“The chairperson [Tsotsi] said there were charges to be dealt with concerning the executives,” said Ngubane last month. “He said Mr Koko was caught on camera in a sexual escapade with a fellow employee at Eskom and that Mr Matona did not investigate this matter.
“The FD [financial director] Ms Molefe had met someone who had put in a tender bid and had a discussion with the person during the evaluation of the tender. These are the reasons he wanted us to accept the suspensions.”
But Molefe, who attended the same meeting, gave her own unique version of the events when she testified at the commission on Tuesday.
“The issues of the suspensions were not even touched. If we had discussed suspensions in that meeting, I could not have signed [the meeting’s minutes and resolutions],” she said.
The resolution of the meeting, prepared by an outsider who had no standing at Eskom — consultant Nick Linnel, who was deployed by Myeni — is mum on the issue of suspensions.
Evidence leader advocate Pule Seleka said the commission had since reverted to Tsotsi to explain the contradictions.
“We put it to Mr Tsotsi that there is no explicit reference to suspensions,” said Seleka.
Tsotsi had also contradicted Ngubane’s version about exactly when Molefe’s name made it to the list of executives who were to be suspended. According to him, it was only introduced at a meeting on March 11 by then-minister of public enterprises Lynne Brown, while Ngubane insisted it was Tsotsi himself who added Molefe’s name at the March 9 meeting.
Molefe, Matona, Marokane and Koko were all suspended on March 11. They were told it was precautionary so they could not “interfere” with the inquiry.
Three would later leave Eskom with a combined exit package amounting to R18m, while Koko was reinstated.
The commission sits against on Wednesday, with more Eskom-related testimony.
BY Mawande AmaShabalala
