Questions To Minister Simelane

September 2024
Inkululeko SA Media NPC

Co Reg: 2014/199607/08
September 2024
Good day minister Simelane,
Daily Maverick and News 24 gained access to the “loan agreement” you rely on to validate
the legitimacy of the R575 600 alleged “loan” transaction between your company T5
Investment Group and the company of corruption accused Ralliom Razwinane, Gundo
Wealth Solutions.
The “agreement” purports to be signed by yourself and Razwinane on 30 September 2016.

The transaction relates to acquisition of Silvana’s Co ee Shop in Sandton on 14 and 17
October 2016.
We are deeply concerned about the legitimacy of the alleged “loan agreement”.
Our analysis is based on your written report submitted to the Parliamentary Portfolio
Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, your verbal comments at the
committee hearing on 6 September 2024, the BDO report of March 2019, a letter from the
Hawks dated June 2020 and the purported “loan agreement”.
Our analysis highlights the following:

* The document is forward looking, typical of the nature of legitimate contracts.
* Section two of the “loan agreement” opens with: “It is hereby recorded that the lender
[Gundo] agrees to make a loan available to the borrower [Simelane’s T5 Investments]…”.
* The following sentence, section 2.2, states that “The capital being advanced or the
principal debt is the sum of R575 600.00 and same will be paid into the account of the
borrower within 5 days of the agreement being signed by all parties.”
Inkululeko SA Media NPC - Reg: 2014/199607/08 - Directors: S. Charalambous, B. Brkic, I. Abedian

ff
September 2024
* The very next paragraph of the agreement, numbered 2.3, switches to the past tense, and
refers to money already paid. The paragraph is completely out of kilter with the nature,
intent and tone of the rest of the document. It reads: “The borrower hereby acknowledges
that the loan amount, at the time of signing this agreement has been (our emphasis)
advanced to its nominated account of Silvana Bistro Lounge in two payments as follows:
2.3.1 R300 000 on 14 October 2016, and;
2.3.2 R275 600 on 17 October 2016.”
* Not only is this paragraph in contradiction to the sentence preceding it, but section 2.3
also stands in stark opposition to the purported “30 September 2016” signature date at
the bottom of the document.
* By signing the agreement, you acknowledged, improbably in our view, that money had
already been paid in the future.
* It is further improbable that the parties who signed the agreement would have had the
divinatory knowledge of the split payment, three days apart, some two weeks after
signing the document. (This also seems to be an apparent breach of the agreement as it
stated the payments would be made within 5 days of the signature date.)
* Our analysis of Gundo Wealth Solutions’ VBS Mutual Bank account shows the payments
for Silvana’s were directly linked to the payment of kickbacks by VBS to Gundo for
securing the rst two Polokwane investments. The speci city of the future payments,
again, seems to signal that the agreement was backdated.
For these reasons, the alleged “loan agreement” appears to be backdated - possibly years
after the Silvana’s transaction was concluded in an e ort to legitimise the transaction.
It seems the need to fake the “agreement” was triggered by a letter from lt.col. A White of
the DPCI in Polokwane in June 2020, sent to Polokwane Municipality requesting a wide
range of documents related to its investments with VBS Mutual Bank.
Our attempt at reconciling your version - under oath - before Parliament with the BDO-
report and White’s letter, further highlighted a series of concerns:
* In your written report to Parliament, you state Polokwane made its rst investment on 12
October 2016 and pointed out that the “loan agreement” was concluded on 30
September 2016. The inference you seem to wish to draw is that for this reason, the
Silvana’s payments could not be kickbacks or untoward. Firstly, this argument is not
supported by South Africa’s anti-corruption legislation, the Prevention and Combatting of
Corrupt Activities Act 12 of 20014 (Precca), as we’re sure you as justice minister are fully
aware of. More important, though, is that the rst payment was actually paid on 16
September 2016, and the second on 7 October 2016, the BDO report states - days before
Gundo paid the money to Ricovert.

fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
September 2024
* On 9 October 2020 the HOD of the Limpopo Treasury wrote to Polokwane Municipality
manager, mr Makobe, requesting an update on the implementation of the BDO report
recommendations. Yet, you state that the BDO report was only handed to you on 9
October 2020. This cannot be in light of Limpopo Treasury asking for an update on the
implementations of the report recommendations;
* On your version before Parliament, you and other municipal o cials were informed by
“treasury and provincial treasury” in “February or March 2020” that VBS would be placed
under administration and that a forensic investigation was initiated. This is improbable, as
the bank folded in March 2018, and BDO had led its report after an investigation in
March 2019.
* About this time, you informed Parliament: “I informed Mr. Ralliom, because I was now
supposed to start with the repayment, that I will hold the repayment until the Limpopo
provincial investigations are concluded.”
* This again makes your timeline improbable because it does not align with the facts: The
BDO investigations occurred in late 2018 to early 2019 and the repayment schedule in the
alleged “loan agreement” purports to require repayment only in 2020.
* This misalignment of your explanation with the facts also casts further doubt on the
legitimacy of the “loan agreement”. By the time the loan was supposedly due for
repayment in 2020, BDO had long concluded its work.
* In fact, you embroidered on your assertion that you have done “nothing wrong” and said:
“I do believe, and I still do, it would have been very wrong for me then and now, when you
are noti ed that there's an investigation taking place, you are supposed to appear and then
you quickly, quickly start making payments.”
* You were at pains to expand on these repayments, even providing information to
Parliament that you rst had to make payments to Ricovert for the outstanding purchase
price balance. However, if it is true that the repayment as captured in the purported “loan
agreement” was only due in 2020, it is impossible that you could have had any concern
about repayments, to the point where you decided to withhold repayments. These
payments were not yet due, allegedly, for over a year at the time BDO signed its report!
* The timeline of events unfortunately suggests you made a series of mistakes while forced
to make up an explanation as developments unfolded over the years and seemingly now
struggle to remember the intricate detail you need to include.

fi
fi
fi
ffi
September 2024
The above leads us to the following questions:
1. Do you disagree with any of the facts or statements as set out above. If so, respond to
the speci c statement and provide the necessary reason and context of why you have a
di erent view.
2. Did you and Razwinane conspire to backdate and fake the “loan agreement” between
your company T5 Investment Group and Razwinane’s Gundo Wealth Solutions?
3. Who authored the “loan agreement” between T5 Investment Group and Gundo Wealth
Solutions?
4. According to Precca, a “loan” can be a bene t or gratuity as de ned in the legislation.
Repayment of the alleged “loan” is irrelevant and only speaks to mitigating factors. The
issue to evaluate is whether you received the bene t of owning a co ee shop and the
bene t of creating a lucrative business. Our analysis suggests you did receive the
questionable bene t from Razwinane to create a lucrative business. What is your view?
5. Our analysis suggests you misled Parliamentarians with your written and verbal response
to questions on 6 September 2024, which was delivered under oath. What is your view?
6. If you disagree with point 5, provide us with an explanation for the contradictions and
misstatements as set out above.
7. Our analysis suggests you wilfully misled Parliament in your explanation of your
misstated concern over the repayment of the alleged “loan” during the time of the BDO
investigation when, in fact, the BDO investigation had already been concluded and such
concern could not exist. Your view?
8. On which date did you enter the course linked to the MFMA training at Wits University,
when did you start the course and what was the end date? (This refers to the ‘remedial
action’ taken in light of the BDO nding.)
We require your answers to the above by 15:00 on Wednesday, 25 September.
Regards,
Pauli van Wyk

Investigative Journalist
[email protected]
+27 84 504 7266
Kyle Cowan
Investigative Journalist
News24
[email protected]
079 586 0447

ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff

Questions To Minister Simelane

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Questions To Minister Simelane

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Questions To Minister Simelane

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

September 2024

Inkululeko SA Media NPC

Good day minister Simelane,

The “agreement” purports to be signed by yourself and Razwinane on 30 September 2016.

Our analysis highlights the following:

Inkululeko SA Media NPC - Reg: 2014/199607/08 - Directors: S. Charalambous, B. Brkic, I. Abedian

Inkululeko SA Media NPC - Reg: 2014/199607/08 - Directors: S. Charalambous, B. Brkic, I. Abedian

Inkululeko SA Media NPC - Reg: 2014/199607/08 - Directors: S. Charalambous, B. Brkic, I. Abedian

The above leads us to the following questions:

We require your answers to the above by 15:00 on Wednesday, 25 September.

Pauli van Wyk

Inkululeko SA Media NPC - Reg: 2014/199607/08 - Directors: S. Charalambous, B. Brkic, I. Abedian

You might also like