes Mr Pretorius.
ADV PAUL PRETORIUS SC: Thank you Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mokoena.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

20

Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Chair, a question maybe

posed as to where does one locate the evidence of Ms Hogan with reference to the
Commissions terms of reference.

Ms Hogan’s evidence addresses the term of

reference 1.1, to the extent that it deals with the undue influence made to members of
national executive in the appointment of boards and/or the CEOs of the SOEs. She will
also deal with how she was removed as a minister of Public Enterprises.

Page 4 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
The testimony of Ms Hogan will also lay the basis, Mr Chair, for the evidence
which the Commission intends leading in relation to the SOEs which - such as Eskom,
Transnet, Denel, SABC and SAA. It might include also other SOEs which fell under her
portfolio.
Apparent from her statement, she will also testify on these terms of reference, with
specific reference to Transnet, Escom and SAFCOL. She will proceed, Mr Chair, to
also testify on the issue relating to the termination of SAA route from SA to Mumbai .
She will also refer and corroborate the evidence of Ms Mentor in relation to the
rumours of her removal as the minister of Public Enterprise. You will see that her
10

evidence in a way dovetails with the period which Ms Mentor have testified upon
pertaining to when she visited the Gupta compound and when an offer was made to
her.
Initially, Mr Chair, you will recall that Ms Hogan, through the assistance of
his legal team, did furnish the Commission with her written witness statement. It was
after perusal of the statement, we arrived as the legal team at a conclusion that the
statement only implicated one person and it was the ex-president, Mr Zuma.
A notice in terms of Rule 3.3 was then dispatched to the ex-president as
early as 22 August 2018. The Commission did not receive any applications in terms
of Rule 3.4 or any version from the ex-president, and subsequent to that Mr

20

Chair…[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: And in terms of actual receipt by him or his legal team of the notice,
that is not an issue they did receive it.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

They did receive both statements according to the

records of the Commission. There is no issue around that Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay.

Page 5 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

And subsequently Ms Hogan, having filed the initial

statement, she then supplemented the same statement and attached comprehensive
annexures to the statement in order to ventilate the issues which were paramount - or
which were appearing in the first statement. So, there is no any change of the version –
the version is the same, the second statement simply supplemented the initial
statement and it was also delivered to the Commission, on 8 October 2018. In her
supplementary statement, Mr Chair, Ms Hogan mentions a number of individuals and
organisations and this raised a similar debate, like the one of Ms Lynne Brown, whether
a mere mentioning of a person can be equated to that person being implicated within a
10

proper interpretation of Rule 3.3? However, to err on the side of caution, as the legal
team we did issue further notices in terms of Rule 3.3 to all individuals, institutions,
organisations and parties that we mentioned. The dies has since lapsed and no person
or party or organisation has applied to cross-examine Ms Hogan, save for two affidavits
that we received from Mr Marocha and the other one from Mr Manje, where they simply
clarified certain portions of Ms Hogan’s statement, which we will deal with them in due
course, but none of them have actually made any formal application in order to crossexamine Ms Hogan.
Ms Hogan, Mr Chair, is represented by Harris, Nupen, Molebatse Attorneys
and I am informed that Mr Harris and Mr Macheta[?] are in attendance on behalf of

20

Ms Hogan.
Mr Chair, for ease of reference we have also prepared a bundle containing Ms
Hogan’s witness statement and annexures. We propose that that bundle be marked as
EXHIBIT L1. Ms Hogan…[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: Is that the one written File 2 of 2?

Page 6 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, Mr Chair. There are two files, both of them - we
may have to mark them L1, but we will refer to them as File 1 and File 2.
CHAIRPERSON:

Yes. Okay. The two files relating to Ms Hogan’s evidence will be

EXHIBIT L. You said L, hey?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: L1.
CHAIRPERSON:

Ja. Exhibit L and the one which contains her statement will be

referred to as Exhibit L File 1.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON:
10

And the one which contains only annexures will be referred to as

File 2 of EXHIBIT L.
FILES RELATING TO MS HOGAN’S EVIDENCE HANDED UP AS EXHIBIT L
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, thank you. Mr Chair, for completeness, there are
other parties here to listen to the evidence of Ms Hogan and I am aware that Transnet,
that is being represented by Mr Mattau, and I am also told that the SACP it is sending
also its legal representative to also listen to the evidence of Ms Hogan in these
proceedings. Their legal teams are present.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Mr Chair we are ready to proceed with the evidence of
Ms Hogan.

20

CHAIRPERSON:

Yes. Ms Hogan once again thank you very much for taking the

decision to come forward and assist the Commission in regard to what you know and
what happened during your time as Minister of Public Enterprises. We appreciate it
very much. We are investigating allegations, as you know, including allegations of state
capture and certain aspects which are set out in our terms of reference. You will be
asked questions and if in the process you are asked questions you might interpret as

Page 7 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
not so friendly, it will not be anything personal, it is simply because we approach the
matter in terms of our reference on the basis that these are allegations. We have to get
to the bottom of them. We have got to find the truth and so every witness who comes –
if there are questions that need to be asked in order to understand his or her evidence
properly and get to the bottom – those questions will be asked, but once again for thank
you for coming forward. Thank you.
Yes Mr Mokoena - O, the Registrar will take an affirmation.
REGISTRAR: Please state your full names for the record?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Barbara Anne Hogan,
10

REGISTRAR: Do you have any objection with making the prescribed affirmation?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No objection.
REGISTRAR:

Do you truly affirm that the evidence you will give, will be the truth, the

whole truth and nothing but the truth. If so please state. I truly affirm.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I truly affirm.
REGISTRAR: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Yes Mr Mokoena you may proceed.
EXAMINATION BY ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ms Hogan, you had furnished the
Commission with witness statements. Is that correct?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: That is correct.
20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: If you can keep your mic on.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: The initial statement and the one which supplemented
the initial statement. Is that correct?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: That is correct.

Page 8 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

They appear on EXHIBIT L – just for reference sake,

you do not have to go there. Page 1 – 24 and the initial statement appears from page
393 to page 399. Do you confirm those statements under oath?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I confirm them. Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Can you please, Ms Hogan, proceed to sketch for us a
brief synopsis of your personal history.
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

Okay. Chair, I had the distinction of being born in Benoni

and I grew up there and I was lucky enough to go to university. I went to the University
of Witwatersrand and I completed a BA Honours in Development Studies.
10

CHAIRPERSON:
everybody?

Just one second Ms Hogan.

Is her voice audible enough for

Okay, I think the technical – they must do something to make sure

everybody can hear.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON: Just one second they will try and sort something out.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Is that better?
CHAIRPERSON:

It looks like that is much better. Can you now hear? Just say

something again Ms Hogan.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I was born in Benoni…[laughing]. Many more other famous
people were born in Benoni, but I claim that right as well. I went to university at W its
20

and did my Honours degree there in Development Studies. It was at Wits that I first
started to become politically conscientized. I arrived there in 1970, which was really the
heyday of apartheid, the great heyday, and over time I developed a great misgiving
about apartheid and what it was doing to the people of this country.
I became involved in the start up of what later emerged as the Congress of
South African Trade Unions, COSATU. It was a legal advice office. I was involved in

Page 9 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
that and I was involved in student politics and later on I was involved in support work for
workers’ struggles such as consumer boycotts etcetera.
In 1977 I joined the ANC underground, not the military underground, but the
political underground. My reason was that I believed that the apartheid government,
particularly after the death of Steve Biko and the banning of the black consciousness
organisations, that they had so much power, that unless there was an organisation that
was outside of the country which could continue the struggle. We would not be able to
break the back of that power.
I also firmly believed in the non-racial stance of the ANC. In my university
10

years I had to engage with the issues of the black consciousness movement, which was
a predominant movement at that time and whilst I understood, and still do, sympathise
with a lot of the positions they took, I felt that the ANC with its non-racial position
provided a future for South Africa.

So, I joined the ANC underground a political

operative. I then – I registered for a Masters in Unemployment in South Africa and I
was a full-time student then, and in 1981 I was arrested by the Security Police. Along
with me there were – it was a wide scale raid on people. It was said that it was
probably the first time in a long time that a broad range of people had been arrested
who covered the entire spectrum of South African Society. Whites, Indians, Coloureds,
Black. We were sort of seen as the immergence of a non-racial tradition that was now
20

coming forward.
I was initially charged with six - five other people and then charges were later
withdrawn against three – one managed to slip the country and one was found not
guilty. I then stood trial on charges of high treason. I was found guilty of high treason
by the court, although the judge had said there was nothing absolutely illegal that I had
done, but I was party to a conspiracy to overthrow the state because I was a member of

Page 10 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
the ANC. So, I was then sentenced to 14 years, four to run parallel and I then went to
jail – this whole process, I was in detention for six months and then awaiting-trial and
finally sentenced seven months thereafter. So, in late 1982 I was sentenced to prison.
I was the only white woman prisoner and I was not allowed to be with other prisoner, so
I was on my own.
After that I was joined by one or two, three, four, people at a time and after
eight and a half years of my time in prison, President de Klerk announced the
unbanning of the ANC on 2 February. I was privileged enough to be released from
prison two and a half years ahead of my release date, on parole, and I was released
10

two days before President Mandela was released. I wanted time out. It had been a
long hard time. But the ANC had just been unbanned. It was still in exile. There were
no structures in the country that were ANC. So, Walter Sisulu who headed the interim
leadership core of the ANC, at that stage requested that I sit on an interim leadership
committee of the ANC in Gauteng and our task was to build the branches and the
structures of the ANC. If we were going to be in negotiations it had to be on a
democratic basis and we needed a party.
I became the General Secretary of the ANC in Gauteng and I was there for a
period of three years. It was a terrible period, as you would recall. When people were
being massacred left, right and centre. It was one of the worst periods and it was a

20

very difficult time to persuade people to believe in a future when they themselves were
being massacred.

We participated as a province, very much in the policy

considerations and negotiations around CODESA and in 1994 after the elections – in
1994 I was put forward as a candidate as a member of parliament and in 1994 I
assumed my position as a member of parliament for the ANC, on the National list not
the Provincial list.

Page 11 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
In parliament I served in various capacities. I was chair of the Parliamentary
Budget Committee. I chaired the Finance Committee – the Parliamentary Committee
on Finance. When I was in prison I was not allowed to continue with my Masters and I
was only allowed to do a BCom degree which turned out to be very useful, because in a
new country, a newly emerging democracy, economic and accounting skills were very
important.
So I chaired the Finance Committee, we passed the Public Finance
Management Act, the Municipal Finance Management Act, we set in process the
procedures to reform the South African Revenue Services, which had completely
10

collapsed during the apartheid years.

I later served as the chair of the standing

committee of the Auditor General. The Auditor Generals, I had a very close working
relationship with the Auditor General and through our efforts, we were able to establish
Public Accounts committees throughout all the provinces and later in the municipalities
and they still survive as one of the greatest, the best committees for accountability.
In 2008, shortly before the 2009 elections, when shortly after President Mbeki
was removed, or resigned from office, President Motlanthe asked me to be the Minister
of Health. I am not a health expert, but I had strongly – I was strongly committed to
making sure that people who had HIV and AIDS and Tuberculosis, received the proper
medication in order to survive and I saw that as my challenge and fortunately, during
20

that period of time we were able to start the process for unleashing a proper regime of
care for people with HIV and AIDS. That was 2008.
In 2009 there were the elections and President Zuma appointed me as
Minister of Public Enterprises and I served in that capacity until he removed me about
18 months later at the end of 2010.

Page 12 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Who was your Deputy? Who was the Deputy at the

time?
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

My Deputy was Enoch Godongwana, who was head of the

ANC’s Economic Transformation Committee.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: So as a Minister of Public Enterprise, now I am talking
from the period May 2009, flowing from your evidence, how many SOEs fell under your
department and you may also mention them please?
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

Yes. There were nine SOEs. The Department of Public

Enterprise does not cover all SOEs but there were extremely important ones. There
10

was Eskom, Transnet, it is in paragraph 10 on page four. Eskom, Transnet, SAA, SA
Express, Denel, Infraco, PBMR, Alexkor and SAFCOL. They were entrusted to my
care.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Now during your time as a Minister of Public

Enterprise, you also obtained two opinions; the one was from Wim Trengove and the
one from Michael Katz. May I refer you to, just to identify them, Annexure D, page 53.
The one runs from Annexure D, Mr Chair, page 53 to 82 and the other one runs from
page 83 to 93 of Annexure D. Are you there Ms Hogan?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, I have them.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you say, page 53?
20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Page 53, Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: And that is EXHIBIT LF, File 1.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: EXHIBIT F1, File 1.
CHAIRPERSON: And what I have at 53 is on the letterheads of Public Enterprises and
I did not expect Counsel’s opinion to be on the letterheads of…[intervene]

Page 13 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Mr Chair, let me just recheck that numbering, I might

have given you - page 83 Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: 83?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: The one of Mr Wim Trengove is from page 83.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Mr Katz is 68, I think.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I have got it at page 83. Have you got it Ms Hogan?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes. Are those the opinions that you received?
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, I have got them.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Would I be correct that those opinions dealt with the

appointments and removals of the SOEs and also address the powers and functions of
the Minister of Public Enterprises with reference to the applicable legal instruments.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
CHAIRPERSON:

I am sorry Mr Mokoena, the other opinion is that of Mr Katz, you

said.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Katz. I did not hear where you said that is to be found?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: It is 68 and he signs at page 82.
20

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, Ms Hogan, and do you agree with the conclusions
arrived at in those opinions?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, I do.

Page 14 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Now, may you please in your own words and flowing

from your understanding, you know, from your experience as the Minister of Publi c
Enterprise, take us through the structure of ownership and control of the SOEs.
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

Okay.

There was a period in time before the ANC

Government came into power, when SOEs like Eskom, Transnet and whatever, were
not companies as such but Government agencies and over the period of time in the late
80’s, early 90’s and whatever, that status was changed so they then became public
utilities and became a company and fell under the Companies Act and in terms of the
Companies Act, both the one that prevailed at the time when I became Minister and the
10

Companies Act which then followed on shortly thereafter, the Minister in most cases of
all of these nine SOE’s is the single shareholder. Now, the Minister is the shareholder
and performs her functions as a shareholder on behalf of Government. That is the
executive authority assigned to the Minister of Public Enterprise which is to exercise her
authority as the shareholder.
Now, as we all know, the shareholder does not run a company, nor does the
shareholder interfere in the management of a company. The shareholder has certain
prescribed rights conferred on it both by the Public Finance Management Act, by the
Companies Act, codes of conduct by the King Report and the shareholders, one of its
most important task of the shareholder is to appoint directors at an annual general

20

meeting of the Board and the shareholder can also remove a director under certain
conditions.
As a Minister, you have to keep very close watch what is happening in each of
these companies and particularly when I refer to companies like Eskom, Transnet, SAA,
who have a vast asset base and Transnet and Eskom are essential for the running of
the country, for the economy. If Transnet does not work, none of us work. So there is

Page 15 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
even a greater need for the Minister to be very close to what is happening but not to
interfere. There is a handbook that Government gives, that Government issued and
which Cabinet adopted in 2008 which prescribes in very clear terms and I am sure the
Commission would be very interested, prescribes how the Minister should go about
appointing and it is a very - very careful process because you want to have the best
people and the most knowledgeable people to run this company.
So then let us go to the directors. The directors have a fiduciary responsibility
to the company, not to me as a Minister but to the company. They have to make sure
that everything that is done there is for the good of the company. In order to do so they
10

appoint a manager, or a series of senior managers. Often the CFO, the Chief Financial
Officer, and the CEO are the most important appointments.
In many of these SOEs, the memorandums of association as they were called
then, prescribe that the Minister appoints the CEO, as in Transnet for instance, but
under these circumstances no Minister would just go ahead and appoint a CEO
because that CEO then has to enter into formal employment contract with the Board
and is accountable to the Board for their performance.

If there is no trust or no

endorsement of that CEO by the Board, it is a very difficult relationship.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Ms Hogan, while you are still there testifying on the

structure and the state as the shareholder, may I for completeness also, refer you to
20

page 84. Mr Chair, that is part of Mr Trengove’s opinion, page 84, with particular
reference to paragraph 4 and that theme runs up until page 87, paragraph 8.4. Would
that also equate to what you have been testifying to the Chair, in as far as the State as
the shareholder and the responsibilities of the Board as well as the CEO, the Minister.
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

That’s correct. Do you want me just to elaborate a bit on

that?

Page 16 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, you may please, definitely.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: So, the Minister’s executive authority as a shareholder, one
of its important roles is to appoint the Board and to allow the Board to do the initial work
around the appointment of a CEO in agreement. So you would agree, this is what the
shareholder, this is what competencies we want versus the kind of person we are
looking for and keep very close to the process and the Board would consult backwards
and forwards and say we have done the interviews and from my opinion, we would like
to recommend so and so or whatever and then the Minister would make a decision and
then take it to Cabinet.
Now, it is very important that the Minister, does not interfere with the work of

10

the CEO or that the CEO does not believe that he or she can jump the directors, go
past them and go straight to the political executive authority. Corporate governance is
very important in this phase and if there is any dilution of that, it leads to the company
starting to disintegrate because no-one knows where the real authority emerges and the
notion of a shadow state comes up.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

You have just referred to an important concept of

corporate governance. Can we dissect that in order for us to place it in its proper
context?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Sorry, I did not.
20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now, to place it in its proper context, who runs the day
to day operations of the SOE?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The management and the CEO is the central person in that.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And to whom are they accountable to?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The Board.

Page 17 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

And what is the role of the Board in relation to the

SOEs?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The Board owes a company a fiduciary responsibility so the
Board provides us to strategic direction and vision. Obviously in a relationship with its
senior managers, you know, in consultation but the Board must provide that strategic
direction and must hold the management to account.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Yes, and from your own experience and perspective,

what is a focus of a major SOE such as Eskom and Transnet?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Well, Eskom is responsible for providing energy to this entire
10

country and there are very few - when I came in as a Minister, I think Eskom was
responsible for 97% of the energy generation and I think we have all expe rienced during
the blackouts what the consequences are if Eskom is not performing.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, now…[intervene]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: And Transnet, let me just, Transnet…
MECHANICAL INTERRUPTION [16:58]
CHAIRPERSON: [everyone laughing] So maybe you should…[intervene]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: By the blackouts because we do experience them.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I will undertake to do so.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You were just about to explain about Transnet?

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN:

Transnet does not deal with passenger rail. Transnet only

deals with the movements of manufactured goods or goods or chemicals across the
country. If you look at the moment at the trucks that carry coal, it is just two holders,
containers. If you look at a Transnet train, it can go on for nearly a kilometre, the
length, so obviously having an efficient rail infrastructure with an efficiently run
infrastructure is incredibly important, because in our country we depend a lot on mining.

Page 18 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
A lot of what is mined needs to be taken out of the ground, taken to where it is needed
to be manufactured or taken for export. If Transnet is not operating at full capacity, we
damage the economy and many people are of the view and I cannot corroborate that,
that South Africa was not fully able to take advantage of the commodities boom that
happened in the early 2000s because Transnet was not up and running with the
efficiencies required. Maria Ramos then came in, she managed as a CEO, she got the
balance sheets up and running and Transnet in my time was ready to start doing what it
needed to do.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:
10

And these SOEs, where do they derive their capital

from?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: They were?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Their capital, where do they derive their capital from,
these SOEs.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, now one of the differences between a company and a
State-Owned Enterprise is that the State is not in a position to provide equity on the
scale that any shareholder would be able to provide that equity. So a State-Owned
Enterprise has, you know, they are doing massive investments. Transnet and Eskom’s
biggest investments in the country in infrastructure, they have to raise their capital for
infrastructure investment from the issuing of bonds, you know, by borrowing and

20

hopefully they can cover their running costs through the tariffs that are imposed.
What has happened in my time in the case of the SAA for instance, is that
technically SAA already at that time could have been declared bankrupt and the only
way that the State could respond at that point was to offer a guarantee that, you know, if
the SAA reneged on its payments, that the State would then come in so a lot of the
State’s strategy in those early years when I was there, was around giving guarantees

Page 19 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
which National Treasury had to approve of. So you can imagine that the financial
health of those two institutions is watched extremely closely by National Treasury, by us
in Public Enterprises, by the ratings agencies because if these two fail, the
consequences for the country are huge so the question of the funding model of StateOwned Enterprises was never properly resolved during my period. Cabinet asked Mr
Gordhan, who was Minister of Finance at the time, and myself to set up an interministerial committee to look at that funding model but that was then shut down when
President Zuma appointed an independent commission to investigate State-Owned
Enterprises.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, you did also mentioned that one of the things that
National Treasury would sometimes do was to issue loan guarantees and you
mentioned SAA as a case in point.

Now, may I link that evidence of yours with

reference to Exhibit K1. Mr Chair, I have only provided the extract, that is the evidence
of the ex-Minister of Finance, Mr Nene, with particular reference only to paragraph 102.
I see that my colleagues are looking at their bundles, they will not find it. I have just
provided the extracts. It is on a separate page, have you found it? You will see that the
ex-Minister of Finance, Mr Nene, also touched on the things that you have now testified
upon. At paragraph 102 he stated the following:
“SAA was brought under the arbitration of Treasury on the 11
20

December 2014, gazetted on the 19 December 2014, due to
poor governance and financial instability. At the time of the
transfer, SAA’s financial position was extremely weak. In the
2012/2013 financial year, the airline suffered a loss of 1.2
billion. The loss increased on 2.6 billion in 2013/2014 and the
airline was on track to realise an even larger loss for the

Page 20 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
2014/2015 financial year which eventually amounted to 5,6
billion.

The company was technically insolvent with its

liabilities exceeding its assets by 3.5 billion as at March 2014
and was experiencing severely depleted challenges. I was
only able to raise a funding with the support of government
guarantees”,
and that is what you have also touched on during your time as this was your
experience of Treasury having to provide those guarantees.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct, yes.
10

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mokoena?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Mr Chair?
CHAIRPERSON:

The handwritten notes on those two pages, are they Mr Nene’s

corrections or are they…[intervene]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: No, no, no, those are just for ease of reference so that
you must know where are we finding those documents, where those documents are
sourced.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, all right.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: They have nothing to do with Mr Nene.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Now, in relation to the SOEs Ms Hogan, what is the

purpose of a shareholders compact?
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

So, one has to ask the question, the Minister is a

shareholder for these large enterprises, the Minister belongs to the Department of
Public Enterprises which is not a policy department. So, for example, the Department
of Energy formulates policy around energy and there is a document which is produced

Page 21 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
on a regular basis which looks at the long term energy needs of the country and that
provides the basis for Eskom to move forward and of course there is a lot of
consultation with Eskom. So what a Minister does in Public Enterprises is, the Minister
signs a shareholders compact with the Board in which that shareholders compact
reflects the main direction and the performance objectives that government expects of
that company and it goes through a lot of discussion and whatever and that is what you
hold as a Minister, that company to account so you hold the Board to account on that.
So that becomes then the mechanism whereby the shareholder has an influence on the
direction of a company, its strategic possibilities and whatever, but does not dictate and
10

it provides a basis for evaluation. In the Department of Public Enterprises we had what
we called a dashboard, so every three months we would look at the results of all the
companies, we would spend a day analysing those results and then engaging with the
various companies on the basis of our assessment.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Yes, now, who appoints the Boards of the SOEs and

what is the role of the Minister of Enterprises, if any, on such appointments? Who
appoints the Boards of the SOEs and also please deal with the role of the Minister of
Public Enterprise, if any, on such appointments?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay, it is the Minister who appoints the Boards of the SOEs.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes. Now, can we take through, is there a process that
20

is in place? What process must be undertaken?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes. In the Department of Public Enterprises there are
various teams of speciality. You have got to have a team that specialises in energy, in
logistics, rail infrastructure, in forestry, in nuclear. It is a wide range, that covers a lot of
what the economy is composed of and that team keeps very close to the companies
that fall within its speciality. It is a number of Deputy DGs and the DG, the Director

Page 22 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
General of the department, runs all of that. They have to keep a watch on the Board
because the Boards are usually appointed for three years and, you know, there is the
usual provisions that might be in a memorandum of incorporation which says, you know,
a third of the Board must move, two-thirds, it differs from company to company but
nevertheless, there has to be a succession plan worked out around the Boards and the
department has to keep ahead of that so if it is expected that certain directors will move
on, then the search begins.
My experience in the Department of Public Enterprises, was that the DG would
lead the process but in close consultation with myself.
10

In virtually all cases, a

professional search company would undertake professional searches under the
guidance of Public Enterprises about the kind of skills that would be required on the
Board. An assessment would be made of the kind of skills, what skills were lacking,
what they needed more etcetera and that would be in discussion with the present
Board, and then on that basis a brief would be given to a professional company.
But people would also headhunt, they would also look around and see and
they would also – the Board often had a very good idea of who could come in. But that
would all be subjected to interviews with the prospective Board members, not by
myself, but by the professional agencies, there would be competency checks. For
instance in Transnet and the big senior organisations, there would be professional

20

psychological tests done, management competency tests done and these are not just –
you know these are used in the corporate world extensively. You really got to have t he
best of the best on these Boards.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes and then who ...[intervenes]
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Ja?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And who appoints the CEOs in the process?

Page 23 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ME BARBARA HOGAN: The CEO appointment, once again depends on the
memorandum of incorporation, all the founding legislation of a particular SOE. I took
the view and that is also endorsed by the opinion of Michael Katz Senior Counsel that
that appointment, even though a Minister may and it was not always, be said to do the
appointment, the Minister would authorise the Board to do a search along commonly
agreed parameters. So the Minister would never appoint a CEO out of the blue and
would allow the Board to go ahead. The reason being is that the CEO is accountable,
like I have said. You cannot have a CEO who the Board does not even know coming
in.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes and what is the role of the President if any, in the
appointment of the Boards of the SOEs, or the CEO what role does he play?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: The President has in terms of the Constitution exercises
authority in two ways. One, as Head of State and he is permitted in terms of that
Constitution to exercise that without consultation what the Cabinet can do and the
President can then do appointments, you know, I am not au fait with this, but it might be
the National Prosecuting Authority for instance. But the President is also a Head of the
Executive Council of the Cabinet and exercises an authority there. But in that case,
Constitution lays out what the President's responsibilities. Could I just read that, it is
just a very short thing from the Constitution which spells out the President's

20

responsibilities?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes you may.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Section 85 (2) of the Constitution says that the President in
his capacity as Head of the National Executive, exercises that Executive authority
together with members of his cabinet and does so jointly by – and this is the quote:
"Implementing

National

Legislation,

Page 24 of 124

developing

and

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
implementing National Policies, coordinating the functions of
State Departments and Administration, so it is coordination,
implementation, preparing and initiating legislation and
performing any other executive function provided for in the
Constitution or the National Legislation."
There is not a specific role in any legislation, which envisages that the
President must make a decision about the appointment of people to a Board of a State
Owned Enterprise.
Now when one becomes a Minister Chair, you are allocated as a Minister an
10

executive authority.

As Minister of Public Enterprise, I was given the executive

authority to appoint members to the Board.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: I

had

occasion

to

seek

an

opinion

from

Advocate Wim Trengove on this matter, because I clearly wanted to understand what
my authority was. Firstly, must the cabinet agree with my proposed candidate and what
role, if any, does anyone else play in this process?
If you do not mind Advocate Mokoena can I refer to the Trengove
...[intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Opinion?
20

ME BARBARA HOGAN: The prerogative of an executive authority?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes you may.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: I will not be long.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes you may.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Okay. Now ...[intervenes]

Page 25 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: I intended to take you there, but now that you are there
it is fine you may continue.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Is that okay?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Okay. The implications of a constitutional scheme, this is
what Advocate Trengove writes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And you are reading from?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: On page 86.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Page 86 yes.
10

ME BARBARA HOGAN: Paragraph 8. Okay?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: It is a prerogative – and this is the Minister exercises powers
as the shareholder. Firstly Trengove says:
"It is the prerogative of cabinet, in terms of Section 85 (2) (b) of
the Constitution to develop National Policy. Cabinet may in the
exercise of this power, develop a policy on SOEs. It may
determine, not only whether there should be such a policy, but
also what it is and to what level of detail it goes to."
So that is, as I have said to you, I follow the Policy Departments. The only

20

limitation on this cabinet prerogative is that the policy must be consistent and may not
contradict National Legislation. So Trengove saying Parliament in the enactment of
legislation still means that Parliament determines the full, you know, legislation trumps
all. He goes onto say:
"It is in the first place for the Minister to determine how to
exercise the State's power as a shareholder."

Page 26 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
So the Minister has the policy, now how do you exercise it?
"If cabinet has, however, formulated a policy, then the Minister
is bound to exercise it in terms of that policy. The Minister may
consult the cabinet on the exercise of her powers, but she is
not obliged to do so. Whether she does so, is in the first place
a matter of cabinet, protocol and custom, but not law and in the
second place a matter of personal discretion."
Now this is an important point:
"The Minister is bound in law to exercise her powers in
10

accordance with these rules."
So I must exercise my powers in accordance.
"It does not follow, however, that if I fail to do so, that the
exercise of a Minister's powers is invalid."
Trengove goes on to say:
"I am of the view that the Minister's exercise of her powers
remains valid in law, even if she fails to adhere to National
Policy determined by cabinet."
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: So the law trumps all.

20

"The external validity of the Minister's conduct does not depend
on her compliance with the internal policy laid down by cabinet.
The remedy for any failure by the Minister to adhere to cabinet
policy, is for the President to dismiss her from cabinet, or to
transfer her powers to another member of the cabinet."
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.

Page 27 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ME BARBARA HOGAN: So my understanding is just clear, once you become a
Minister you are assigned executive powers and you must exercise those powers in
terms of legislation and in terms of the policy given by cabinet and as long as you are
exercising your powers in that way, you are doing your job.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.

Now flowing from that testimony and with

reference to the opinion that you have read, can the President acting outside the
cabinet instruct you as the Minister as to which Board a member he must appoint?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: No.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Can a President instruct you as the Minister, or instruct
10

the Board as to which CEO must be appointed?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: No.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now in that ...[intervenes]
ME BARBARA HOGAN: That would be in terms of the opinions that I sought, if any
cabinet Minister or the President tried to instruct me on who should be appointed, they
would be usurping my executive authority. The opinion went so far as to say that if a
President or a cabinet Minister requested three names from which cabinet would
choose, that would itself be usurping the authority – usurping the executive authority of
that Minister, because then it is cabinet that is choosing and not the Minister.
Now I do not want a false impression just given here that you just go and do

20

your own thing. Obviously you consult with your fellow Ministers, we are working as a
team. But I think it is extremely important for us to understand executive authority and
when it has been usurped, or when it is not being recognised.
CHAIRPERSON: I just want to ...[intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Mr Chair?
CHAIRPERSON: I just wanted to – Mr Mokoena, I just wanted to emphasise that you

Page 28 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
are asking her about what the President may or may not do on the basis of her
understanding of those opinions and not on the basis of anything else, is that right?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay alright.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Mr Chair I am told that it is 11:15.
CHAIRPERSON: I did not understand her to be a lawyer, I do not know she may be.
Are you a lawyer Ms Hogan?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Am I?
CHAIRPERSON: Are you a lawyer?
10

ME BARBARA HOGAN: No I am not.
CHAIRPERSON: Oh okay. No I just want to make sure that legal questions that are
being put to you, that you are asking – you are answering them on the basis of your
understanding.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: My understanding.
CHAIRPERSON: Of the opinions that you obtained.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Exactly that Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Mr Chair I am told that it is 11:15.
CHAIRPERSON: We shall take the short adjournment, a tea break and we will resume
at 11:30. We adjourn.
COMMISSION ADJOURNS FOR TEA
COMMISSION RESUMES AFTER TEA
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Thank you Chair. Ms Hogan can you please tell us

Page 29 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
what happens once you have approached the composition of the Board?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Chair ...[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry. Can we go back to the question you had asked earlier
on, so that I can just make sure I understood the answer. The role of the President in
the appointment of the Board and the – ja the Board and maybe CEO of an SOE, is the
position that he has no role at all in terms of the law as you understood it after those
legal opinions?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: My understanding in the founding legislation of the various
institutions over which I had oversight, that there is no envisaged role for the President.
10

The President chairs cabinet and I would imagine that if the President has concerns
about a particular candidate or whatever, it would be at that cabinet meeting that those
concerns would be raised. But I have not been able to find an instance in law or
elsewhere, you know, yourselves as a Commission might assist me here, where the
President has the executive authority to instruct a Minister to do this or that. You know,
to appoint this particular person or not appoint that person.
CHAIRPERSON: The cabinet itself, was your understanding that it also did not have a
role, unless that role was captured in a policy?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Let me explain that, okay. It will just go back just two steps
to explain that. Once I am satisfied as a Minister about the composition of a Board,

20

then a cabinet memorandum is prepared which I sign off on, but it does not go directly
to cabinet. It goes to a subcommittee of cabinet and in this instance it would be the
Economics subcommittee, because my Ministers who are involved in the Economy
would have an interest in who I was proposing and they would be able to comment.
This happens with every Minister, any, any memorandum, a decision memorandum
goes through a cabinet subcommittee. So cabinet meets one weeks, the following

Page 30 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
week a subcommittee, the next week cabinet okay. So the agenda of a cabinet is
determined by the decisions that arise out of that cabinet subcommittee and that
subcommittee then is the committee that makes the recommendation to cabinet itself,
on the basis of the memorandum that a Minister would have prepared. So, in those
circumstances, the agenda becomes – the agenda is managed by the cabinet
secretariat who receive all of these memos, these decision memos from Ministers, it
goes onto the particular subcommittee and then it becomes part, if they approve it, it
becomes part.
Now, when it goes to cabinet, cabinet is allowed to discuss the merits or
10

demerits or that. But it is not usual that it would be dismissed like that.
CHAIRPERSON: Sending the memo that you are talking about to the subcommittee,
would that, as you understood the position have been a requirement of law, or would
that have been based on the booklet that you said was issued in 2008, would that be
based on practices that had been evolved over time?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes Chair. The handbook for the appointment of persons to
Boards of State and State controlled institutions says fairly specifically, that you cannot
send every appointment to cabinet. It says under – on page 22 of that handbook and I
think it is page 475 of your documentation, paragraph 15 it says:
"It has become common practice for all appointments of

20

persons to Boards – to refer all appointments of persons to
Boards to the cabinet."
This places an unnecessary administrative burden on the cabinet, particularly
in those cases where legislation specifically provides that the responsible executive
authority may appoint Board members. Elsewhere – and I will not go into that. It does
say, however, that if the Board is significant, then it ought to go to cabinet for approval

Page 31 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
and then it also defines what is significant. One of the definitions is, if that particular
institution has an asset base exceeding 1 billion.
So my understanding in that regard is that it would go to cabinet, you know
Eskom, Denel all of those.

However, the big issue which is not clarified in the

handbook, and was never clarified in my day is, does it go to cabinet for approval, for
noting, what is the point? The Department of Public Enterprises, when this became an
issue, conducted an assessment of the extent of the cabinet's involvemen t in order to
establish a trend. The review was from April 2002 to February 2009, relating to the
appointment of CEOs, not Boards, to a variety of SOEs. The result show that cabinet's
10

involvement varied between approval that was ten times, concurrence six times and
noting twice of the Minister's decision. Indicating that every CEO appointment is dealt
with on a case by case basis, having considered the size, importance and
circumstances facing the SOE at that time.
Now I did consult with one or two cabinet colleagues and people who worked
with the cabinet secretariat on this matter around, would the President be in a position
to stop a process and whatever. I was informed by a previous cabinet Minister that in
his experience of President Mandela and Mbeki, if a cabinet memo was patently
incompetent, if it was a badly drawn-up memo, the President would request that – or
the cabinet would request that the Minister go back and discuss it, you know and bring

20

in. But it was not – now both who I consulted said it was never a precedent that the
President must approve everything.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mokoena.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Mr Chair following on your questions, just to clarify the
issues. Ms Hogan may I refer you to page 89. You will see that initially in my question
when I asked you about who appoints the CEO or the Board and that would be

Page 32 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
regulated from time-to-time by the specific founding documents of that company, do you
agree?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now let us take, for instance Transnet in order to
ventilate the issues which the Chair was canvassing with you.

If you look at

paragraph 12 it says that:
"In terms of Section 2 (1) and 3 read with Section 4 (1)
Transnet it is a public company.

The State is its only

shareholder and the Minister exercises the rights of the State
as a shareholder on its behalf."

10

Is this your understanding when you dealt with the issues pertaining to
Transnet?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes. Now it also proceeds at paragraph 13 to say that:
"The State's right as a shareholder exercised on its behalf by the Minister
include the following ..."
And those are tabulated in terms of key 1.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And with reference to particular sections of the
20

Companies Act linked with the Transnet documents, am I correct?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now would you get the same sense also in Eskom,
one; you will have go to the founding documents and to see how do they regulate those
specific powers vis-à-vie the shareholder, the President, the Board and the CEO, am I
correct?

Page 33 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.

Now, let us take the following example, in

instances where you as the Minister had went through a lawful process of appointing
the Board and having interacted with the relevant structures.

Can a President

unilaterally rescind that decision of the Board?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: A rescind of a decision of a Board appointing a CEO?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Sorry, or the decision of you as the Minister to appoint
the Board. Let us start by the Board first, we will then move on to the CEO. Where you
have gone through the process of identifying individuals, their expertise, they are being
10

interviewed, you have consulted with the relevant structures.

Can thereafter the

President unilaterally outside cabinet simply rescind that decision of the appointment of
the Board?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Based on the opinions that I have received, I would say that it
would be extremely incorrect, or irregular for the President to intervene and stop a
process outside of a cabinet process.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Let us take the CEO, whereby the Board which it is
having the powers in terms of the relevant founding documents or Transnet or Eskom,
having identified the candidate, having engaged the experts, having recommended, or
found a suitable candidate, can that be ignored by the simply say-so of the President
20

simply saying that that is not the candidate that I want?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: In my understanding not.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes. Mr Chair at an appropriate time we will make
submissions with reference to the relevant documents, but also bringing the evidence of
this witness to fall in within that regulatory framework. We understand that she cannot
comment on the legalities, but we want her to give the factual spectrum on the issues

Page 34 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
that confronted her at the time.
CHAIRPERSON: No, no that is in order.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: I do not know whether you are still going to deal with the issue of the
different roles of different office bearers, or whether you are done speaking in general?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: When we deal with the specific entities like Eskom and
Transnet, she will ventilate on those issues Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay no that is fine. Let me ask this question. The cabinet is a
collective, it is appointed by the President, the Ministers are appointed by the President
10

and as any Minister is supposed to execute his or her functions in her or his portfolio in
accordance with the Constitution, the law, the policies of Government and the particular
department and whatever else it is that the Government of which she is part seeks to
achieve for the country. Now, I can imagine that where, for example, in terms of
policies, in terms of even legislation maybe as a Minister you are required, or you have
a discretion to approach cabinet and hear what they may have to say about certain
candidates that you are thinking of approving or appointing or supporting in terms of a
Board. I can imagine that you might not necessarily always want to stick to – you might
not want to be rigid to say, for example, this can only be discussed at cabinet. You
might want to say, no before I go to cabinet, let me find out what the President's views

20

are on this matter, because you might want to have an idea whether by the time you
go to Cabinet you have the support of the President on the particular candidate and
if the President has got some issues you might want to apply your mind to those
issues before the matter goes to Cabinet is that right?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. So does that not mean that maybe problem areas arise

Page 35 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
when maybe the different office-bearers, let us say well one such office-bearer is the
President, the Minister is another office-bearer and there are others. You might
have a situation where rightly or wrongly the President might think the Minister is not
understanding her role properly, saying well I appointe d her. The Minister might be
saying well the President is now overstepping you know.
But where for example the President understands that you have, in law, the
final say and whatever views they express they express with an appreciation of that,
there should not be serious problems should there be, when they express their
views, what is your view? In other words is the position not that it is not who you
10

consult it is how they perceive their role to be. If they, if for example a President
perceives that you, if he or she says no even though the executive, the power in law
vests with you then no matter what the circumstances are you should not pursue
what you believe is right then there is a problem. But if the President says look I
would not go along with, I would not support this candidate for this and that and that
reason but it is your decision. Take into account everything you are supposed to
take into account and then you have heard my views but then make up your mind
then there should not be problems if that is the approach is it not?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I think you are absolutely correct Chair. No Minister would
make an appointment to as crucial an institution without talking through the matter

20

with people who do matter who will have to back up tho se institutions at a certain
stage.
Consultation is different from interfering with what a minister does. My
experience was that the President stopped things from going to Cabinet, instructed
me to withdraw things and I will go more into the details but what was very worrying
about that was that in some, in one of those instructions related to Transnet there

Page 36 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
was a potential breach of law.
So you know you do consult you know, the President would phone you and
say listen I hear this, can we talk a bit, but it is in a collegial basis. The same as you
expect with your fellow Cabinet Ministers, they are not going to be driving their own
agendas for their own purposes but remember that the Executive Ethics Act says
that you may not make a decision in your, in exercising your powers as an executive
authority if it is to benefit someone close to you or along those lines. So there is a
constraint, a Minister or President cannot be doing if it is to benefit some unknown
persons.
10

CHAIRPERSON: No thank you very much.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: I thought at a general level it was important just us to understand
what your views are in regard to that.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Because it may be that the problem might not really be
consultation, the problem might be how consultation is understood and how
everyone understands their role. Thank you very much. Mr Mokoena?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ms Hogan if I understood your interaction with the
Chair you emphasised on a distinction between a consultation and an interference,

20

and those interferences, we will deal with them in due course when you talk to
specifics. For now just to complete the picture, can you explain to the Chair what
happens once you had approved the composition of the Board and in relation to the
Cabinet so that we get a full picture of your evidence?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Once the Board is approved, you are saying what is the
process or before?

Page 37 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes once you had approved as the Minister.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Oh once I approved then it goes to a subcommittee of
Cabinet and that goes through the Cabinet secretary. You know the Cabinet had a
secretariat and they run all the processes so that, I have to sign off on it and then
that would go to the Cabinet subcommittee. Sometimes the secretariat would say oh
you have not added this in and you know there is a certain protocol about what must
go into a memorandum.
Then your fellow Ministers will discuss it and then it will go to Cabinet
based, your decision will go to Cabinet, the decision of that subcommittee goes to
10

Cabinet as a recommendation to Cabinet. Cabinet can further engage, the President
chairs that Committee and that is the process that takes place and then it is
announced the next day.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, and whatever that the President does will have
to be within those structures that you have actually testified upon, that Cabinet
Committee and those are the processes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Those are the processes that I understood and once you
become a Minister you are given a handbook which explains the Cabinet decision making process.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: And it is very carefully run. In each department there is
one person who is responsible only for Cabinet documentation. That person links
into the Cabinet secretariat.

There is a very sophisticated filing system.

The

minutes of those Cabinet meetings are taken very seriously. If you have to do
something in terms of a decision of Cabinet the secretariat will remind you. So those
documents, and as you know they are State secret, those documents and that

Page 38 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
process is the ultimate decision-making process of a Government.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Of an executive authority.
CHAIRPERSON: Well let me just ask this question because I think it probably
belongs at this stage when you are just talking in general; we have looked at the role
of a Minister and the President and the Cabinet. Is there a legitimate role for the
ruling party in the appointments of CEOs and Boards of SOEs? Obviously I ask this
question because I have read your statement.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, ja. Well that is what ...[intervenes]
10

CHAIRPERSON: In other words I am saying.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja.
CHAIRPERSON: You have told us your understanding about what role the
President has, on your understanding he cannot instruct you to say you may or may
not appoint so and so.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja.
CHAIRPERSON: And you have said as a Minister you will not just go and just
appoint whoever you want, you would want to hear what your fellow Cabinet
members have to say you know, but you will appreciate that in the end I think if the
power is given to you it is the power you must exercise. Now is there any legitimate

20

role for the ruling party to make any input to a Minister who is a member of the ruling
party, when she has to consider whether a particular CEO must be appointed,
whether certain people must be put on the Boards or is there none?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Chair, in law obviously it does not exist you know, the
ruling party, there is nothing in law that requires a Minister to consult with the ruling
party. The problems that I think many of us may have experienced with the ruling

Page 39 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
party was that in 1994 when we came to Government the ANC set up a Deployment
Committee. Now at that time the entire civil service was occupied by people from
the apartheid era. There needed to be transformation, there needed to be transition.
At the same time there were large numbers of people who had been in a struggle or
had been sympathetic or who were wanting to use their professional skills for a new
South Africa and how were they now going to be deployed. And in that sense the
ANC set up a Deployment Committee which would say you Mr Gordhan, you will –
no they did not say that to him but you know that it would be preferable if you
... [intervenes]
10

CHAIRPERSON: You want to say ... [intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Let me not interfere with the Minister.
CHAIRPERSON: You are Mr X or Ms X.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Mr X, Mrs X, you know we would want you to go. Like they
said to my partner Mr Kathrada we would like you to be the parliamentary advisor to
the President, to President Mandela. And so it was a question when you had to look
at the resources available to you, the capable people, the people who understood
what a new South Africa actually meant, to be deployed, and it had to be on a
massive basis and those are the issues that come up with any change, fundamental
change in Government.

20

I – my own view after an experience nowadays is that I sincerely wonder if a
Deployment Committee plays a useful role now. You know it is a handful of people,
if you see the number of appointments that go to Cabinet every time, I mean it is
huge numbers of people, you do not know how many institutions Government has
got, and for a handful of people just simply to decide that this is their preferred
candidate, on what basis, what transparency is there?

Page 40 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
I am not saying that that Deployment Committee did not always operat e with
honesty and integrity but the weakness of the system is that if that Deployment
Committee is captured by whatever forces it can have a fundamental impact on
Government. And so we do have to protect Government from undue influence.
Now that again does not mean, I did it myself, I spoke to the Secretary
General. We had differences of views on some matters and we agreed on other
matters, on other appointments. He never wanted to know the full Board or the –
you know it was on sensitive matters. Often those sensitive matters were related to
issues of transformation but the President – but you know I would consult but I was
10

very clear that I was hearing, because I needed to hear what the issues were, and
on the basis of hearing everything then I would apply my mind.
But it became apparent during my time, and we will see it later in a press
statement issued by the ANC or statements to the press that even the NWC, the
National Working Committee, which is the Executive Committee of the ANC saw it as
their right to instruct a Minister who should be appointed and not appointed. That is
an abuse of power and that is usurping executive authority. Why have a Minister if
you are going to instruct that Minister about what happens.
I feel the same way very strongly about Parliament. When you become an
NP your responsibility is to a constitution. You take into consideration of course,

20

ruling party views, but to be instructed by a ruling party about what you should do is
usurping the legislative authority of you know finally MPs must make a decision. But
yes, robust engagement. Yes discussion, yes persuasion. You do not want anyone
appointed who is going to be knifed in the back by some political formations but it
cannot be instructions.
CHAIRPERSON: And you may or may not be able to say, to answer this one and

Page 41 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
feel free to say so if you are unable to, do you know whether there is clarity within
the ruling party as to where their role starts and where it stops in regard to for
example the appointments of SOEs, Boards and CEOs, and I know you have raised
the question of Parliament, it is a very important question as to what a party can say
to members of Parliament who are there on his ticket as it is said, and that issue
may become quite a big issue in regard to the work of this Commission because one
of the things that we have to look into is what environment existed that may or may
not have provided fertile ground for State capture.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja.
10

CHAIRPERSON: Is there anything in our legislation, is there anything in our
electoral system, is there anything in our laws that may have made it easy for certain
things to happen which should not have happened? So – but we will deal with those
and I hope that people, political parties, Government and everyb ody can start
thinking about that very wide and important issue. But for now my question is simply
whether you know whether there is clarity in the ruling party about whether their role
starts and where it ends in regard to the appointment of Boards of SO Es, CEOs of
SOEs and so on. In other words maybe they can be – their views can be sought but
it is just views and nothing more, or whether they can insist on certain appointments.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Chair, I can only speak to my experience at the time.

20

There was no clarity on this even when there were talks of a Deployment Committee
I would ask now who is on this Deployment Committee and who is doing what, and I
would be told well it is really not functional. So you know that leaves you very
confused about what is happening.
But my first experience of this, my first negative experience of the
relationship between the party and State emerged very early on in my career as a

Page 42 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
Minister.

As you will know the ruling party, on the question of State owned

enterprises had vetoed any privatisation, and that was the position of the tripartite
alliance, and had accepted though that there needed to be restructuring, and that
was left very open-ended.
You will recall that I came into that position as – from the Minister of Health
into Public Enterprises. In Health I had to deal with the Free State Government
running out of antiretrovirals in August. Government did not have money, I had to go
and speak to the American and British Governments to make grants. Now that is
how desperate funding is for people on the ground.
10

So when I came to the portfolio and I had a look at it one of the first things I
noticed was how financially stressed, apart from Transnet, many of these SOEs were
under control, and SAA, within two days of my appointment I was already harassing
the Minister of Finance to give them a guarantee to keep them a going concern. And
so I was really concerned about it and I was interviewed by a reporter and I said you
know there will have to be an equity partner somewhere in this game, and I was
saying that not in defiance, I was saying it because the reality was Government
would not – did not have the resources to fund the deficit.
We were also – it was shortly after the 2008 financial crisis so the revenue
that we were going to expect was terrible. That was reported.

20

The Secretary

General and the Deputy Secretary General kicked up a huge fuss in the media and
publically summonsed me to explain myself at Luthuli House, myself and the Deputy
Minister. We both went and we explained you know, at that meeting I explained that
SAA was in severe problems and it was not easy to see a funding model, and I said
trust me you are going to have real problems there and they would not release a
statement after that meeting.

Page 43 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
But my concern at that stage was if I was seen to be going outside of
Government policy it should have been the President who summonsed me not the
party. And so I am not saying that I was saying the right or the incorrect thing but it
is the President not the party. And what made things even more vulnerable at that
time was that a certain faction, and I hate using these words but a certain faction
who was supporting a President who came in, President Zuma, was very powerful in
that NEC at that stage. If you look at the National Working Committee at that stage
it consists almost entirely of his very vocal supporters.
So there is a weakness there. You know they were driving a whole agenda
10

and they saw themselves as super powerful and they could now d ictate.

The

tripartite alliance could dictate to the Government what it should be doing down to
the level of who should be a CEO or not. And I think there are real problems there.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much and again part of the context for this i s that
as we investigate these allegations of State capture and so on, at a certain stage I
will have to make findings and reach conclusions, and one of the things we have to
look at is where did things go wrong. And if things that go wrong include the ro le of
a ruling party we would need to deal with that to say this may or may not have
contributed to facilitating certain things happening and what needs to be done in the
future. What should future ruling parties not do if we are to avoid a repeat of thin gs
20

such as those that we are looking at, so that is the context.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, absolutely.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja thank you. Mr Mokoena?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ms Hogan, the issues arising from the Chair's
questions, would I be correct that they are dealt in your witness statement with
reference to paragraphs 22 to 27? That is where you are talking about a parallel

Page 44 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
behind the scene processes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And you are also talking about the Deployment
Committee of the ANC. Now if I have understood the debate between yourself and
the Chair correctly, what you are saying it is not necessarily that you are not
... [intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: More a conversation than a debate.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: A conversation with the Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: We did not have any debate.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: There is a thin line Mr Chair, the conversation with
the Chairperson, you do not take issue with the question of having to consult the
ruling party but I think what we describe as the weakness is the lack of transparency
or where there could be inherent conflict.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And that would result in people who are conflicted
being appointed regardless of the proper lawful process that y ou had actually
undertaken am I correct?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ja, now you in fact summarise that conversation with

20

the Chair, it is captured in paragraph 21, if you can go there, of your statement, and
if you can read paragraph 21 and also for completeness read paragraph 25 and 26
so that at least we get a proper picture of what you wanted to convey to the
Chairperson about the parallel behind the scene processes, on page 6 of your
witness statement, paragraph 21.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay I have read part of the paragraph 21 that said the pro

Page 45 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
– you know the assessment of how many came, of how many you appointments
were approved, concurred, noted. That and then page 20 ... [intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Page 7.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Page 7 then it is ... [intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Paragraph 25 and 26.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: And 26.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: If you can read that so that we can be able to
understand better what you are conveying to the Chair.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, I was appointed a Minister shortly after the
10

Polokwane Conference and that Conference was noted for the emergence of very
strong factional tendencies within the ANC. So I say from paragraph 25:
"Regrettably these factional battles in the ANC only serve to
encourage an entrenched nepotism and patronage from within
the ranks of the ANC in the tripartite alliance and this would
have

very

damaging

consequences

for

State

owned

enterprises and by extension for our economy, which I will
illustrate below with regard to my experience in the
appointment of Board members and CEOs of Transnet and
Eskom during my time. It is important to note that there were
20

three damaging processes afoot in my time with record to SOE
related appointments. There were the very political and public
manoeuvrings of certain elements within the ANC and the
tripartite alliance to get their way. Then there were ways that
President Zuma and some Cabinet colleagues thwarted my
attempts to get Cabinet approval for Board appointments, and I

Page 46 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
stress the word thwarted.

And finally the inexcusable

interference with my responsibilities as a Minister by President
Zuma that eroded my executive authority, and I refer in
particular to Eskom in that regard."
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And that is what you were conveying to the Chair is it
not?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The last paragraph 27.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: No, I am saying that paragraph 25 and 26.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, ja.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Those are the essence of what you were conveying
to the Chairperson during your conversation.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes Chair.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now I need to move to another topic. I need to deal
with Transnet specifically Ms Hogan. Just to remind ourselves you were appointed
as the Minister of Public Enterprise around May 2009. Who was your predecessor?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Minister Brigitte Mabandla. She had been there for a short
period of time after Minister Alec Erwin had resigned and Minister Mabandla took

20

over for the eight or nine months ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And who succeeded you?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Minister Malusi Gigaba.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Okay. Now did you have an opportunity to familiarise
yourself with the issues and events which took place prior to your appointment?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.

Page 47 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And you are introducing the topic of Transnet, in fact
with reference to page 8?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Paragraph 28.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And therein you are saying that:
"A simple, but important job of appointing a CEO of Transnet,
after the resignation of Maria Ramos at the end of February
2009 became the site of an ugly protracted battle between
10

President Zuma and I, in which he thwarted all the legal and
legitimate procedures that I took to obtain Cabinet approval for
any appointments whatsoever to Transnet including the
appointment of a CEO. As a consequence, Transnet had an
Acting Chairperson, an Acting Group CEO and Acting CFO and
later on an Acting CEO in one of the divisions Transnet Freight
Rail for one and a half years".
Now can you please contextualise the issues which you are prefacing in that
paragraph in relation to Transnet?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay. As I have indicated before Transnet had gone through

20

a restructuring process. Its balance sheet was now…[indistinct] and it now had to
embark on a major investment in equipment, in trains and in infrastructure to really step
up its performance. Maria Ramos had been CEO for five years and in November 2008
she announced that she would be moving on and the board then undertook a
succession planning exercise. They consulted extensively with Minister Mabandla and

Page 48 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
there is a document for timeline of Transnet. We can get – I did a document that shows
the extent of that…[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: Well, between you and Mr Mokoena you must feel free if you want to
refer to it.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: To refer to it, so…[intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: We will refer to it …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: A bit later on, yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Just give us the context.
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: I am not going to speak to it, but I am going to – I am
summarising more here, but it was thoroughly - a very thorough process in which the
Transnet board met with the Minister. They discussed the criteria for the appointment
of a new CEO. What skills, what competency, what the time frames would be, how the
interviews would be conducted, what tests would be conducted on short list? Who
would be on the subcommittee of the board that would run that process? It was – you
know a very, very professional run process.
And this is in line that the Minister is in power to appoint a CEO, but this is
what you do. You allow the board, because they know what they need to run the
process, but you make sure every step of the way that you have applied your mind. So

20

that process went ahead and a number of people were short-listed. Some were internal
candidates, others were external and in a letter, early February 2009 the Head of the
Board Mr Fred Phaswana, the Chair, sends a formal letter to Minister Mabandla and
says they have decided that they are recommending one candidate only, because he
stood head and shoulders above the rest, and that was Minister Ghordan – well Pravin
Ghordan. Okay, …[intervenes]

Page 49 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ms Hogan, while you are still there we will come to that.
May I refer you to page 386?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: In order to help you with the time line that you are
referring to.
CHAIRPERSON: You say 386?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: 386. Mine is paginated 386.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 386?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: 386, yes, the first file, Mr Chair.
10

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 386, of the timeline, 387. Yes, the timeline for Transnet is on
page 387, is that what …[intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: It is the one that you were referring to, to the, Chair?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, but that is a detailed – yes…[intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: It is a detailed summary. I am just speaking to…[intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Just to check and have reference to it, yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now may I refer you to annexure A? As you were

20

talking about Transnet on page 25, Mr Chair. You were just about to talk about the
candidate that was recommended by the board?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, annexure A1, yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, if you may identify that document firstly for us? If
you can identify the document for us? What is that document?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, yes. This is the document that I was referring to.

Page 50 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: What is that document? What was the purpose for that
document?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 13 February 2009.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: And the purpose?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The purpose was to make a recommendation to the Minister
for the appointment of a group CEO of Transnet.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, you can then proceed to take us through your
evidence with reference to that document. You were saying that there was only one
candidate. That is where I interrupted you.
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, there was only one candidate.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: I interrupted you, yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Now, Chair, in this, in this proposal we have blacked out the
assessments of other candidates, because it is confidential.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Can you refer to page 27?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Paragraph 4.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Would that entail …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: That is a recommendation.

20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes. They say that – so at paragraph 4 on page 27 says:
"The Corporate Governance and Nominations Committee
conducted interviews, although…"
And this is important, because this was distorted all the time, and this
paragraph is very important.

Page 51 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
"…although the preference was to a point a suitably qualified
internal candidate. After consideration of the current global
meltdown and the global recession its current and future
potential impact on Transnet Ltd and as a consideration of
these individuals the nominations committee fully supported by
the board recommended the appointment of Mr Pravin
Ghordan on the basis of the strengths he displayed against the
competency profile and in comparison with the other
candidates who were interviewed."
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Yes, and you also referred to a letter that was

subsequently written. May I refer you to page 31? Mr Chair, it is annexure A2.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Are you there Ms Hogan?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, now this is a letter that was sent again by Mr Phaswana
to Mrs Mabandla, which says that although the board approved Mr Ghordan – hang on
wait, and that is on page 34, that although the board had appointed – approved Mr
Ghordan, he has withdrawn from the process and we know of course that he became
Minister of Finance shortly thereafter.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Then what happened …[intervenes]
20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Then on page 33.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Now on page 33 there is a very important paragraph there.
"In the light of your letter…[intervenes]"
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Are you now reading at the bottom of page 33?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: At the bottom of the page.

Page 52 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Bottom of page 33.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: The last paragraph?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The last paragraph:
"In the light of your letter it is also incumbent upon me to
highlight that in respect of Mr Ghama the Transnet board has
received documentation and reports including, but not limited
to a recent forensic report from Transnet's internal auditors
which detailed serious allegations of misconduct on the part of
10

Mr Ghama, that require the company to conduct investigation
to ascertain the truth thereof and decide on any appropriate
action from Transnet's internal audit – any appropriate action
against the individual involved."
Do you want me to continue?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: "I annex hereto annexure C."
That is what I am annexing. Then:
"…correspondence from Transnet internal auditors relating to
the matters in question which sets out some of the summarised

20

information relating to the main allegations against Mr Ghama."
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: So at the time the board had already considered these
issues in relation to the candidacy of Mr Ghama?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Yes, now what happened after Mr Ghordan has

withdrawn his candidate?

Page 53 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry, I am sorry Mr Mokoena, you may have said this and I
missed it, do you just want to confirm Ms Hogan that at page 32, which is part of the
letter from which you were reading just now, there is a list of names of the candidates
who had been short listed and to mention that Mr S Ghama is one of the candidates
who are listed there.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, but you will note it is not written in numerical order.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, my question Ms Hogan, what happened after
Mr Ghordan has withdrawn his candidature? What happened?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The board then approached – once – you know the board
then had to find another CEO and this is already getting towards the end of February
when Ms Ramos was due to move on. So the board then requested Minister Mabandla
if they could then start a further search, because in the interviews that were done with
the other candidates both internal and external, although they did receive good reports
they just felt that those candidates did not meet the requirements for being a group
CEO.
Let me also say that Transnet had several divisions. All of them, I think a part

20

one were all run by black Managers, very capable black Managers and the board was
dominated by black Directors. I say that, because that became accusations later on.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay.

Page 54 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: In fact you also capture the board's decision. The letter
that you referred to of the Chairperson at the time Mr Fred Phaswana, if I may refer to
page 34? 34.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 84?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: 34.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 34, yes?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: 34. The second paragraph you are saying there:
"The withdrawal of Mr Privan Ghordan has resulted in the
board's view in the need to commence a new appointment
10

process as none of the other short listed candidates are at the
level required for such a key position for the organisation and
indeed for the country given the central role that Transnet must
play in the government's economic and infrastructural
development plan."
That is what you are testifying about. Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct. So the board then requested the Minister to then –
that they would like to embark on a further search, and they never got a definitive reply.
The Minister asked to receive the CV's of the other internal candidates and their
assessments, plus the professional assessments, which they sent on. At one stage he

20

said send me a couple of names and I will put it before a panel for them to decide. It
was not a cabinet panel, I am not sure what panel she was referring to, but you know it
went backwards and forwards, and when I came in as Minister in May this matter had
still not been resolved.
The board, however, in considering its …[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: And Ms Ramos was about to leave at that time?

Page 55 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ms Ramos had already left.
CHAIRPERSON: O, had already left.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: And Minister Mabandla had approved Chris Wells as the
Acting CFO, as the Acting CEO, he had been the Chief Financial Officer and had
approved Anauze[?] Singh who had been in the Treasury as the Acting CFO, prior to
my appointment. So Transnet already had an Acting General Group CEO and an
Acting CFO, and one must always take into consideration that when there has to be a
succession of a CEO is always a very vulnerable moment in any major enterprise.
So the board did not get a definitive thing, but in exercising their fiduciary
10

responsibilities they went ahead and did a search, and out of that they came up with a
candidate and when I, sorry – and in June when I became a Minister and they had done
exactly the same procedures as they had done in the previous, they then submitted that
document to me, recommending a candidate, a Mr Sipho Maseko who is now the CEO
of Telkom.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: May I refer you to page 35?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 35, yes. Yes, that is the correspondence. Mr Phaswana met
with me in person and gave me this document. What is missing from these memo's are
the entire assessments of all the other candidates and reasons for accepting and not
accepting. So it was not just a blank, we want this person. Details of all the others and

20

the strengths and weaknesses were identified.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And then may I refer you to page 38, paragraph 4?
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

The recommendation is then for the appointment of

Mr Sipho Maseko, and he gets a very glowing report.

He had been Head of

BP South Africa, he was familiar with logistics, various matters, developed very
sophisticated interpersonal skills and whatever.

Page 56 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And may I refer you to page 45, paragraph 13?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: So that is a recommendation and you are saying that,
that was the most qualified person with skills, and that was the recommendation of the
board to appoint him premised on those credentials?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now, I want to take you to the events which happens
after this recommendation. On page 9, paragraph 33 of your witness statement you
referred to your meeting with the ex-President Mr Zuma approximately a month after
10

your appointment. Could you share with us what transpired in that meeting?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I felt it necessary to inform the President that Transnet did
not yet have a CEO. That is a serious thing. And I gave him a full background to the
whole process for the appointment of a CEO. I also said to him that the Transnet AGM
was coming up and that, you know, the shareholder would then appoint the group CEO
at that meeting, and a Chairperson of Transnet, because Mr Fred Phaswana by that
stage had resigned, and he was leaving the company at the end of July.
So both the Chair, the Chair had also now resigned.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, what happened – what was Mr Zuma's reaction to
all the issues that you are raising in relation to Transnet?

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Chair, I was extremely shocked. The President would not
hear of any candidate except Siabonga Ghama. I informed him how professional the
selection process was. I informed him that he was facing some serious misconduct
charges. That the board in terms of the PFMA was obliged to investigate these
charges, it was not just going ahead, and under these circumstances it would not be in
the interest of Transnet to appoint a group CEO who was facing, you know, whose time

Page 57 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
would be caught up with defending himself in a misconduct, but even over and above
that I was recommending Mr Maseko on the basis of the recommendations made by the
Transnet, the recommendations made by the professional evaluation agency. I will not
go through them here, but they are here in this report that Mr Phaswana forward – gave
to me.
It speaks very glowingly of Mr Maseko. I had also …[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: Well I will ask you to go there and just …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Do you want me to go …[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: Tell us what the Chairperson had to say about Mr Maseko.
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, do you want me to do that?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, please, yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON: What is…[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: So they…[indistinct] has an LLB in law from…[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry what page is it?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Page 38.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Sorry, it is page 38.

20

CHAIRPERSON: 38.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: I have got it page 38 and let us talk about the profile of
Mr Maseko, paragraph 4.1.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, and it is paragraph 4.1. He has a BA, a LLB, BA at Wits,
LLB at KZN University in Durban Westville. Now it says here:

Page 58 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
"During the interview process the panel was very impressed
with his skills, experience, track record and knowledge that Mr
Maseko had. The Transnet board are of the opinion that Mr
Maseko who is currently the Chief Executive Officer of BP
Africa has demonstrated the ability and track record to
effectively lead and manage the strategic challenges and key
responsibilities related to the post of group Chief Executive.
Owing to his extensive experience, knowledge and utility in
leading and transforming a large complex multi-national
organisation across Africa. He has a stable track record in BP

10

and has successfully improved operational efficiencies,
reduced costs, increase service delivery and managed risk in a
highly volatile foreign currency based revenue stream and
dealt with the issues and challenges presented by regulatory
authorities and constraints in infrastructure development. His
leadership style contributes to a transformed and streamlined
organisation."
I will then go further and refer you to page 39.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes?
20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: To effectively the second paragraph there, he displays, it
starts with.
"He displays very sophisticated interpersonal skills and has an
ability to communicate influence and negotiate effectively at all
levels with all stakeholders.

Mr Maseko has successfully

implemented world class standards in terms of operational

Page 59 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
efficiencies, quality standards, cost structures, process service
delivery and safety standards. His innovative flare has enabled
him to effect meaningful black economic empowerment
structures and partnerships for the organisation. He is well
schooled in all aspects of governance and he has a high
integrity reputation. In the past two years in BP Africa he has
successfully refocused the business significantly reducing
costs by 60%, moving the South African Head Office and
remodelling the interface between the African satellite
operations in South Africa."

10

I then just go onto the independent assessment, that is at the bottom of the
page.
"His suitability in terms of his leadership style, his cognitive
level of functioning to handle the complexity of an organisation
as large as Transnet, his personality to lead with maturity, his
drive and his integrity have all been independently…"
And I stress this.
"…have all been independently assessed by an independent
counselling psychologist who confirms he has a requisite skills
20

competencies and attributes for the job. In summary he is
assessed as having a good all round profile."
I do not think I need to go further than that. Okay.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: I think you need to go further.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: It is quite important.

Page 60 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
MS BARBARA HOGAN:
"He has good thinking skills and the potential to be very
effective in this executive leadership role. He is particularly
good at dealing with detailed complexity and he spends a lot of
time thinking through problems in order to consider all the
ramifications. He has a high level of learning potential and can
be expected to engage effectively in the new learning
institutions.

He has sophisticated social skills and an

inspirational and supportive style of leadership. He is good at
10

motivating

and

encouraging

people, but will confront

underperformance when he needs to do so. He forms good
relationships with people and has a great respect for diversity
and individual differences. He likes to listen to people and
guide them rather than direct them, although he can be strong
and assertive when a situation requires strong leadership. He
is assertive in a quiet manner, and manages situations with
sensitivity. He can be direct and straightforward."
Do you want me to continue?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
20

MS BARBARA HOGAN:
"He responds positively to change and embraces opportunities
for advancement and challenge and …[indistinct] bring in
enthusiasm and energy.

Mr Maseko's preferred style of

problem solving is explorative and reflective when faced with
an unfamiliar or new business environment or industry. This

Page 61 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
indicates that in a new large organisation like Transnet he
would benefit from an experienced mentor and coach who fully
understands the complexity of the organisation. The industry is
in the challenge and will fast track his learning and decision
making."
And then he says all the relevant checks were done.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: But this is important, because you know when you deal
with other issues – I will be posing questions to you whether the subsequent boards
when they were appointed did one have this checks, you know, that are referred to on
10

page 40 and what were the credentials of the different individuals that were appointed,
subsequent to you having left your position as the Minister of Public Enterprise.
Now can you take us all through this citizen credit criminal qualification checks
on page 40?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay. All relevant suitability checks were done, criminal
records, citizenship verification, credit financial asset record checks and qualification
degree verifications.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Advocate may I just say one thing in relation to this?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: It sounds very lyrical. Let me say that was other candidates,
a lot of very good stuff was also written and important assessments. What made me
believe that this was not just trying to pull wool over my eyes was in the assessments of
the other candidates there were frank pointers to certain issues which indicated that
this would not be the perfect candidate or the most candidate.

Page 62 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
I also met with Mr Maseko twice to get my own understanding. Sometimes
you can hear good stuff. I met with him twice and I must say he was very, very
impressive and straightforward no nonsense about him.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, so he was – you first Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: So this was the candidate that the board was recommending after
following certain processes and it was a black candidate?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: With the academic qualifications that we have been referred to and
quite a lot of experience according to the board's letter.
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: In recommending this candidate I also liased with my Deputy
Minister Enoch Gordan Ngwana who is a Chair of the Economics Transformation
Commission in the NEC of the ANC. He was fully behind this candidate and he had
engaged very extensively, I asked him to concentrate. I also spoke to Deputy President
Galima Motlanthle, because he was supposedly head of the employment committee at
that time, and he said he knew him and he thought he was an excellent candidate.
Okay.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Despite all that process and the recommendation of the
board Mr Zuma was saying that Mr Ghama should be the one that must be appointed?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja, carry on.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You wanted to elaborate?

Page 63 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: Go ahead Ms Hogan, you wanted to say something in response.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You may proceed.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, it actually shocked me. I, okay, you know he then said
to me "you may not appoint anyone" to the board, because the board also had to have
changes, until Mr Ghama's disciplinary was over, because I said to him we cannot
appoint him until that disciplinary is over if that is the candidate that you are insisting
on.
He said "until that disciplinary is over you will appoint no one".
CHAIRPERSON:
10

Now when the former President said to you that he wanted

Mr Ghama to be appointed as the CEO did you furnish him with documentation such as
this recommendation, for example from the …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: From the board so that he could familiarise himself with how the
board had come to the decision to recommend this one as opposed to any other
candidate?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I did, and later on as the advocate will lead me, I gave him a
more comprehensive document which included the chin grove and CATS opinions and
an extensive document that outlined all of this, yes I did.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you know whether when he informed you for the first time that Mr

20

Ghama should be the one who should be appointed he had read or had had an
opportunity to read the documentation you had given him?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I could never give documentation ahead of a meeting. That
was part of the problems with the way that office operated and in those early months it
was pretty disorganised and remember this is a month into my job, ja, it was still
disorganised, the President's office a lot of the staff had been redeployed into the

Page 64 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
Deputy President's office to be staff members. So you know sending stuff in, it was
confusing. So I took documents with me to the President, but I briefed him according to
the documents.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, okay, what I wanted to find out was whether at the time he
expressed the view he had already had the benefit of reading them.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No.
CHAIRPERSON: He had not?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No, no.
CHAIRPERSON: But he had had the benefit of you briefing him in that meeting?
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: And did he express this view that Mr Ghama should be the one to be
appointed at that same meeting where you briefed him or subsequently?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No, at that same meeting. You know initially he wanted me to
go ahead with the appointment of Mr Ghama. I said I cannot do that. The kind of
compromise he then said, he said "alright, we will wait until the disciplinary process is
over". I did not agree to that, but we then agreed that I would provide him with further
information which I then did.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Did the President, the ex-President provide you or the

20

board with any reason why Mr Maseko was not supposed to be appointed, when he
insisted Mr Ghama and Mr Ghama alone should be the one who should be appointed?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: He never raised objections about Mr Maseko. He never
referred to Mr Maseko. It was just, this is my candidate and Mr Maseko was, you know,
he never raised objections or reasons why he should not be appointed.

Page 65 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: When he came up with Mr Ghama's name, as far as you know was
that because in briefing him you had told him what the names of the other candidates
who had been short listed were? Or do you know whether he might have had the name
even before your meeting with him?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I had the impression that he had the name before I met with
him. He seemed to, you know, there were a lot of allegations going around and he
seemed to be familiar with those allegations. They were wrongful allegations, but he
was aware of them.
CHAIRPERSON: So, so whatever may have influenced him to make the choice that he
10

made may have been what you said, maybe plus whatever else he might have known
before the meeting?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: And also I am not sure, because I have no evidence thereof,
but it came out in a month or two later that the ANC and a whole number of
organisations were supporting Ghama completely as the candidate, and it might have
been that these matters might have been discussed with him in his capacity as head of
the ANC, and of course there were all sorts of allegations being made that Mr Ghama
was being sidelined, because Mr Wells, a white man who was an Acting CEO had also
applied for the job and it was a plot to marginalized a very competent black Manager.
Mr Wells had applied for the job in December 2008, but he withdrew his

20

application three days later. So there was a lot of false allegations going around.
CHAIRPERSON: But at the time that Mr Maseko was recommended, Mr Wells had
withdrawn his application already. He was no longer a candidate or …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: He was no longer a candidate.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Not at all.

Page 66 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: So for all intents and purposes to the extent that the former President
or anyone of the organisations you referred to may have wanted Mr Ghama as far as
the board was concerned and as far as you were concerned as Minister of Public
Enterprises, they were wanting Mr Ghama over Mr Maseko?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And not over Mr Wells?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No, over Mr Maseko.
CHAIRPERSON: And…[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: But they were saying that Mr Wells, and this will come out
10

later, had conspired to marginalize Mr Ghama by instituting, and the board had
instructed him to institute – by instituting an investigation into those misconduct
charges.
CHAIRPERSON: But they never said anything as to why Mr Maseko was not good
enough?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No, it was just Ghama and that is it.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr Mokoena?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You – in your attempt or your attempts to persuade the
ex-President Mr Zuma about the suitable candidate that must be appointed in having
regard to the process that was undertaken, the board's resolution, you also dispatched

20

a comprehensive memorandum that you are talking about. If you can go to page 53?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, I have got it.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Are you there?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.

Page 67 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

Is that the memorandum that you said that you

dispatched to the ex-President Mr Zuma, and you also annexed to that memorandum
the relevant opinions which you have received?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry, Mr Mokoena. The meeting that you had with the former
President where you briefed him, how did it end? So what was the basis on which you
parted on that occasion?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: He was insisting – firstly he insisted that I go ahead and
10

appoint Ghama. I said I could not. He was facing misconduct charges and he was not
the preferred candidate. He then said that no appointment to translate must be made
until the disciplinary case against Mr Ghama is concluded.
I was concerned about that and I said I would provide him with further
evidence. I was already – remember I was only one month into that job, but I was
already feeling that the President was exceeding his authority here, and I was truly
shocked, you know. When you explained to the President that a person is facing
misconduct charges you expect a certain response that says oh, well if that is the case
let us look at the preferred candidate that the board is recommending.
Do you know what I mean? You are not going to encumber Transnet, that is

20

so important, with a candidate that is going to be involved in controversy and the fact
that the President was absolutely insistent, Ghama will be appointed.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Mr Chair, I see it is 13:00, is this an appropriate time to
adjourn?

Page 68 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes, thank you very much. We are going to take the lunch
adjournment and we will resume at 14:00.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: We adjourn.
MEETING ADJOURNS FOR LUNCH
MEETING RESUMES AFTER LUNCH
CHAIRPERSON: We apologise about this delay. My protector and I was stuck in the
lift for the past 25 minutes or so, so, but we are here now, there is a job to be done let
us get on with it. Thank you.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Thank you, Mr Chair. Ms Hogan, just to recap and
summarise on what we touched on before the lunch adjournment. When you testified
about Mr Zuma saying that Mr Ghama is his choice, do you recall? When you nod the
machine will not be able to take your answer.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Do you recall, yes?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, yes, ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now during that interaction you said that Mr Zuma was
aware that Mr Ghama was the subject of an investigation pertaining to serious
procurement irregularities?

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And you conveyed to the ex-President that the board
had underwent a very professional selection process and that Mr Ghama was the
choice of the board, but despite that he still insisted that it must be Mr Ghama and no
one else?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.

Page 69 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: I think, did you not say Mr Ghama instead of Mr Maseko?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Maseko, yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Maseko, ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: I beg yours, Mr Chair. Now what I wanted to know from
you is that, when the candidacy of Mr Ghama was considered did the board only
consider the question of the pending disciplinary – the pending investigation or were
there other issues which made the board to persist that Mr Maseko was in fact the
suitable candidate?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: In fact when the board received the report of its nomination
10

subcommittee it then discussed those matters and made its nomination and its
recommendation of Mr Maseko. Ms Ramos then only introduced the update on the
investigations of Mr Ghama after the board had made its decision. Now, Chair, the
allegations of misconduct were initially centred on senior people, but not necessarily Mr
Ghama at a certain point.
Mr Erwin had received a whistleblowers report and it referred it
on…[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: And that was Mr Erwin being the former Minister?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Minister, the former Minister.
CHAIRPERSON: Of Public …[intervenes]

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: And then forwarded it onto Eskom for investigation. That was
related to the purchase of 50 locomotives. It was not immediately apparent that Mr
Ghama who was the CEO of Transnet Freight Rail that was doing a purchase was
implicated in anyway. And let me say now Mr Ghama was not ever found guilty of
fraud, okay. However, there were other senior Managers who were found guilty of fraud
and they were dismissed, okay.

Page 70 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
So then another query had come up in the interim about a contract between
General Ayanda Security Advisory Services and Transnet Freight Rail, a security
contract that had been entered into that had certain anomalies and that was also further
investigated and Mr Ghama's conduct in that matter also had to come under the
spotlight.
But the board at that stage, as I understand it, was not completely oevey of
how Mr Ghama was sensually affected, you know, as sensual player in this, and
Ms Ramos had the day before requested Transnet internet audit to provide an update,
and that update is what we have from Transnet internal audit which I think is C, is that
10

right?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: We will be getting to it shortly, but I …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Which then starts to definitely identify Mr Ghama as one of
the people who had to be investigated. So, yes, there was no sense at the time of the
discussions that the reason why they were turning Mr Ghama down as the – as a
recommendation was more on capabilities, and let me stress here as well. Mr Ghama
received very fine assessments and he is considered as is his fellow senior Managers.
They are considered all of them in terms of the assessments. Got very good reports,

20

but there were certain, there were just certain aspects which from the individual
evaluations and whatever made them not suitable to be the recommended appointment
at this moment in time.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: So if I understand your evidence correctly you are
saying to the, Chair, that a number of factors were considered in relation to various
issues, which were also considered by the board in relation to Mr Ghama?

Page 71 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
MS BARBARA HOGAN: That is correct, yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now may I refer you to page 40? Just to round up this
issue. You will see that on page 40 you have four unnumbered paragraphs. I need to
direct your attention to the paragraph just before the heading citizenship, credit and –
can you see that heading, can you see that paragraph?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: On page 40?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, 4-0. The fourth paragraph.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The fourth paragraph, yes I can.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: The one that starts with, it says "Mr Maseko's preferred
10

…[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Of problem solving is explorative and reflective when
faced with unfamiliar or new business environment or industry. This indicates that in a
new large organisation like Transnet he would benefit from an experienced mentor and
coach who fully understand the complexity of the organisation. Now a question might
be posed to say that, if indeed Mr Maseko was an excellent candidate, why would he
still require a mentor when he is appointed at this large institution?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Mr Maseko came not from within the ranks of Transnet, but
from outside the ranks of Transnet. He had extensive experience in running a company

20

that deals primarily with infrastructure and logistics and the movement of goods, and
Transnet is a very complex organisation and anyone who came in as CEO from the
outside would need a proper induction process. And my understanding of that is that
he would undergo a comprehensive induction process, but that his managerial
capabilities and his ability to assimilate and his managerial qualities overweighed any

Page 72 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
instance that he was, you know, he was just someone who would not know what to do
when he arrived.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes. Now in paragraph 35 of your witness statement
you refer to persons and organisations that were vocal that Mr Ghama was the
candidate of their choice. Could you please provide the context and detail to the
contents of this paragraph?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes. During the course of all of these matters the media
began to carry stories that Mr Ghama was being sidelined in favour of a white
candidate Mr Wells and the Transnet Chair…[machine stopped] with me and asked if I
10

could assist with media statements to set the record straight.
There were other media reports that was saying that he was the preferred
candidate or the second preferred candidate. The next on the list after Pravin Ghordan
and they were dealing with, it was often in Sunday newspapers. Later on when Mr
Ghama was suspended by Transnet, about a day before and in the following probably
ten, 11, 12 days several organisations issued very very firm statements that Gha ma
would become the CEO and that he was being sidelined.
Should I continue with those, mentioning who they were?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Those media statements are the ones contained from
page 95 to 113, am I correct? I intend to deal with them in due course.

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Sure.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: But I just want you to confirm whether are you referring
to those media statements?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay, alright.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Are those the ones from page 95 …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: It was those, it was in that order …[intervenes]

Page 73 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And they go up until page 113?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, and then there was also two cabinet Ministers. Minister
Siphiwe Nyanda and Minister Jeff Kgadebe, also made very very strong statements that
Mr Ghama was being sidelined, that he would – that he would become the CEO and
that he was being persecuted like Mr Zuma had been persecuted.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And those cabinet colleagues that you are referring to
them are they the ones that you are testifying about on your statement on paragraph
35, when you say that the problem was that President Zuma, two of my cabinet
colleagues …[intervenes]
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: So you were referring to Minister Jeff Kgadebe and
…[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Siphiwe Nyanda, yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: May I refer you to annexure C on page 46? Now
annexed to that letter it is a document on the next page that is styled summary report
by Transnet internal audit into allegations relating to Transnet Freight Rail. Now could
you please …[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: Before you proceed Mr Mokoena, is it more convenient for you to
deal with those media statements later rather than now, saying that she has just

20

mentioned names?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, Mr Chair, there is a context to them.
CHAIRPERSON: There is a context?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: In terms of chronology yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, alright.

Page 74 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: The two documents that I have referred to you on page
46 and 47, could you please tell to us what do they relate to?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay. After having received the whistleblower reports at
different times Transnet internal audit was asked to investigate these. The first tender
which raised problems was the 50 like new locomotives. That was a decision made by
Transnet management, which government really agreed with, that certain locomotives
could be refurbished in the interim until we purchased new and the Transnet board in
agreeing that this particular company should get that contract said that the
refurbishment must take place in Transnet itself. At that stage it was called Trans Werk
10

or Transnet Rail Engineering. That is one of the divisions of Transnet, and Transnet
wanted to up its ability to build, maintain, refurbish locomotives, instead of constantly
trying to outsource.
Government's intention was also that government does not – and this was an
initiative between Public Enterprises and Trade and Industry that we look very much at
creating such a manufacturing capability in South Africa rather than importing rail stock
from abroad. Also, South Africa also had that kind of rail manufacturing capability,
Union Carriage Way, Downing Dunator was a private sector one and Transnet had it.
So the expenditure on refurbishing this was meant to advantage South Africa's
manufacturing capability and to provide jobs. So Transnet board passed a resolution to

20

say that this contract, the work must be done in-house. Only to find out later that Mr
Ghama had signed off the contract with no reference to – that it should be in-house,
and only to find out later that the company which had an international component, an
American component as I remember, with a local component, had started such a facility
near to Pretoria and was already investing and building it up. And Transnet now had to
now role that back and they had to go to the United States, there were a lot of things,

Page 75 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
Transnet had to pay a penalty, all sorts of matters arose out of those kind of
complications.
So that, what we have here is that this was a matter that Transnet internal
audit was investigating and they say here that the contract that was signed did not take
into account, and that is on page 48, and it is the third bullet from the bottom.
"The contract signed by Mr Ghama did not take into account
the resolution passed by the board of Directors."
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now if I may refer you to page 49 under the heading
conclusions?
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes. On page?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: 4-9.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, so the conclusion at that stage, 49, in terms of Transnet
internal audit was that the signatories of the contract did not comply fully with the board
or Directors' resolution and consequently disciplinary action must be taken against the
relevant signatories to the agreement. The Presiding Officer of the disciplinary hearing
should take into consideration the implications to Transnet, of the non-compliance and
the resultant additional costs to Transnet in determining the appropriate sanction.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes and you are saying that Mr Gama was the one that
also signed the contracts?

20

ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes. Now Mr Gama was not in control of the Tender Board,
you know.

Transnet had a whole series of Boards from different divisions and

whatever. But as the General Manager of Transnet Freight Rail, it was his job to signoff
on the contract and he gave evidence that he had not – you know, he was under
pressure and he quickly signed it. He had not really read it through, because he was
more or less aware of the contents. Yes that was that one.

Page 76 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now you also make reference in your statement to one
Mr Wells.
CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry Mr Mokoena, so this – the time of this letter and your
report from the Transnet Internal Audit Section, was happening in March 2009?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Before your time?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You also make reference to Mr Walsh in your statement
Ms Hogan?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: How did he feature in this saga of Mr Gama?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Mr Walsh was the Acting CEO and he was instructed by the
Board to initiate proceedings and whatever. I am not exactly sure the details are here,
but as I understand it, he then handed it over to the Head of Human Resources to
manage and that was a process that then went ahead. Mr Walsh faced a tirade of
insults, it was a fusillade of insults, raciest comments, accusations that he was trying to
thwart the progress of a very good black manager.

20

As I have said before, partly because he wanted the job, it was alleged that he
wanted the job himself which was not true. Those accusations never ever stopped.
Even into the Disciplinary Hearing, the person who conducted the Arbitration Hearings
at that point, listed the number of accusations that were laid against Mr Walsh that
proved not to be true and they are very – they are not nice accusations. You know, our
country has gone into a mode of destroying people in the public domain and it was that

Page 77 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
kind of thing. In that very disciplinary hearing, Mr Gama was found guilty of the way
that he criticised, the manner in which he criticised the Transnet Executives and
Mr Walsh in particular and he said he would apologise.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes. May I ...[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry Mr Mokoena. As at March 2009, when the Transnet
Internal Audit Section made this report, Mr Walsh had actually withdrawn his
candidature a few months before in December, is that right?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Correct in December 2008.
CHAIRPERSON: So when Mr Gama was charged with allegations arising out of this
10

investigation by the Transnet Internet Audit Section, he was no longer an interested
party in terms of the position, Mr Walsh?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes he was no longer an interested party.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: May I refer you to page 53 Annexure D, could you
please identify that document for us?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: This was the document which I gave and went through with
to the President. At the end of July 2009, as you would recall Chair, I had undertaken
to come back with more information to the President relating to the appointment of
Mr Maseko. As you will see in the document, I took quite extensive legal advice on this

20

matter and a lot of research was done and this I gave to President Zuma and I went
through it.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Before that Ms Hogan, you also set out the purpose of
this document on paragraph 1.1 to 1.5.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.

Page 78 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And I think that those issues are quite important which
you conveyed to the President. Could you please read them into the record?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Could you please them into the record?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: If there was?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Could you please read the paragraph 1.1 to 1.5?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Okay I will read it. It was brief the President on the following
matters:
"1.1 The legal framework governing the appointment of a
10

Group Chief Executive Officer for Transnet Limited.
1.2 The CEO and the recruitment and selection process
undertaken by Transnet Board of Directors to employ a
CEO.
1.3 Investigations into allegations of corruption at Transnet
impacting one of the candidates for the position of a
CEO.
1.4 Assessment of the recruitment and selection process by
the Board.
1.5 The recommended process forward and the risks involved

20

in the appointment of the CEO."
That was the content of that.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: So already in 2009 long before this Commission of
Inquiry as per 1.3 there were already those issues pertaining to the allegations of
corruption at Transnet as you have indicated in that paragraph?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.

Page 79 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now what I want to know Ms Hogan, you then had a
meeting with the ex-President and also provided him with this detailed memorandum?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes I did.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Did you take the President through this document?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Did I?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Did you take the President through this document?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: What was his reaction?
CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry before that. When was that meeting?
10

ME BARBARA HOGAN: It was towards the – this document is dated the 28 July. So it
must have been within a week of that. You see I was approaching the President,
because the process for appointing the CEO had been halted, we had to then postpone
the AGM of Transnet and I was wanting the President – you know this documents
comes with a recommendation that Sipho Maseko be appointed and so it must have
been between the date of this document the 27 July and the 11 August when the
Transnet AGM took place.
CHAIRPERSON: This meeting that you are talking about now between yourself and
the President, where you took him through this document, this memorandum of
28 July 2009, that was then a second meeting that you had with the President on the

20

issue of the appointment of the CEO for Transnet?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
CHAIRPERSON: The first one having been about a month or so after your
appointment as Minister of Public Enterprises?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
CHAIRPERSON: So a month or so would have been early June 2009, is that right, I

Page 80 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
think you were appointed about 10 May?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Or 11 May.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: June yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja. So your first meeting with him in regard to this issue, would have
been around early June towards mid-June?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: I think I give the date – yes it was towards – I say
approximately a month after my appointment.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
10

ME BARBARA HOGAN: So June sometime ja.
CHAIRPERSON: So that would be somewhere in the first half of June?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja okay thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: To clarify the Chair's questions, if you can go to page 9
just to paint in the chronology, paragraph 33 that is where you talk about the first
meeting?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And you will see that it is approximately a month after
my appointment.

20

ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ja. Now if we refer back to Annexure D page 53.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Page?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Five three.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Five three okay, yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You have outlined the topics which are dealt with in this

Page 81 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
memorandum on paragraph 1.1 to 1.5.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And I take it that from – if one peruse this document,
one will find these issues being ventilated at great length?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And this is what the President had in his possession
when you were trying to convey to him the importance of appointing Mr Maseko?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now just to clear one of the issues which – where there
10

might be a lacuna in terms of your documents. Could you explain to the Chair whether
at the time when you were preparing your statement, did you have all the necessary
documents that you required?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes I did.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You did?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Did you receive all the emails that you required from
your previous office?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: I did, but there was a problem. I wrote an official letter to
Minister Gordhan requesting access to my documents in order to prepare this

20

statement.
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry to Minister?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Gordhan, because he is the Minister of Public Enterprises
now. So I requested access to documents in order to prepare. They were able to
assist me and he assigned an advocate in his department to assist me and I signed off
and they signed off that these were copies. But, it was evident that my papers had

Page 82 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
been quite considerably tampered with and also we could find no record of my emails.
It seemed that they had been deleted from my time and maybe a little later from the
server of the Department of Public Enterprises. So I did have to reconstruct as best as
I could some of these documents and my understanding, I spent a lot of time doing
that, just to make sure that I – you know that it was solid.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now we were still dealing with Annexure D on page 53.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You have also testified about your second meeting with
the ex-President.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now what I want to know is that after that meeting, or
during that meeting, what was the reaction of the President?
CHAIRPERSON: Or maybe before that. Could you give me the main features of this
document that you presented to the President?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: The main?
CHAIRPERSON: The main features.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Features okay.

20

CHAIRPERSON: The main points.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON: In other words you do not need to say everything.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: But what you consider were the main points that the memorandum
contained, which obviously you probably mentioned to the former President.

Page 83 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Ja. The main point was firstly the legal framework, regarding
the appointment of a Group CEO for Transnet that is founded in the Transnet founding
documents.
CHAIRPERSON: And that briefly was, just go ...[intervenes]
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Okay I will go through it here. I am talking to page 55 it says
here, Transnet's articles of association do provide specifically for the appointmen t of the
Board and the CEO. Article 69 and 71 vest the power to appoint the CEO with the
shareholder, the Minister in a general meeting. Article 69 specifically addresses the
appointment of Executive Directors that is the CEO the CFO, and any other Execu tive
10

Director while Article 71 deals with the non-executive Directors. So I was giving who
has executive authority to appoint. That was one of the matters. Because I thought the
President did not understand that kind of component or was not agreeing with it.
Then I went through the CEO recruitment and selection process. As I have
done with you, how thorough, what it was about, what the competencies we needed.
CHAIRPERSON: Effectively in the same way you have explained it.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: I done it with yourself yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja, ja that you explained to him as well.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Ja.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja.

20

ME BARBARA HOGAN: I also dealt with investigation into the issues of corruption
and I gave him the details of both instances, the 50 like new and the security contract
which had been given to Minister Nyanda's company. Let me say Minister Nyanda was
no longer – when he became a Cabinet Minister, he then moved out of that company,
but at the time he had been a member. So I gave the President details of all of that.
I also informed him of the legal onus on the Board to take action when such

Page 84 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
instances of misconduct do occur and that it was not the Board's decision to make, to
follow-up, it was actually a legal requirement. So that was followed up with him and
then I repeated my recommendation that he notes the contents of this memorandum
and approves the submission of a cabinet memorandum recommending the
appointment.
Now I want to be very clear. I was not asking the President to approve
Mr Maseko. I was asking him to approve a cabinet memorandum recommending the
appointment. Now as I have said to you before, the cabinet memorandums go through
a subcommittee of cabinet and then go to cabinet. When a Minister is under pressure
10

and it is an important issue, the Minister can write a letter to the President explaining
why the Minister would prefer to bypass the subcommittee process because of certain
exigencies and the President is then empowered to grant the Minister to place that on
the agenda. That is what I was referring to. Because it was already getting very late
for the Board.
CHAIRPERSON: So the approval that you were seeking the appointment was an
approval of bypassing the subcommittee of cabinet in regard to this memorandum an d
going straight to cabinet?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: My recommendation says that.

Well not, it just says,

approves the submission of a cabinet memorandum. I did not go into details of which
20

process.
CHAIRPERSON: But what I mean is you – the approval you wanted related to the
process to the procedure.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes to procedures.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja okay.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: It was because Advocate Trengove had advised very strongly

Page 85 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
and others as well that you should not be asking for approval, you should be consulting
with.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay I think Mr Mokoena's question before mine was therefore, what
the former President's reaction was to your recommendation at that meeting.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: He said he would come back to me.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now may I refer you to Annexure E page 94.
CHAIRPERSON: And maybe before you go there. At your first meeting with the former
President on this issue, had you left him with documentation relating to the issue that
10

he could have looked at after your meeting, or not really?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes I left him. The problem with meeting – in all – virtually
every instance of meeting with the President, is that there was never an aid present.
My experience with President Motlanthe, previously when I was Minister of Health is
that, if there was something very important that you had to discuss, you know not just
something quickly, but you could pass by him, you would request that meeting. On
occasions the President's office would contact the DG or someone to say, what is this
about and you know there would be various things. But in most instances, virtually all
those instances when he was President there would be an aid taking a record of that
decision. With President Zuma there was not that, you know, you met at his house. It

20

was, you know the housekeeper sometimes would organise the meetings. There was
not a professionalism there.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: I was referring you to Annexure E on page 94.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now you had told the Chair that when you testified
about Annexure D that you had a meeting with the ex-President Mr Zuma, you left him

Page 86 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
with that document, you took him through that document and he said he will revert to
you, am I correct?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now can you tell us, identify for us Annexure E and tell
us what was the purpose of you despatching this letter to the President?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Okay. So having not heard from the President and knowing
that I had to get within the cabinet's cycle, I then formally addressed a letter to the
President, requesting permission for the late and direct submission of the cabinet
memorandum and therefore to – for the appointment of Mr Maseko.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now in terms of the dates, I know – I will give you the
opportunity to proceed with that evidence. We know that Annexure D is dated the
28th July 2009, Annexure D.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And Annexure E it is now dated the 25 August 2009,
almost a period of a month has lapsed without you hearing from the ex-President.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes. You can now proceed dealing with Annexure E.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Ja. I then request the President's permission, because I had
not heard – I had requested that I put it before cabinet, I had not heard from him. So I

20

did the formal request which you are supposed to do as a Minister and I think I spoke
telephonically, I cannot remember. All I have is that this memo was then withdrawn
from the cabinet's agenda and the President then said he wanted several names, not
only for the CEO position, but he wanted several names for the Chairperson of
Transnet.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now do you know who withdrew the memorandum from

Page 87 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
cabinet?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: This memo who wrote this?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: No, no who withdrew the memorandum?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: The cabinet secretariat were instructed to withdraw the
memorandum and they said the President had given that instruction.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Oh yes, and you said that the President wanted several
names of what?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: For the Chairperson of the Board.

I had not requested

anything yet to put forward a memorandum on the Chairperson. But the President now
10

wanted three names for the Chairperson of the Board.
CHAIRPERSON: Would this have been around August now?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: 28th August. Oh yes, the formal request I put through was on
the 28th August.
CHAIRPERSON: Had Mr Paswana left the Transnet Board at that stage?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes he had left at the end of July.
CHAIRPERSON: Oh okay alright. But the point you make is that you had not yet
approached the President about the feeling of that vacant position?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.

I surmise that what I had said to him that it was

important to have appointments is that there was now an Acting Chair, Acting CFO,
20

Acting Group CEO, Acting CEO of Freight Rail and that might have been the context. I
cannot exactly remember, but he now wanted me to give him three names so he could
decide.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now you despatch Annexure E to the President, did he
react to this letter?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: Well he did in a sense that the memo was withdrawn from

Page 88 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
cabinet, it did not serve at cabinet, the recommendation.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Did you find any opportunity to address the cabinet on
the issue of – the issues that you wanted to raise – that you have raised with the
President?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: I could not raise that issue following on this until Mr Gama's
disciplinary proceedings were completed and they were only finished in June when he
was dismissed from Transnet in June 2010, it was almost a year later. So Transnet was
left completely vulnerable with acting positions all the way through.
CHAIRPERSON: Now were you consulted in any way about the withdrawal of the
10

memorandum from cabinet?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: No, no.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: The President – what I surmise is that the President said, this
is not going through, I want now you to add three more names for a Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: But as at the date when that happened, he had not come back to you
on the documentation you had submitted to him in July?
ME BARBARA HOGAN: No he had not.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now on paragraph 44 page 12.

20

CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry Mr Mokoena. The three names that the former President
was asking for, were those exclusively for the position of Chairperson of the Board,
Transnet Board, or did he also mean he wanted other names for the position of CEO as
well.
ME BARBARA HOGAN: No he was then talking about the Chairperson of the Board.
CHAIRPERSON: As at that time, what was your understanding of the President's

Page 89 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
position on the issue of CEO, Group CEO for Transnet? Was it that he wanted the
search for a CEO to be put in abeyance until the disciplinary process relating to
Mr Gama was finished, at which stage then all the relevant candidates could be
considered and the choice be made, or was - were your understanding that whatever
happened, Mr Gama was the one to be appointed at the end of that process if he was
not dismissed as a result of the process. What was your understanding.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: That Mr Ghama must be appointed.
CHAIRPERSON: And that – your understanding that that was his position did it ever
change at any stage while you were Minister of Public Enterprises?
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: No.
CHAIRPERSON: It did not?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No.
CHAIRPERSON: Was there – was there any time when you did ask whether the
former President had any problem with the candidate recommended by the board? In
other words did you get a chance to say, Mr President, do you have any particular
problem with this candidate who has been recommended by the board? And maybe if
you did, what was the answer?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The answer was that Mr Ghama is being persecuted.
CHAIRPERSON: So you did get a chance to ask …[intervenes]

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Oh, yes, when I briefed him the first time and the second
time.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: But he was not prepared to discuss the merits of Mr Maseko.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: He simply wanted Mr Ghama appointed.

Page 90 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: So he did not articulate any criticism of Mr Maseko's capabilities or
experience or knowledge?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Mr Maseko then withdrew as a candidate in September.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ms Hogan, just for completeness so that we do not
leave the, Chair, behind. May I refer you to page 10, paragraph 34? And in that
paragraph you address the questions that were now put by the, Chair, in order to clarify
10

your evidence. You answer as follows: You are saying in your statement:
"I was shocked and disappointed when President Zuma
informed me that he was adamant that Mr Ghama was his only
choice for the group CEO. I informed him that that was not
possible and that Mr Ghama was not the board's choice and I
could not override the board as they had undergone a very
professional selection process. I further informed President
Zuma that Mr Ghama was the subject of an inquiry into
procurement irregularities and it would be very messy to
appoint a group CEO who could potentially be facing fairly

20

serious charges."
And fundamentally you say:
"President Zuma said that if that was my view no appointment
whatsoever was to be made at Transnet until Mr Ghama's
disciplinary process was over. We agreed that I would provide
him more detailed information for him to further apply his

Page 91 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
mind."
So there was no doubt in the ex-President's mind as to whom he wanted as
the group CEO?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Despite everything else that you have conveyed to
him?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON:

Was there an appreciation on your part that if you were the

appointing authority in respect of the CEO and there were a number of candidates and
10

the board had recommended a certain candidate that if you appointed another
candidate you would as a matter of law be required to be able to justify why you chose
a particular candidate and not another candidate? You had that appreciation?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Exactly.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, and that you would have – you would need to be able to defend
your decision?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, I was aware of that, and for me it was really important
that a board has confidence in a CEO, otherwise it is just not going to work. And, yes,
you know, it was not for me now to go looking around for another candidate who they
had said they would prefer not to appoint at that point in time.

20

CHAIRPERSON: Um.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Sorry, ja?
CHAIRPERSON: No, no, no, continue.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No, no, that is …[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: From what you say it seems that you were not given anything even if
you may have been open to appointing somebody else other than Mr Maseko, you were

Page 92 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
not given any grounds as to why Mr Ghama was or would have been a better candidate
than Mr Maseko.
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

I was given no grounds and what I learned from this

experience and from what the President had said is that I would not be able to put
before cabinet any proposal relating to Transnet. Going forward apart from submitting
a very dubious memorandum nominating three names for cabinet or the President to
decide, which I was advised was usurping an executive authority, and I quite frankly
had started to become alarmed at – and I did not understand it, what the underlying
motives must be for all of this.
10

What was the interest in just one particular candidate and what was the
interest in a Chair then? That seemed to go beyond just the interest of Transnet as a
company.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you have – did you get to know whether the former President
also had an appreciation that whoever was chosen as the CEO, that decision would
need to be a decision that could be justifiable in terms of why choose this one and not
that one? Did you get to know whether he appreciated that? That that was required?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: You know, no. I could not get a sense that he appreciated –
that you have to be able to apply your mind and justify what decisions you make as an
executive authority. It was almost like he still saw himself in the ANC as issuing

20

instructions to, you know, one of your executive members or, you know, that you are in
charge of the show and you tell people what they must do. He almost had that
approach.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ms Hogan, I was referring you to page 12 of your
witness statement, with particular reference to paragraph 44. You say in paragraph 44:

Page 93 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
"Mr Ghama was formally charged by Transnet and later
suspended on 1 September 2009. Immediately before and in
the days following his suspension Minister Jeff Radebe,
Ghama, 'Ghama will become CEO', Minister Siphiwe Nyanda
'Ghama is being persecuted like Jacob Zuma and also ANC,
the SACP, the South African Transport Union and ANC Youth
League under Julius Malema at the time all issued strong and
harsh statements in support of Ghama' accusing Transnet of
persecuting him. This was reflected in numerous statements
10

and reports in the media which I attach hereto marked F1 to
F13."
I need to explore with you some of those media reports in order for us to be
able to appreciate the influence and the pressure which you say was exerted upon you
at the time in relation to this issue. May I then refer you to page 95?
CHAIRPERSON: What page? 95?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: 9-5, Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now let us start with the one on page 95 headed ANC
backs suspended Transnet boss, dated 30 August 2009 from the Sunday Times and if

20

you can read that article and you can react or comment on it?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I will just read extracts. This was an article which appeared
in the Sunday Times a day or two before Mr Ghama was suspended and all of these
statements occurred as Mr Ghama was suspended. Minister Jeff Radebe described his
suspension as a miscarriage of justice, that is the first paragraph.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, and if you can also comment on the last paragraph

Page 94 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
that says Ghama is believed?
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

Yes, then various falsehoods were put out.

Ghama is

believed to be among at least three candidates short listed to take over as a permanent
CEO. He was short listed, but you know, he was not the person recommended. So it is
an innuendo rather than a blatant distortion.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And that must be viewed in the light of your evidence
before the, Chair, today when you told us about the individuals that were short listed
and you also commented on the credentials of Mr Maseko?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And the other issues that were taken into account in
relation to Mr Ghama?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, yes, indeed.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Proceed.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: And then it says the Sunday Times can also reveal that the
National Working Committee instructed Minister of Public Enterprises, Barbara Hogan
about two months ago to appoint Ghama as Transnet CEO after the departure of the
…[indistinct] former head Maria Ramos had left, who had joined ABSA.
Now I had never received an instruction from ANC's National Working
Committee. It is, you know, it is insightful to look at who was on that committee at that

20

stage. Many of them were people who had backed President Zuma in his campaign to
be President of the ANC. They were his firm supporters and backers with very few
exceptions on that National Working Committee.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now can you turn over to page 96? You can ignore the
first portion, unless you want to comment on it, but I am much more interested in the
second portion that appears in quotes, that, that says in other words. If you can read

Page 95 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
and react to it?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, now this was a quote from Brian Sekotu who was the
media's ANC spokesman and he was saying, you know, he was saying that Ghama was
an executive who has been around Transnet. In other words we say he has a track
record. I am not aware of discussions about him at the NWC or the MEC level, but
there is nothing stopping members of the ANC from discussing succession within
parastatals. Now you can discuss, do you instruct? Why are you discussing? Those
are the questions that one needs answered.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And then the following that says speaking at the
10

University of KwaZulu-Natal on Thursday Radebe deny the Transnet board and
described the decision to suspend Ghama as gross injustice.

You have already

testified about that.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes. Now if you go towards the bottom of the same
page, starting with the words according to NWC insiders, Ghama was recommended by
the parties deployment committee. Do you wish to comment on that?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: It may well have been, but that was never drawn to my
attention that Ghama was recommended by the deployment committee.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, turn over to page 97. You can read from where it
20

says both men and you can comment thereafter.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Well this is misleading, because it says "both men were
recommended". Only one person was recommended, not both men.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And this is in line with your testimony corroborated by
the documents which I referred to today that there was only one recommendation?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: One recommended person all the way through.

Page 96 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: May I refer you to page 98? Sorry, while you are still on
page 97 the sixth line that starts with "an ANC deployment committee" if you can read
there and comment? 97.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 97? Sorry I thought it was 98.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: 97, I think it is the sixth line.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: It was also, I do not know, I have no knowledge of who
opposed Ghama, that person.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes. Now may I refer you to page 98? You can read
the first and the last paragraphs and comment on them.
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: This is now the ANC Youth League. So the first, well, one of
the media statements is on the 30 th, the ANC Youth League issues a statement on
September the 11 th saying:
"The African National Congress Youth League calls for the
immediate appointment of Siyabonga Ghama as a group CEO
of Transnet. There is evidently a concerted agenda by the
predominantly white board of Directors and external role
players to isolate Siyabonga Ghama from Transnet and deny
him the position of group CEO of Transnet despite his
credentials.

20

Currently Africans are denied positions of

responsibility in key and strategic sectors of the economy and
we should never egg walk around this absolute reality."
And then it goes onto say:
"Siyabonga Ghama should be appointed as a group CEO and
business go on as usual in Transnet. Any attempt to persecute
and isolate him will be met with massive resistance from the

Page 97 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
youth of South Africa."
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And this is some of the pressure that you say it was
exerted upon you at the time?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And the board?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: And the board, yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now may I refer you to page 101? You can identify that
document, read it and you can also comment on it.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Now this is the South African Communist party releasing a
10

statement a couple of days before the ANC Youth League on 7 September saying, this
is a statement:
"THE SACP has noted the recent developments within
Transnet and the subsequent suspension of Siyabonga
Ghama. We wish to express serious concerns about what
appears to be an attempt by certain elements within and
outside of Transnet to clearly frustrate the appointment of Mr
Ghama as a CEO despite his illustrious career, commitment to
public service and strong credentials."
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Let us go to page 101.

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: That is the same …[intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: That is the same thing, yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: A duplicate, ja, ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: That is a duplicate. Page 108. It is headed Ghama
being persecuted like Zuma, are you there?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I am just allocating it. 107. This is on September the 13 th in

Page 98 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
the Sunday Times business page and the quote is:
"Ghama

being

persecuted

like

Zuma.

Minister

of

Communications and ANC heavyweight, General Siphiwe
Nyanda says suspended Transnet executive Siyabonga
Ghama is being persecuted in the same manner as Jacob
Zuma. He is a young man. Very few people are as capable or
as suitable as he is. The challenge is that some people out
there are really bent on insuring that he is destroyed. What
happened to Jacob Zuma, to JZ is happening in this case.
10

People vilify and cast dispersions on you."
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: The last one on page 113.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: This is from South African Transport and Allied Workers
Union. It is, it was issued by the General Secretary Randall Howard.
"SITAWU has become aware the suspension of Ghama
effected on 1 September.

SITAWU is convinced that the

suspension

by

is

informed

a

dirty

tricks

campaign

…[intervenes]"
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You are reading the one on annexure G111, is it not?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: On 111.
20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, okay, proceed.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, ja.
"…is a dirty campaign to discredit him publicly, rule him out as
the most suitable candidate. We also question the timing of
the charges."
And then it goes on:

Page 99 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
"SITAWU is reliably informed that the Carlton Centre Kabal…"
And how often are we hearing that word Kabal?
"…that the Carlton Centre Kabal led by the acting GCEO
Chris Wells with a direct link to former GCEO Maria Ramos is
hell bent on insuring that Ghama does not get the job."
It goes on and on, SITAWU and then at the end here, the last paragraph:
"SITAWU will ensure that no puppet appointment takes place
until the disciplinary process of Ghama is completed. Even
though at the cost of keeping an untransformed Kabal in place
10

a little longer."
And you know that is the tone of it. Might I just say that COSATU as a
federation never once engaged publicly on this matter. I had briefed Zwelinzima Vavi
and he concurred with me that there were, you know, this issue was problematic. So
although the transport union who, you know, have members in Transnet issued a
statement. COSATU was the one part of the …[indistinct] alliance that did not follow
suit as the others had done.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And we have also annexure H on 113. This also
captures the history, and it has captured, it is headed meddling with Transnet matters.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, this is an editorial.

20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Of a City Press of September the 13 th, 2009, headed as you
say meddling with Transnet matters. It starts off with saying:
"The level of political interference at Transnet does not bode
well for the effective management of parastatals. At last count
the presidency the ANC headquarters Minister Jeff Radebe, the

Page 100 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ANC Youth League and the Trade Union Federation…"
And that was incorrect, it was just SITAWU.
"…had all insisted that the Transnet board appoints suspended
executive Siyabonga Ghama as the Chief Executive. It is an
unprecedented level of political pressure exercised on what is
supposed to be a board appointed by government, but which
operates with autonomy and respect for its professionalism and
its expertise."
And then it starts to speculate what is at stake here. Obviously certain
10

business associations with Minister Radebe, whatever, I will not go into those, but it
ends off by saying and that is the third paragraph from the bottom:
"The question of who is right or wrong is really not for the ANC
to determine, neither is it terribly good practice to level the race
card at the board and the executive team at Transnet. The
board is diverse and its non-executive Directors include
Christine Ramon, Nunu Ntshingila and Peter Moyle.

Their

reputations are being sullied and it will be little surprise if they
walk in the next week. Also in a tight spot is Public Enterprises
Minister Barbara Hogan who has to make the nomination of the
20

Transnet Chief Executive to cabinet.

Caught between her

party and the board she is damned if she does and damned if
she does not."
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Do you wish to comment on that?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Very true. I have not included how in later times during this
period, the kind of newspaper articles that were produced, allegedly quoting insiders,

Page 101 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
people in the know, all of those. Besides myself, Mr Wells was also targeted, the
Transnet board. As regards to myself there were often headline stories in particular
Sunday newspaper, which said I did not have the confidence of the cabinet, that I must
go, that I am going to be taken out, and it was, you know, nothing related to what I –
what my experience was, but how I experienced that was an enormous amount of
pressure being put on me publicly to exceed to what – whoever was doing this to
exceed to their demands.
There was a point at which I was informed that a senior, that certain members
of a senior black management of Transnet would walk out if Mr Ghama was appointed.
10

Now, Chair, you know this is a company. This is not a two bit little show. This is a
company that is extremely important for the country. I counted no less 18 times in six
months that the Transnet board tried to engage government, myself, my predecessors.
They even went to President Motlanthe, Deputy President Motlanthe to make a
decision about the board and the CEO.
Would any shareholder withhold and postpone and not appoint a board for
over – you know, not appoint these critical positions for over a year? No. How are we
treating senior professional people who we have appointed to a board and treat them
as though they are part of a conspiracy to do whatever is evil and wrong and against
transformation? That board, majority was black. Very fine people, and yet they were

20

castigated. Yet, and you can see here that some of them are already talking to the
media and say this is ruining me, my reputation, I will have to move on, and in fact four
did resign. And to the credit of others they stayed on, and to the credit of the people
who were in the acting positions who often had to be in the firing line non-stop they
stayed on.
It is unacceptable, and that is why I do feel that this Commission does need to

Page 102 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
look at the issues of how boards are appointed? What level autonomy, what level of
professionalism is engaged and how we respect people? But is not only boards. There
is a person like Sipho Maseko. He is already running a major parastatal, the share
price has shot up since he took over.
What are we saying to Sipho Maseko? A completely competent Manager who
has come flying through the tests, that he is not good enough, because for some
reason the ANC does not see him as one of them. Not that he is, you know, I am not
saying as one of them as a member, but somehow refuses to respect him as a person.
And this went on time and time again.
10

This notion that there is an in-house and there is an out-house and the way to
pursue your career is to beat, is to walk a beaten path to Luthuli House and ingratiate
yourself with the party. And I do think that we need to look at that relationship between
the state and the party and the way that people are being mobilised to spread
falsehoods and deformation.
CHAIRPERSON: To your knowledge, as at that time, had it ever happened that in
regard to the appointment of a CEO of a parastatal SOE members of cabinet should go
out publicly and make the kinds of statements that I understand were made by some of
your cabinet colleagues in regard to another colleague's portfolio?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: You know it is unheard of that you would implicitly attack

20

another cabinet colleague, insist on the decision that, that – you can criticise a cabinet
colleague and say, well, you know, there is within bounds, but you know, I do not agree
or whatever or I have reservations. But to say this cabinet colleague will appoint
Ghama, appoint someone.
In fact the matter was taken to the Public Protector at the time. The Public
Protector ruled in the case of Minister Nyanda that he had contravened the Executive

Page 103 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
Ethics Act in that he had leveraged his position as a Minister to benefit p eople who
were close or whatever. And the President was told that he had to reprimand Minister
Nyanda and when asked in Parliament whether he had reprimanded Minister Nyanda,
he simply said yes, I have reprimanded him.
Yes, it is, you know I remember several cabinet Ministers coming to me and
saying they were shocked at the way that fellow cabinet Ministers were going out into
the public domain, neither of them ever, ever spoke to me, but went into the public
domain and were, you know lobbing, and that is the only word that you can say, lobbing
for a candidate.
10

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know whether those cabinet colleagues of yours as well as
all the other organisations or people who are referred to in the newspaper articles that
you have referred to, whether they were aware that there was a selection process that
had to be followed? That had been followed by the board. A board as you say that was
– and the majority of whom were black, and that there was a black candidate who had
been recommended? Do you know if they were all aware of this or were there just
some stories told that it was either Mr Ghama and a white candidate? Not necessarily
white …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: You know, I am not a party to the knowledge …[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: Not necessarily meaning that if it was a white candidate it would be

20

justified, but I am just looking at some of the things that I have read which some of the
people seem to use to justify why they said it should be Mr Ghama.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The Deputy Minister Ina Gordan Ngwana often had to be at
the Luthuli House, because he was chairing the Economics Transformation
Subcommittee and would engage there, you know in an informal basis. He was of the
same view as I held. We both met with the Secretary General of the ANC. We wanted

Page 104 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
to know why he was insisting on Ghama.

We explained all of this and he was

absolutely adamant that Ghama was being persecuted and that they would not accept
anyone else but Ghama.
Whereas …[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: Even after you had told him about Maseko …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Even after I explained.
CHAIRPERSON: And his credentials and so on?
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

Yes, O, yes, O, yes.

As I say I had spoken to

Deputy President Motlanthe and he agreed with me and I had also briefed Zwelinzima
10

Vavi as part of the …[indistinct] Alliance and he also agreed with me, but from within the
ANC it was absolutely Ghama or no one else. And I know, you know, I must take into
consideration that perhaps they did genuinely believe that he was being persecuted,
but then when presented with, not evidence, but the full story, you should then at least
realise that there is a bigger story here. And I was disappointed that they did not
realise that.
CHAIRPERSON: I can understand an attitude that says there is a certain candidate
who is being unfairly excluded from the process. An attitude that says something must
be done to make sure that there is a fair process, which allows everyone who is eligible
to compete. That is obviously different from saying it does not matter what process is

20

followed, it should be so and so. That is different.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: But I would – it would be surprising if people in senior positions,
whether in government or in organisations in a process which by law is required to be
fair were to basically say we do not care about the merits or demerits of other
candidates, it should be so and so. Because from what you say it seems to me that,

Page 105 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
that is the effect of what you are saying it was the former President's attitude and you
must tell me if I am wrong, that seems to be the effect of what you are saying was the
then Secretary General's attitude as well? Am I understanding you correctly?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, look the Secretary General would endorse a fair process
of a disciplinary process, but it was my impression that he believed that Siyabonga
Ghama would be – prove himself completely innocent in this.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, I think it is important to appreciate nuances here. You might
be bringing in new ones that is important. It was your understanding that as far as the
Secretary General was concerned, he wanted there to be a fair process that would
10

include Ghama, but that if Ghama was appointed he should be appointed through a fair
process when other people compete?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No, that he is – that the disciplinary process would be a fair
process.
CHAIRPERSON: O, okay.
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

Yes, you know.

So do not appoint anyone until that

disciplinary process is over.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but after that disciplinary process where your understanding
was that he was saying that Ghama should be appointed?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
20

CHAIRPERSON: Not that there must still be competition?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No, no, Ghama must then be the candidate, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: And like the former President he also did not have any criticism for
Mr Maseko's credentials?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No, no.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

Page 106 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ms Hogan I have referred you to a number of media
articles and you have commented on them. Can I find out from you whether did you
react at all to all these statements that were – that I have actually taken you through,
did you have a chance to comment on them?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I did not comment. You know, I felt a lot of this was fake
news. It was clearly a lobby and it would have been undignified and counterproductive
to go out in a public domain and have a public slinging matches with people.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now those media articles or reports are attributed to a
number of individuals and organisations, you know, who – some of them were Ministers
10

at the time, Mr Jeff Radebe, Nyanda and it refers to the ANC's league and the list goes
on. Do you know whether those individuals or the entities did they ever deny what was
attributed to them in those articles?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Not to my knowledge. To the President's, you know, when
the President – can I just say one thing?
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: When the President was questioned by reporters at one
stage, journalists, whether it was correct that Siphiwe, that other Ministers get involved
in this, the President said no, they should not be involving themselves in this. So he
also appreciated …[intervenes]

20

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: That they have gone out of their mandate.
CHAIRPERSON:

So you must have been under enormous pressure to appoint

Mr Ghama at the end of his disciplinary process. Maybe the outcome made things a
little bit easier for you.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.

Page 107 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: But you must have been under extreme pressure?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I was under extreme pressure. I had to attend National
Executive Committee meetings, not National Executive Committee, but meetings, yes
NEC's and meetings of the …[indistinct] Alliance. And some people were very, very
nasty to me at those meetings. Not that I cannot take that. And what really offended
me was that I was cast as an anti-transformation racist who did not appreciate the
necessity for transformation in this country.
And that really offended me.

I expected better from my colleagues.

Colleagues who knew my history. Jeff Radebe was the General Secretary of the ANC I
10

think the Southern Natal region when I was General Secretary of Gauteng. People
knew my engagement and my involvement, and I saw the lengths then to which people
will go in their ambitions for whatever, to destroy other people and today we see it in full
force in our public domain. That we will destroy people to get our own way.
And I expected the President to protect me in as much as you know, you saw
President Mandela, President Mbeki in particular, even though it was a Minister that no
one agreed with, the Minister of Health, he defended her. He defended Minister Manuel
when he was under fire, but in these instances the President hung me out to dry.
CHAIRPERSON: Between the time when you said to the former President in a meeting
with him in effect that – or when you refused to appoint Mr Ghama and then he said let

20

us wait for the disciplinary process, your refusal, your attitude then did it obtain right
throughout as long as Mr Maseko was a candidate or did it ever change?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No, you know, I did await the outcome of a disciplinary
hearing, but once that outcome, you know once he was found guilty on three counts
and was dismissed on all three counts, the Deputy Minister and myself initiated a
process to appoint a new Transnet board. And that was – that was then a year after all

Page 108 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
of this happened and it was then towards July/August 2010.
And my thinking then was that you do not go and appoint a CEO when this
board is already, you know it is time for it, you know, for the certain recycling to take
place and then let the board initiate a new search and a new process and let us go
ahead. So I never went to appointing someone else or anything like that, no.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, I see the time Mr Mokoena and I am sure you wanted to draw
that to my attention sometime back already. We lost about 20 minutes earlier. If it is
convenient to the witness and to everybody I would like us to see if we can carry on
until 16:30 to make up for that time. So let me start with Ms Hogan, would that be
10

convenient to you?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: That is convenient.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mokoena?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: There are some murmurings, Chair, because always
after 16:00 we have other witnesses that we have to engage with in preparation for
other sittings.
CHAIRPERSON: Well, other members of the legal team can be excused who might
need that. Do you have to be there before 16:30?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: There is an application that we have to speak about
with Mr Maleka that is supposed to be argued for tomorrow.

20

CHAIRPERSON: O.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You would recall, so if I could divide myself into two, Mr
Chair. I am told that we will deal with it at 22:00 with Mr Maleka. So we can proceed
for now, Mr Chair, yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, no thank you, thank you to everybody. Let us continue until
16:30, thank you Ms Hogan.

Page 109 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ms Hogan I posed a question to you earlier on whether
were you able to react to those public or to those media reports?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And you said no. May I refer you to page 102, because
there seems to be an article which is attributed to you, that is pointing to what was
happening at the time, so that we can be able to clear up the issue. Page 102.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: If you look on the second column towards the middle it
says when Ghama was suspended, can you see that?
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:
"When Ghama was suspended on September, 1, Hogan said
the Transnet board would run the disciplinary process and
inform the shareholder, the government of the outcome and
any decision to be taken."
Does this quote you correctly?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: So you did actually react to that one?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, it was not in response to …[intervenes]

20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: To these?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja, ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Okay. Now while you are on that page 102, let us go
back to page 102 and I want you to comment on that. It says that:
"The Public Enterprise Minister Barbara Hogan faces crunch
time tomorrow after being called to appear before Parliament to

Page 110 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
explain her handling of the succession process at Transnet and
the suggestion of Siyabonga Ghama of Transnet Freight Rail
division."
Do you wish to comment about that?
MS BARBARA HOGAN:

Yes.

[Indistinct] who was a Chairperson then of the

Parliamentary Committee on Public Enterprises summoned me to Parliament to please
explain why I was not appointing – you know, to explain what was happening with the
appointment process. So I went to Parliament.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Are you at liberty to share with us as to what was the
10

outcome of that session?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Well the ANC members of that committee and other members
from other parties were of the view that this was a matter that if not sub judice this was
an internal matter within Transnet and it should be allowed to continue its processes.
So I was not really engaged on that matter.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Alright, we know that Mr Ghama did challenge his
suspension before the High Court?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, Mr Ghama then challenged his suspension in the High
Court and he lost. He wanted his suspension set aside and he lost that in the High
Court.

20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: May I refer you to page 114?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 110?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: 114.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 114, sorry, yes, that was a letter, ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And we know also that he brought the challenge that
you are talking about is the one on page – starting from page 114 and it goes on up

Page 111 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
until page 161.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And if you go to page 114, Mr Chair, I am referring the
witness back to page 114 and paragraph 2 captures some of the essence of the
application. It says that:
"On 1 September 2009 Mr Maharaj who is the group Executive
Human Resources of Transnet Ltd took the decision to institute
disciplinary proceedings against Mr Ghama and to suspend
him on full pay until either the disciplinary process was
10

finalised or until the suspension was lifted."
So is that correct that, that was the decision of Mr Maharaj at the time? Ms
Hogan, yes?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Well Mr Mantasha was …[intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Maharaj.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Was concerned that he had been suspended.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, but I am referring to paragraph 2.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Maharaj, O, yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Are you on page 114? Yes, I am saying that in relation
to …[intervenes]

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Paragraph 2.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: That decision to suspend and to discipline Mr Ghama
was the decision which was made at the time by Mr Maharaj according to the papers?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.

Page 112 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now if …[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: Mr, sorry, so Mr Ghama had not been suspended by the board? The
decision to suspend him had been taken by Mr Maharaj? Or is it something that you
would not have known?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Let me just remember this.
CHAIRPERSON: This judgment of the High Court by Judge Spilg suggest that in terms
of the papers that were placed before the High Court …[intervenes]
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: That decision seems to have been taken by Mr Maharaj?
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, there was a whole, Mr Ghama contested the authority of
Mr Maharaj to conduct a disciplinary process, although the board had appointed Mr
Wells to follow up and Mr Wells in turn had conferred the authority to conduct the
process onto Mr Maharaj, given the controversies that were out in the public domain
about Mr Wells, and that was one of the issues about the process that Mr Ghama was
contesting.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And it was also dealing with the delegated powers?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, where …[intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Whether were they correctly delegated?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: And he did have it, ja.

20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC:

And one can see that from paragraph 3 of the

judgment, Mr Chair, page 115 which provides that Mr Maharaj decision are challenged
in proceedings brought by way of application before this court. They are challenged on
the grounds that the current acting group Chief Executive of Transnet Mr Wells could
not delegated his admitted authority in such matters to Mr Maharaj, and the applicant
contends that only the full board of Transnet could take the decision to bring

Page 113 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
disciplinary proceedings against him or authorise his suspension. And those were the
issues which were crystallised before the High Court.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And, Mr Chair, for completeness you can also see that
from paragraph 5 on page 116, which provides that the factual basis under pinning the
legal challenge is that Mr Wells was precluded from delegating the decision making
power to bring disciplinary proceedings against Mr Ghama or to suspend him by r eason
of Mr Ghama's own accusations against Mr Wells and that Mr Wells alleged
involvement in the process continued to have an influence over the board and did
10

assert itself over one of the board's appointed subcommittees. In short Mr Wells
involvement in the process, however, rendered the entire process tainted.
That was the essence of the application.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, that was the essence of the application.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And reference is also made on paragraph 6 to the
extract of the replying affidavit of Mr Ghama in order to ventilate the challenge that was
before the High Court, am I correct?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, now this matter was fully ventilated before the
High Court and may I refer you to page 161, the concluded paragraph starts from page

20

160, by the Judge, by the honourable Judge, can you see? Ms Hogan? Are you still
with me?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: If you can speak into the mike.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, yes, I can.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: When you answer, that will help.

Page 114 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: It has been a long day.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: We are just about to finalise Ms Hogan for the day. So
page 160 paragraph 118 to paragraph 120 summarises the conclusions of the Judg e,
and ultimately the order that was made, this we find on page 161 paragraph 121 and it
reads as follows:
"Accordingly make the following order. I accordingly make the
following order.

The application is dismissed with cost,

including the cost of the first to the third respondent and of the
fourth to the 13 th respondents excluding the 10 th and the 11th
10

respondents. Such costs to include the cost of two counsel."
Something which we like to hear as counsel when we win. So that is correct?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes, now we know that flowing from there the challenge
by Mr Ghama did not succeed before the High Court.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes and the High Court also found no evidence of bias
against Mr Gama.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes. Now may I refer you to – I just want to follow the
note. Yes Mr Gama was ultimately dismissed by Transnet subsequent to a disciplinary
process that was undertaken.

20

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: May I refer you to Annexure J.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Page?
CHAIRPERSON: What page?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Page 162.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 162 yes I am there.

Page 115 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: These are the findings in the disciplinary hearing
against Mr Gama, Ms Hogan?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct. It was an arbitration process according to the – you
know their thing, it was an arbitration process ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: May I refer you to page 359.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: That is where you will find the conclusions and the
summary of the findings by Advocate DM Antrobus SC who was the Chair of the
disciplinary inquiry.
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: At paragraph 435 he says that:
"I understand that these findings are in the nature of a recommendation to Transnet in
summary and for reasons fully set out above, I find Gama guilty of misconduct on
charges 1, 2 and 4."
And this is in line with what you have testified that he was found guilty on
three charges.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: On paragraph 436 he says that:
"These findings have dealt only with the merits of the misconduct charges. The issue

20

of what sanction ought to be imposed in consequence of the findings of misconduct,
which have now been made is to be considered under Transnet Disciplinary Code and
Procedure in a separate proceedings, as was the arrangement which was made with
the parties at the close of the previous hearings."
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now what was the ultimate sanction?

Page 116 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The sanction, there was a separate hearing on sanction.
They did not – the findings on that sanction, the sanction is imposed was on the basis
of negligence that Mr Gama had not applied his mind to locomotive – to the two, to the
contracts. He was dismissed on each of the three charges. They said each charge
would have warranted a dismissal.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ms Hogan I am posing the following questions out of
my sheer ignorance and for your guidance. Now the Mr Gama that you are referring to
in your testimony?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes?
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Who you say was fired from a Transnet on the
28th June 2010 as per paragraph, I think 51 of your witness statement. Is it the same
Mr Gama who was reemployed by Transnet as a Group CEO and recently fired by
Transnet?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Is it the same person?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: It is the same person.
CHAIRPERSON: Well he was dismissed around June 2010 is that right? The sanction
of dismissal was it imposed by the – or decided upon by the Board or by an
independent person in the same way as the findings of guilt had been decided by an

20

independent advocate?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: It was an independent process.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you know whether it was the same advocate who had dealt with?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: No it was a different advocate.
CHAIRPERSON: It was a different advocate?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: That dealt with the arbitration ja.

Page 117 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes. From the answer you gave to Mr Mokoena just now, he
was later on appointed, that is Mr Gama as Group CEO of Transnet?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Well Mr Gama was fired at the end of 2010. I was fired by
the President at the end of October 2010.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja. You said end of 2010 for Mr Gama, is it not around June 2010?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Mr Gama was fired on June 2010, I was then fired.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: In October, end of October 2010.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
10

MS BARBARA HOGAN: Mr Brian Molefe was then appointed as the CEO of Transnet.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I think it was in January or so.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Then Mr Gama was reappointed as the CEO of Transnet
Freight Rail, it was a couple of months later. On the grounds that they had reviewed
the sanction and that they had an independent review, I do not quite know what that
was about and that the Board felt that the sanction that had been applied was too
harsh.
CHAIRPERSON: This was now a different Board from the one that was in existence

20

during your time?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.

This was the Board that had been appointed by

Minister Gigaba who succeeded me.
CHAIRPERSON: In effect overturning a decision to dismiss Mr Gama that had been
taken by an independent party?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes and he was out of the organisation and then reappointed.

Page 118 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You have actually testified on this issue, or it is
recorded also on page 13 (one three) may I refer you to page 13 at paragraph 51, are
you there?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You say on paragraph 51:
"After Mr Gama had been found guilty, a separate independent hearing on what
sanction should be applied, found that the charges were serious enough to warrant
dismissal on each charge. Accordingly, on the 28 th June 2010, Mr Gama was fired from
10

Transnet."
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Correct.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Do you confirm that?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now may I refer you to Annexure K on page 360
Mr Chair.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: I am with you.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now who prepared this memorandum?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: This memorandum was prepared by my department. It was a
submission to cabinet for the appointment of a new Board to Transnet.

20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: I see that on page 365 if you can go there?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: You

signed

that

memorandum

27th October 2010?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: What was the purpose of this memorandum?

Page 119 of 124

on

the

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The memorandum was to appoint non-executive directors to
the Transnet Board.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: What happened to this memorandum ultimately to
Annexure K?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Well ...[intervenes]
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Was it ever discussed by cabinet?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Well once again the cabinet secretariat, when I put this into
the process the 27 th was not the first date. The cabinet secretariat said the President
wants to speak to you about this. So we had a telephonic conversation about that. He
10

wanted the name of two Chairpersons, not one and he wanted the CVs.
CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry, I think I missed something, who is "he"?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: The President.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: So the cabinet secretariat, when I was processing this memo
for the appointment of Transnet Directors ...[intervenes]
CHAIRPERSON: This is connecting with your earlier evidence that around July the
President had asked you to – the then President had asked you to give him three
names. So this is connecting with that?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Well no this is the following year.

20

CHAIRPERSON: Oh.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: It is one year later.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: So now the President has said, I cannot go ahead until Gama
is dismissed, Gama is dismissed.

I sent the details of the judgment, the entire

judgment to the President and started processing a cabinet memorandum for the

Page 120 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
appointment of a new Transnet Board.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Now this is now post Mr Gama being dismissed?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: A new cabinet memorandum.

Once again the cabinet

secretariat contacts me and says the President would like to discuss this with you. A
telephonic conversation takes place and he wants to see the CV's, he wants the names
of two Chairpersons and he also wants to see the CV's. I was also processing a
cabinet memorandum for the appointment of directors to the Board of SAFCOL the
10

Forestry Company and he wanted to see the CV of the person that I was
recommending for the Chairperson of SAFCOL. Accordingly, I sent him those CV's and
once again heard nothing and so on September – and you know I pointed out again the
centrality of Transnet. I once again on the 10 th September and on the 11th I sent
reminders that I needed to meet with the President, I sent reminders to his office, heard
nothing.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: May I refer you to page 366 Annexure N?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 367?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: 366.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: 366 yes.

20

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: So just to follow on your chronology. You sent the
memorandum that you have now spoken about and subsequent to that there was no
reaction from the President, then you went on to send what you term to be a reminder.
Is this the one on page 366?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes. This is a letter that I sent to the President after our
conversation stressing in ...[intervenes]

Page 121 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And in this letter, you are raising serious issues on
Governance within the Transnet, do you agree?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja. Transnet – that Transnet needs, the AGM is coming up
again. The AGM were not able to appoint anyone, we cannot go secondly now without
appointing. I point out the importance of Transnet to the company and I say there, th en
to confirm in respect of the position of a Chairperson, where he had asked for several
names. I raised two candidates and I gave him the names.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: And both of their CV's are attached.
10

ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Ms Hogan may you answer just you know, because
there are quite important issues which you have stated in this letter. May I suggest that
you read these paragraphs?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: In order for one to appreciate the serious issues that
you are conveying to the President at the time.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: And the importance of appointing the Board at the time.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Ja.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Having regard to your evidence that it was now over a

20

year that no appointments were made in appropriate positions.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes I conveyed that to the President.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Can you please read this one?
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON: I am sorry, I am sorry, I am sorry. Mr Mokoena it is at about 16:30, if
we are going to go into tomorrow, I am hoping you are still available Ms Hogan?

Page 122 of 124

12 NOVEMBER 2018 – DAY 21
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Yes, ja.
CHAIRPERSON: I am quite amenable if that is an important point that we adjourn and
we start with that point tomorrow.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Okay.
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: Yes Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that fine?
ADV PHILLIP MOKOENA SC: That is appropriate, we may adjourn.
CHAIRPERSON: Because otherwise we go beyond 16:30. Alright then we are going
to adjourn at this stage and we will resume tomorrow morning at 10:00, so if you will be
10

here again tomorrow.
MS BARBARA HOGAN: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. We adjourn.
HEARING ADJOURNS TO 13 NOVEMBER 2018

Page 123 of 124