At an historic secret ballot of no confidence in the South African Parliament yesterday, the country’s scandal-hit president survived – but by a small majority of 21 as up to 40 of his own ANC MPs rebelled against him.

South Africa is now at yet another crossroads.

At the recent funeral of one of Nelson Mandela’s closest friends and fellow long-time Robben Island detainee, his ex-wife Winnie Madikizela-Mandela (herself an MP) said: “All what we fought for is not what is going on right now … our country is in crisis and anyone who cannot see that is just bluffing themselves.”

At the very spot in Cape Town where Mandela gave his first speech after his long walk to freedom in 1990, thousands of protesters assembled and then marched on Parliament today to demand Zuma’s removal.

This being fractured South Africa, they were joined by large numbers of pro-Zuma supporters.

Meanwhile, roads from the Mandelas’ one-time township home in Soweto into the economic capital Johannesburg were barricaded with rocks and burning tyres from early morning as protesters took action across the province.

Unemployment hit a 14-year high this week as Zuma’s stewardship of a fragile resources-based economy – now officially in recession – bites deep.

A promising national economic blueprint dreamed up at the start of Zuma’s presidency has been abandoned.

The economy of South Africa – a member of the exclusive G20 club of nations — is now growing at half the worst-case scenario rate envisaged by the experts Zuma appointed five years ago.

State-owned companies — the supposed engines of economic growth and job creation in ANC’s economic policy – have stuttered and stalled.

The state electricity utility, the freight and passenger rail companies, the national airline and the arms manufacturer all enjoy near-monopoly status in South Africa, but are increasingly being propped up financially by the government.

To support them, public money is diverted from other urgently needed social programmes – education, health, housing.

It is here – in the beating heart of the country’s economic machine – that a huge corruption scandal threatens to engulf Zuma, his party and perhaps the country.

And it is a scandal that has been exposed by good old fashioned investigative journalism in the face of sinister intimidation and threats of violence.

Over the past several weeks, the terms “state capture” and #Guptaleaks have dominated social media in South Africa, but beyond its borders not much is known.

What are the #GuptaLeaks and ‘state capture’?

The phrase “state capture” has emerged to describe a situation where a business family, the Guptas, enjoying close ties to Zuma, have manoeuvred themselves into a position where they allegedly wield control over state-owned companies and their huge procurement budgets, diverting huge sums into their own pockets and, by extension, Zuma’s family.

The Guptas are a family of Indian immigrants who arrived in South Africa from the early 1990s onwards, apparently spurred by the business promise of a newly democratic, post-apartheid state.

The family is headed by three brothers — Ajay, Atul and Rajesh.

So closely have the Zumas and Guptas become entwined that they are popularly referred to as the Zuptas.

The key connection is Zuma’s son, Duduzane, whom the Gupta brothers took under their wing a decade ago and groomed for a role as a director – and billionaire shareholder – in the family’s business empire.

The Guptas are allegedly able to influence state procurement through the cascading appointment of their cronies, via Zuma-appointed cabinet ministers to key positions on decision-making committees.

In several instances, would-be ministers have reportedly been informed of their cabinet appointments first by the Guptas, before receiving the official call from President Zuma.

All this has been highlighted by one of the biggest leaks in the history of South African journalism.

Earlier this year, investigative journalists obtained an enormous trove of emails and documents from the heart of the Gupta business empire. The subsequent exposés, dubbed the #GuptaLeaks, appear to confirm the state capture hypothesis that journalists have been chipping away at for years.

For example, the latest story from the leaks, published on Tuesday, reveals how the Guptas bankrolled the loan repayments for a house owned by President Zuma’s fourth wife.

They channelled the money in part via Duduzane, dipping into a Dubai-based slush fund set up to receive kickbacks from the successful Chinese winner of a major South African state locomotive tender.

The #GuptaLeaks have lifted the lid on a multinational money laundering machine, dubbed the Dubai Laundromat, into which the Guptas allegedly funnel cash derived from state contracts in South Africa.

How did the Guptas benefit financially?

The cash is derived in two ways: either directly from contracts with state-owned companies won by Gupta-owned businesses; or from “success fees” solicited from international companies wanting to do business with the South African state.

So far, the #GuptaLeaks have exposed how kickbacks were paid or facilitated to the Guptas by foreign companies throughout the world.

They include a Swiss construction company, two German IT giants, a multinational management consultancy, a Chinese state outfit, and a major accounting firm.

• #GuptaLeaks: all the latest on the Gupta-Zuma scandal.

And the Guptas certainly know how to spend their gains.

Having operated somewhat under the radar during the early years of Zuma’s presidency, the Guptas shot to national infamy in 2013 when they persuaded a raft of government departments to bend the law, allowing them to land an airliner of wedding guests from India at a high-security military air base near the capital, Pretoria.

The South African “wedding of the millennium” between a Gupta niece and her Indian fiancé, was designed to showcase the family’s wealth and influence in their adopted home.

Their Indian guests were whisked to the sprawling Sun City leisure complex by a VIP convoy of blue light-fitted vehicles normally reserved for government dignitaries, where they mingled with a who’s who of South African politicians and businessmen.

An inquiry held in response to the public outrage about multiple breaches of national security and protocol heard that “Number One” – an apparent reference to President Zuma – had pulled strings in the Guptas’ favour.

The #GuptaLeaks have subsequently revealed how the Guptas sucked cash out of a state-funded rural development programme and sent it to Dubai, where it briefly washed through the “Laundromat” of Gupta companies before it was used to pay the wedding bills back in South Africa.

Multinational auditing firm KPMG waved the transactions through, turning an apparent blind eye to “related party” transfers, thereby allowing the Guptas to also claim millions in tax-deductible expenses.

KPMG said it “stood by our work done and audit opinions issued”, but its former Africa head attended the wedding and wrote thanking the Guptas gushingly afterwards: “I have never been to an event like that and probably will not because it was an event of the millennium.”

Meanwhile, the leaks have also unearthed a letter, drafted by the Guptas on President Zuma’s behalf, in which they ask the Abu Dhabi crown prince to consider granting Zuma and his family residency in the country. While Zuma denied wishing to make the emirate a “second home” it has been confirmed that Duduzane obtained residency.

Suspicions that the Guptas have been preparing a Dubai bolthole for Zuma were enhanced by media reports, based on the leaks, that the Guptas had acquired a £19-million mansion in an exclusive Dubai neighbourhood intended for Zuma’s use. The property is just a few doors down from a pad owned by Zimbabwe dictator Robert Mugabe.

Zuma’s spokesperson said he owned no property outside South Africa.

Paralysis of the proud ANC

Throughout these, and many other scandals throughout the Zuma presidency, the once-proud African National Congress (ANC) party has stood paralysed, unable or unwilling to confront the Zupta state capture phenomenon.

With many of its officials allegedly “captured” by the Guptas, the ANC’s inaction is perhaps unsurprising.

The social cost has been enormous – not least in the fraying of race relations which Mandela’s ANC worked so hard to build.

As the public outcry against the Guptas reached a crescendo last year, UK public relations firm Bell Pottinger – founded by Margaret Thatcher’s former PR guru Lord Tim Bell – stepped into the breach to spin for the Guptas on a £100,000-a-month contract.

So, despite the mountain of dirty laundry already in the public domain about the Guptas relationship with Zuma, the firm accepted a brief – partly in consultation with Zuma’s son Duduzane – to run a counter-campaign blaming white-owned businesses for perpetuating “economic apartheid” in South Africa.

Somehow, it was “white monopoly capital” standing in the way of genuinely aspirant black businessmen – like the immigrant Gupta family – from fulfilling their full economic potential in the country.

Bell Pottinger now stands accused of stoking racial tension in the country, aimed at its white population in general and at the media in particular.

Intimidation of journalists

A pop-up movement called Black First Land First has subsequently targeted editors and journalists at the forefront of exposing the Guptas’ dealings.

At one point, Bell Pottinger gave feedback about a prospective article proposed by the movement’s leader. The PR firm also scripted speeches subsequently delivered by ANC politicians at political rallies.

For the past eighteen months, an army of fake Twitter bots and one-man blogs have spewed a torrent of racially-charged invective into public discourse around the Guptas and Zuma.

Although such tactics have not been conclusively shown to be the brainchild of Bell Pottinger, a public outcry forced them to drop the Guptas last year.

Last month Bell Pottinger’s CEO James Henderson initially offered “a full, unequivocal and absolute apology”.

He then told the BBC in an interview last week: “At worst, we were very naive in what we got involved with, but there was, at any point, no intention to create the impact that is claimed we created.”

But the atmosphere in South Africa remains poisonous. Black First Land First recently barricaded an editor in his home, scrawling graffiti on his garage door, and assaulting a colleague.

Ignoring a subsequent court order barring them from intimidating journalists, the same group hijacked a public event hosted by investigative journalists to explain the #GuptaLeaks, manhandling a journalist to the ground.

A judge ruled earlier on Tuesday that the movement was in contempt of court, and handed its leader a three-month jail sentence, suspended on condition that they did not breach the order again.

For his part, Zuma will seek to direct the appointment of his successor to protect him and his family from future prosecution when his term as president ends in 2019.

But if he does one day face trial, expect the #GuptaLeaks to feature strongly as evidence.

*Finance Uncovered (@FinUncovered) is an associate of the #GuptaLeaks investigative team. This article first appeared in The Independent (UK).

• The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism is an independent non-profit. Be an amaB supporter to help it do more. Sign up for its newsletter to get more.
• Scorpio is the Daily Maverick’s new investigative unit. If you’d like to support its work, click here.

On 9 February 2016, Bell Pottinger sent Gupta lieutenant Santosh Choubey a document entitled “Master Q&A”, a menu of ready-made answers for the media.

In response to the question “Did the Guptas help President Jacob Zuma’s wife, Bongi Ngema-Zuma, pay off her R3.8-million home loan?” Bell Pottinger wrote, “No. This story is completely false. The Gupta family has not assisted Bongi Ngema-Zuma in any way.”

As South Africans have come to expect from Bell Pottinger’s now infamous disinformation campaign, the story, however, was completely true.

Bank records, accounting records and budgets show the Guptas and Duduzane Zuma paying as much as R3.4-million of the bond on the property, after making what appears to be an initial down payment of R1.15-million – giving a total of over R4.5-million.

The younger Zuma’s role in routing these payments suggests he was not in business with the Guptas “on his own accord”, as his father has claimed, but at least partly as a bagman for the Zuma family.

Equally damning, the money trail suggests the president’s wife – and by extension Zuma himself – benefited from the proceeds of corruption laundered from Dubai.

The presidency, Ngema-Zuma and the Guptas did not reply to questions sent late last week.

A gift with a view

Set on the exclusive Waterkloof Ridge that overlooks Pretoria and the Union Buildings, the property was bought for R5.24-million in April 2010 and became Ngema-Zuma’s home.

A person with first-hand knowledge said that the president personally inspected the sprawling property before the purchase. A neighbour said he had been known to visit regularly.

Deeds office records of the transfer identified the Sinqumo Trust as the buyer, and Ngema-Zuma as its trustee.

Named after the president and Ngema-Zuma’s young son, Sinqumo, the trust is more opaque than most. Public lists on the department of justice website, which usually shows trustees and other basic detail, omit the Sinqumo Trust altogether.

In response to earlier amaBhungane attempts to inspect the trust records, the master of the high court in Pretoria, where the records should be kept, maintained they could not be found.

In the absence of the records it is not known whether the president is a trustee alongside Ngema-Zuma or has rights to the trust assets. But even if he has no formal connection to the trust, he arguably benefits given that the property is home to his wife and son.

Six years of denial

R3.84-million of the R5.24-million purchase price was bond financed by Bank of Baroda, the Guptas’ favourite lender.

Given the provenance of the bond, amaBhungane asked a Gupta spokesperson in 2011 whether the family had helped Ngema-Zuma to buy the property by paying the purchase price, facilitating financing or helping repay the bond. He said: “The answer to all your questions is no.”

When amaBhungane confronted the Guptas with additional evidence of their links to the bond in 2012, one of their senior executives dismissed it as “irrelevant” and “absolute rubbish”.

The #GuptaLeaks show that the bond was serviced by the Guptas and Duduzane Zuma generally at a rate of R65,000 a month from the outset.

They also show that on 18 August 2010, the day after the deeds office effected the transfer to the Sinqumo Trust, R1.15-million was paid into Sinqumo’s current account. This is consistent with it being a down payment; the bulk of the difference between the purchase price and the bond amount.

The R1.15-million in turn came from Gupta company Islandsite Investments via Pragat Investments, which at the time was involved in a scandal over the attempted hijacking of iron ore mining rights at Sishen.

Although Pragat was nominally owned and controlled by then Gupta executive Jagdish Parekh, #GuptaLeaks records suggest it was financially integrated with the Guptas’ Oakbay group. Parekh did not answer questions before going to press.

Duduzane, the businessman bagman

When President Zuma appeared in Parliament in June this year, he was pressed by DA leader Mmusi Maimane on Duduzane’s relationship with the Guptas.

Zuma painted his son as an ordinary citizen who was legally entitled to go into business, like anyone else. Duduzane, he said, was “involved in business on his own accord” and that “whoever he does business with, is his own business”.

The #GuptaLeaks evidence strongly suggests that Zuma’s statement was untrue. Whatever business the younger Zuma may have done on his own accord, he also was an apparent conduit for Gupta money to benefit the Zuma family.

Mabengela Investments, a company named after the hills overlooking President Zuma’s Nkandla homestead, is majority owned and controlled by Duduzane Zuma and Rajesh “Tony” Gupta.

Records show that Gupta money was routed through Mabengela to pay the Waterkloof Ridge bond.

So, for example, the same R65,000 amounts that ended up as the first three instalments in September, October and November 2010, can be seen from accounting records to have flowed to Mabengela from Islandsite Investments and Oakbay Investments, both Gupta companies.

Mabengela income statement and budget records show R1.65-million flowing and budgeted to flow from it to the Sinqumo Trust during the 2012/13 and 2013/14 financial years.

Transfer instructions submitted to Absa, as well bank records, show that these “investments”, as they were called, were used to pay monthly installments of R65,000 on the bond during those two years.

In some months, Mabengela directly transferred R65,000 to Sinqumo Trust’s Bank of Baroda accounts. In others, Mabengela transferred the same amount of R65,000 to “D Zuma”, “DZ – BOB” and “DZ”, in apparent reference to Duduzane Zuma.

Trains, cranes and kickbacks

Apart from the monthly bond repayments, Mabengela also paid a R535,000 lump sum to Sinqumo on 2 September 2013.

Of this, nearly a third seems to trace back to offshore Gupta accounts stocked with kickbacks from Transnet contracts.

It would be a serious indictment if bribes were laundered to a sitting president’s wife.

We exposed the alleged Transnet kickbacks in June and July. These included R1.4-billion received from locomotive manufacturer China South Rail (CSR) and at least R55-million from Swiss crane manufacturer Liebherr.

A contract between CSR and a Gupta-related company made it clear the CSR payments were commissions in return for Transnet locomotive contracts. Similarly, payments from Liebherr flowed contemporaneously with Transnet crane contracts.

Gupta accounting records then show the funds flowing into and through their offshore network.

Sitting in the middle was the Guptas’ US relative Ashish Gupta.

In 2013, he was just 26 years old with no apparent business profile. Yet, he somehow had over R100-million at his disposal, which he transferred to Oakbay Investment in a handful of tranches between 30 August and 6 September.

Purportedly, the money was Ashish Gupta’s “advance” contribution for a mining partnership, but there is scant evidence that his money was used for this.

The payments landed in Oakbay’s State Bank of India account. Typically, the cash was immediately disbursed across a number of Gupta company accounts using multiple back-to-back transfers.

Among these, Oakbay paid R150,000 to Mabengela on 2 September 2013. Immediately after receiving the funds, Mabengela transferred R535,000 to Sinqumo’s account at Baroda.

Ten months later, Ashish Gupta’s R100-million was reimbursed by Accurate Investments. Accurate is a Gupta front company in the United Arab Emirates, which by then had received much of the CSR and Liebherr money.

CSR and Ashish Gupta have not responded to emailed questions. Liebherr has said it is investigating the allegations.

The facilitator

While the Guptas repeatedly lied to South Africa about their funding the purchase, there was one entity which was well aware of the true nature of the arrangement and which also had a legal obligation to report suspicious transactions: Bank of Baroda.

Baroda had Ngema-Zuma swear a statement entitled “Information Required by the Bank to Comply with the Financial Intelligence Centre Act”, as part of the process to obtain the bond.

Ngema-Zuma declared that “the source of income/funds to finance the purchase of the property by [Sinqumo] is the following: – own funds and Bank loans”.

Even if Baroda – the Guptas’ long-standing banker – was not at that moment privy to the real source of Ngema-Zuma’s funds, it quickly should have been.

Records suggest the source of the funds was no mystery to Baroda. Regularly, as funds from Mabengela reached Sinqumo’s current account at Baroda, they were immediately used to pay Sinqumo’s bond instalments.

Baroda did not reply to questions.

A curious omission in Zuma’s financial disclosures

Zuma’s history of relying on others to support his family is well known.

His loans from arms-deal convict Schabir Shaik and Durban businessman Vivien Reddy are prime examples.

Zuma disclosed in the public section of his 2009 Cabinet interest declaration that a businessperson provided a luxury home for the use of another of his wives in Durban for free, even though some family benefits may be declared in a confidential section.

Yet, Zuma’s 2014 Cabinet declaration is conspicuously silent regarding Ngema-Zuma’s receipt of Gupta cash. Under “gifts/sponsorships – immediate family”, Zuma indicated under her name: “Nothing to declare.”

In the public section of his 2016 declaration – by which time the Waterkloof Ridge bond was presumably fully paid as it had a five-year term – Zuma declared the “use” of properties on the Durban beachfront and in Forest Town, Johannesburg.

He also declared two books he received – Mastering negative impulsive thoughts and Ethics in decision-making.

A party fit for a criminal enterprise

While countless questions about Zuma’s relationship with the Guptas remain, the #GuptaLeaks do, at the very least, shed light on their relationship with Ngema-Zuma.

In addition to the bond payments, Ngema-Zuma was also employed by the Guptas’ JIC Mining Services for a while as of 2010.

In 2011, JIC chief executive Jacques le Roux told amaBhungane that Ngema-Zuma “contributes in an important way towards JIC’s corporate goals and has the respect and admiration of all her colleagues”.

AmaBhungane and Scorpio can now report that Ngema-Zuma’s last official act at JIC (at least as revealed in the #GuptaLeaks) was to co-ordinate the company’s year-end party in 2011.

In retrospect, South Africans might consider the theme chosen for the evening particularly apt.

On 17 November 2011, Ngema-Zuma addressed an email to her colleagues, requesting that they RSVP.

Ngema-Zuma further noted: “Dress Code for the event is themed ‘MAFIA’.”

• The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism is an independent non-profit. Be an amaB supporter to help it do more. Sign up for its newsletter to get more.
• Scorpio is the Daily Maverick’s new investigative unit. If you’d like to support its work, click here.

Even the deputy president’s office was fair game. Investigations show they zeroed in on some of the nation’s most sensitively placed staff, including the head of the Presidential Protection Service as well as Zuma’s chief of staff, his private secretary and a chief director in the deputy president’s office.

In certain instances, some of these officials appear to have returned favours, potentially subverting their positions in the Union Buildings for the Guptas’ benefit.

The fact that Saxonwold’s most influential family attempted to recruit people close to the president raises questions about the nature of their relationship with Zuma: were they trying to spy on him? Or were they putting in place a back channel allowing him to communicate with them via trusted intermediaries?

Since the #GuptaLeaks provide mere glimpses of these relationships, only the president, the Gupta brothers and the officials in question know the whole truth. The four officials we feature here have all denied impropriety or said they carried out their duties with professionalism.

One official, however, said she would “be more vigilant and judicious in professional relationships” in future. The Presidency and the Guptas did not respond to detailed questions.

Major-General Muzingaye Mxolisi Dladla: head of Presidential Protection Service (2010-date) and long-time bodyguard to Zuma

As the Scorpions anti-corruption unit were raiding Zuma’s Johannesburg home in August 2005, two vehicles screeched to a halt outside the gates. Out poured several automatic rifle-toting members of the elite Presidential Protection Unit.

A tense armed stand-off ensued between Zuma’s protectors and his would-be prosecutors. Zuma – then a private citizen – was entitled to protection by this elite South African Police Service unit, who guard the country’s current and former presidents and deputy presidents together with their families.

Among the protectors who rushed to Zuma’s side that day was Dladla.

Ever since then, their fortunes have closely tracked one another. Zuma escaped the corruption charges and became president; Dladla rose rapidly through the police ranks to head the Presidential Protection Service, as it is now called. Both are controversial figures.

Zuma’s indiscretions are well known, but Dladla escaped attempted murder charges in 2010 after he was accused of spraying three Uzi submachine gun rounds at an elderly motorist in Durban who got in the way of Zuma’s blue light cavalcade.

Zuma paid tribute to Dladla at a funeral in 2011, thanking him and other members of the so-called Echo Squad for standing by him during his darkest days in politics, including thwarting an alleged assassination attempt when he was deputy president.

The relationship has only grown closer: investigative magazine Noseweek alleged in 2012 that Dladla commanded a secret spy unit within the protection service, tasked with monitoring Zuma’s rivals and ensuring his re-election as ANC president.

It now appears that Zuma’s friends, the Guptas, became equally enamoured of Dladla – and rewarded him for his specialist services.

An early clue of their relationship includes an August 2010 email chain from the #GuptaLeaks showing that a Sahara sister company intended to send Dladla and his then wife, long-serving Presidency official Mogotladi “Mo” Mogano (see below) on a weekend getaway to the Maldives.

Both Dladla and Mogano told us they never travelled to the Maldives, with Mogano confirming that “whilst Sahara did make an offer, my then partner and I did not receive tickets and did not undertake the offered travel”.

However, the emails indicate that Gupta executive Ashu Chawla went as far as requesting a Johannesburg travel agent to “issue and email me the [air] ticket” for the couple, quoted at R9 290 per person on Emirates.

A source, who asked not to be named for their own safety, told us that the Guptas at one stage prepared documents transferring legal ownership to Dladla, but then the property burned down.

A second source in the Presidency independently recalled how a house where Mogano was living with Dladla in 2010-11 had burned down.

Mogano referred our queries about the property to Dladla, who claimed that his company never traded but remained silent on the circumstances in which he appears to have made extensive use of a Gupta-owned property.

What use did the Guptas make of their connections with Dladla? An unsigned 2013 affidavit unearthed in the #GuptaLeaks shows Tony Gupta explaining to the police how he procured VIP blue light escort services for the family’s wedding guests.

The Guptas were in trouble because the black BMW escort vehicles they used had been illegally fitted with blue lights and false number plates.

Gupta’s affidavit, submitted as part of the police investigation into the wedding debacle, makes the astonishing claim that the president’s top bodyguard was responsible for procuring the illegal VIP escort service.

Gupta states: “I requested General Dladla to advise me on road transport security under circumstances explained to him … where guests arrived at Waterkloof Air Force Base and had to travel by car through rural areas to Sun City.”

“I indicated that I would pay for these services without any reservation. I am aware of an initiative within the South African Police Service where members of the public can insist on protection/control services at a prescribed fee.

“General Dladla requested me to furnish him with information and inter alia the flight schedules of the guests,” Gupta states, after which Dladla appears to have taken care of the Guptas’ needs.

“On or about 30 April 2013, I noted certain protection vehicles and members of the SAPS accompanying the group of guests from Waterkloof … to Sun City. I did not find this awkward given the requests mentioned,” says Gupta.

“I expected an invoice from the SAPS for the services rendered … On or about 30 April 2013, I received an invoice from a company called S & M Transport … indicating a request for payment for an amount in excess of R500 000. I did not expect an invoice from S&M Transport and I do not know who S&M Transport is. I further do not know who Salomie Manamela is and I had no arrangement with the aforesaid person to send me an invoice for ‘escort services’.”

Gupta, who was in serious trouble at the time, may have been playing dumb but the identity of S&M Transport and Manamela remains a mystery.

But that was the end of the matter: there is no mention of the company or Dladla’s alleged role in securing its services in the inquiry’s final report.

Responding to our questions, Dladla flatly contradicted Gupta, saying he played no part in “any logistic arrangements either at Sun City or at Waterkloof Air Base”.

However, he confirmed that he “provided an affidavit to SAPS which set out the facts as part of an investigation which was held”. This investigation’s findings have never been made public, but all indications are that both Dladla and Gupta wriggled off the hook.

Like a cat with nine lives – again, mirroring his boss, Zuma – there is one final similarity. Michael Hulley, Zuma’s private legal advisor, prepared Dladla’s responses to our questions.

Denying that he had been captured by the Guptas, or acted to further their interests, Dladla said: “I have performed my duties in relation to President Zuma as a member of SAPS with the discipline and professionalism that it deserves.”

Lakela Kaunda: deputy director-general and head of private office of the president (2009-); chief operating officer in the Presidency (2014-)

Lakela Kaunda is Zuma’s fiercely loyal chief of staff, who has worked beside him in various roles since the mid-1990s.

Emailed diary appointments contained in the #GuptaLeaks show Rajesh “Tony” Gupta accepting a flurry of diary appointments with Kaunda on four occasions between 11 December 2012 and 31 January 2013.

On the fourth occasion Kaunda met Gupta, the email calendar shows a “Bruce” attending – a possible reference to Bruce Koloane, the then chief director of state protocol.

Kaunda’s own meetings with Gupta shortly before this raise questions about her role in the Waterkloof landing debacle.

Koloane was subsequently forced to resign for her role in facilitating the Gupta wedding plane landing at Waterkloof air base, and several military officers who approved the landing later testified they believed instructions had emanated from “Number One” – a codename for Zuma.

Kaunda does not dispute the meetings with Gupta, only that Koloane was not present.

He could not be contacted to verify this. Kaunda also denied playing a role in facilitating the Guptas’ aircraft landing needs, saying, “I actually discovered about the wedding landing at Waterkloof when Radio 702 broke the story on the day of the landing itself. I was totally unaware of it before then.”

Be this as it may, the Guptas were keen at this point to do business with Kaunda. Between the third and fourth successive meetings, as scheduled in Gupta’s email calendar, Kaunda ceded her 100% share in Ntomb’nkulu Investments CC to her son, Siphesihle.

She then forwarded confirmation of the new shareholding to Gupta on 23 January, stating that “we will use this vehicle”.

Asked why she had ceded her shares to her son, and for what activity would Ntomb’nkulu be a “vehicle”, Kaunda repeated the explanation she had given to the Sunday Times in June: “I initially thought of closing down the company as I was not using it, but then felt it would be cost effective to keep as it already existed and we had paid for the establishment. I then decided to cede it to my son,” she said.

“When they [the Guptas] said they wanted to offer a business opportunity and asked if I had a company that could be utilised, I then sent that email about Ntomb’nkulu … the offer of going into business with the family was declined and the matter was never pursued.”

At the time, Islandsite 255’s joint directors were Tony Gupta and Zuma’s son, Duduzane. Islandsite 255 is Gupta-controlled Oakbay Resources and Energy’s BEE partner in Shiva Uranium.

In response, Kaunda said: “It is the first time actually that I hear of that cession of the shares or that resolution. Ntomb’nkulu Investments does not own shares in any company whatsoever.”

Dixie Investments, the company meant to cede the shares to Ntomb’nkulu, retained its stake. For now, at least, the public will have to take Kaunda’s denials on trust.

Delsey Sithole: private secretary in the private office of the president (2009-2012); director: events and protocol in the Presidency (2012 to date)

Zuma’s private secretary coordinates both his official and private diaries, and so knows what the president is doing when his formal duties are over for the day.

It is a unique special position of trust and responsibility, which entails liaising with the president’s security detail after hours to ensure he is safe.

The president’s private secretary is also a regular traveller as part of the president’s delegation on overseas trips. The woman Zuma entrusted with the task at the outset of his Presidency, Delsey Sithole, was very soon in the Guptas’ crosshairs.

Financial reconciliation records from the #GuptaLeaks indicate that Sithole received cash amounts totalling R8 310.78 from a Gupta company in June 2009, just a month after Zuma became president.

It is not known what the payment was for, and Sithole did not provide any clarification in her response to our detailed questions.

Fast-forward a year, Gupta brother Rajesh invited Sithole and her teenage son to watch the opening match of the 2010 FIFA World Cup.

A spreadsheet contained in the #GuptaLeaks shows that Sithole found herself amidst illustrious company in the luxurious Sahara suite in the iconic Soccer City calabash. Her inclusion hints at the development of a special relationship with the Guptas.

The family’s other guests for the match included India’s wealthiest businessman Mukesh Ambani and his family, as well as one of Zuma’s wives, his son Edward, and some of Zuma’s most trusted spies – the head of police crime intelligence, Richard Mdluli and his sidekick Nkosana “Killer” Ximba.

Sithole did not dispute her presence that day, telling us that, “I received many offers of hospitality from various companies during the 2010 FIFA World Cup.”

Fast-forward another two years, to early May 2013, and Sithole publicly displayed her loyalty to the Guptas. Despite the outpouring of public anger about the family’s brazen takeover of Waterkloof military air base to land a planeload of overseas wedding guests, Sithole crowed on her Facebook page: “Its [sic] good to be at Sun City. Some people are being tjatjarag [over-excited]. I am enjoying the wedding.”

By this stage, Sithole had been removed from her position as private secretary and redeployed to head the events and protocol division in the Presidency.

A source in the Presidency recalled a “security incident” involving Zuma’s diary that had occurred in 2011, after which Sithole was moved.

Details about the incident, including a rumour that the Guptas had accessed confidential details about Zuma’s diary via Sithole, could not be independently verified.

Sithole did not respond to the allegation specifically, but said: “In my previous capacity as private secretary, I interacted with various stakeholders on a number of occasions, involving various activities and my interaction with the Gupta family was in that capacity. Such interaction never promoted any unethical activity.”

She added that her move to protocol and events happened at her request, for “career growth and advancement” reasons.

But even after she moved out of Zuma’s private office, the #GuptaLeaks suggest that Sithole and Tony Gupta retained ties. For example, in September 2012, Sithole sent him the guest list for a Jacob Zuma Foundation fundraising dinner. The list includes a number of prominent Nigerian businessmen with investments in South Africa.

How Sithole obtained this it is unclear, as are her motives for disclosing it. Was she moonlighting on social events for Zuma’s private foundation and leaking intelligence to the Guptas about Zuma’s would-be private benefactors?

Sithole did not provide any answers.

The #GuptaLeaks emails show Tony Gupta accepting a diary appointment with one “Delicy Sithole” at Sahara’s Midrand offices in January 2013. Notably, this meeting was scheduled around the time of a flurry of meetings between Gupta and Kaunda (Sithole’s former boss in Zuma’s private office).

Sithole did not dispute that the meeting took place as scheduled.

A few days after this meeting, Sithole sent Chawla a CV for one Phatse Justice Piitso – a former SACP provincial secretary in Limpopo and South African ambassador to Cuba between 2009 and 2011 – requesting that Chawla “please forward to Tony”.

Again, Sithole is silent on the purpose of her email. As for Piitso, he was – or was soon to be – Sithole’s husband. Sithole told us that she sent the CV “in good faith to a stakeholder and acquaintance [Gupta] and there was never an encouragement of untoward expectations”.

Piitso said that he has sent his CV to many people, but denied that he got “any employment from the Gupta family or anything else from Mr Tony Gupta”. However, Piitso has cropped up recently as a pro-Gupta commentator.

In 2016, Bell Pottinger spin doctor Victoria Geoghegan shared Piitso’s name with a MoneyWeb journalist, as part of a list of “people who had agreed to talk on economic apartheid”.

The Guptas had hired the London-based PR firm on a monthly £100 000-plus (R1.5m-plus) contract, aimed at distracting public attention from the family’s murky business dealings.

Other pro-Gupta commentators and luminaries on the Bell Pottinger list included Andile Mngxitama, Ben Ngubane, Kebby Maphatsoe, Tshepo Kgadima and Lindiwe Zulu.

Earlier in 2017, Piitso also penned an eloquent defence of Brian Molefe, who had been exposed by the public protector as one of the Guptas’ accomplices in the nexus of state capture.

Piitso lavished praise on the former Eskom chief executive – then on his way to Parliament as an MP – calling him “one of the finest young leaders our movement has ever produced”.

In language that has become synonymous with pro-Gupta lobby, Piitso urged Molefe to “take forward the revolutionary programme of the second phase of our transition for radical transformation”.

Piitso ignored our question about his inclusion in the Bell Pottinger list, but said: “The revolutionary concept of white monopoly capital is not an invention of the Gupta family. It is a concept which seeks to define the development of monopoly imperialism and its characteristic features within the South African realities.

Throughout my life, I have written so many views about this important theoretical question and I will continue to do so.”

Piitso added that he did not seek compensation for his written work from any media houses.

Mogotladi “Mo” Mogano: assistant private secretary to the president (pre-2009); chief director in office of the deputy president (post-2009)

Mogano has worked in the Presidency for more than a decade, initially as assistant private secretary to Thabo Mbeki.

When Kgalema Motlanthe became president in September 2008, he inherited her services.

After Zuma succeeded Motlanthe, Mogano moved to the deputy president’s office with him, where she remains under Cyril Ramaphosa.

Because she has been ensconced in the office of Zuma’s main political rivals down the years, whilst married to one of Zuma’s most trusted bodyguards, Mogano’s relationship with the Guptas is worth highlighting. (See Muzingaye Mxolisi Dladla, above.)

Mogano can be linked to the Guptas since at least February 2009, when company registration records show that she became a co-director with Tony Gupta and Zuma’s son Duduzane in Karibu Hospitality.

The company became dormant in 2011 and was deregistered in 2013. Mogano said “nothing came of the venture,” adding that “I resigned before any business could be conducted or any trading could take place.”

We have already seen that a Sahara sister company booked return flights to the Maldives in 2010 for Mogano and her then-husband, the head of the Presidential Protection Service Muzingaye Mxolisi Dladla. Both have denied receiving the gift.

The couple also appears to have lived for a while in a Gupta-owned property, about which Mogano referred our query to Dladla, who in turn ignored it.

A source in the Presidency told us several years ago that Mogano had also “flirted with” a job offer from the Guptas, a tip-off that appears to be borne out by a June 2011 email from the #GuptaLeaks in which Mogano sends her “comprehensive resume” to Tony Gupta.

What job Mogano was applying for remains a mystery – she told us “there was no outcome” and she remains gainfully employed in the Presidency.

Mogano confirmed her attendance, with a friend, after her husband dropped out. She added that she had declared the hospitality as a gift in her annual declaration of interests. Mogano now appears keen to dissociate herself from the Guptas and Dladla, from whom she says she separated three years ago.

She concedes: “With concerns of state capture and as valid as they are, I do accept that such associations can raise doubts about one’s professionalism and loyalty to the public service code of conduct.”

But she argued that she joined the Presidency “with the full desire to serve the country and not personalities” and had maintained her top security clearance throughout her decade in service.

“I have not allowed my association with elements of the Gupta family enterprise to influence my work adversely or unethically, but have also learnt from recent events to be more vigilant and judicious in professional relationships,” she said.

• Scorpio is the Daily Maverick’s new investigative unit. If you’d like to support its work, click here.

• The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism is an independent non-profit. Be an amaB supporter to help it do more. Sign up for its newsletter to get more.

In such situations, it helps to have rich friends. Enter the Guptas. Emails from the #GuptaLeaks trove show that the Guptas picked up the R850,000 bill from the MKMVA’s 2010 national general council, with the money deposited straight into the MKMVA’s bank account.

In August 2010, the personal assistant of MKMVA Treasurer-General Sparks Motseki emailed Gupta lieutenant Ashu Chawla: “Kindly receive the MKMVA banking details as discussed with the Treasurer-General, Comrade Sparks Motseki.”

Attached to the email was an invoice for R850,855.40, for conference facilities, accommodation and food for four days at the Booysens Hotel and Conference Centre, south of Johannesburg. Included in the bill was a “gala dinner” totaling R45,500.

The emails do not record a direct response from Chawla, but the evidence shows that the bill was promptly paid. On August 19, 2010, Motseki’s PA emailed Chawla: “This serves to acknowledge the receipt of the sum of R850,000.00 transferred yesterday the 18th of August 2010 to MKMVA Pfumo account.”

Separately, the Gupta emails also confirm, as reported by Mail & Guardian in 2011, that MKMVA was given shares in the Guptas’ companies. An affidavit from 4 July 2014, signed by the MKMVA’s Thembile Magingxa, states that MKMVA was issued shares in the Guptas’ Islandsite Investments in 2011. MKMVA leader Kebby Maphatsoe was also invited to the Guptas’ controversial 2013 Sun City wedding.

The Guptas’ support of MKMVA leadership has not gone unreciprocated. MKMVA’s Maphatsoe has been a staunch public defender of the family in exchange, repeatedly chalking criticisms of the Guptas up to racism and xenophobia. In 2016, when the heat around the family was starting to rise, Maphatsoe described the Guptas as “friends of MKMVA” and said that the military veterans would defend them from unfair attack.

When news broke from the #GuptaLeaks emails that the Gupta family had helped the MKMVA with drafting media statements, Maphatsoe confirmed that the organisation had a “relationship” with the Guptas but denied that this extended to media assistance. MKMVA further rubbished reports that it had received media aid from British PR company Bell Pottinger, calling such allegations racist and insulting.

The emails show, however, that in July 2016 the MKMVA put out a statement defending the Guptas.

The statement was circulated among the Guptas’ media team, and in response Nick Lambert from Bell Pottinger wrote: “Many thanks – more excellent messaging on our behalf and, most importantly, using statistics to accompany the rhetoric.”

MKMVA leadership has also gone to some lengths to cast doubt on the authenticity of the #GuptaLeaks emails. MKMVA NEC member Carl Niehaus complained in an op-ed carried by the Independent group of newspapers on Monday that the GuptaLeaks reports were being released “in a closely co-ordinated and deliberately dragged-out process” to confirm mainstream media’s “particular narrative of state capture”.

Niehaus wrote: “At this stage there is no way to know whether all the emails that have up to now been released, or some, or any of them are authentic. The manner in which they have been obtained evidently does not make for obvious authentication, and one surely cannot expect from the hackers and the reporters – who obviously have a vested interest to claim they are authentic – to police themselves.”

Contacted by Scorpio on Monday, however, Maphatsoe coolly acknowledged the Guptas’ R850,000 payment in 2010 to the MKMVA.

“Some of these emails are true, like this R850,000 MKMVA event,” Maphatsoe said. “If my memory serves me well, it was for the national general council, and we requested funds from many people. We appreciated it. It’s not a crime to be assisted. It’s not corruption there.” He said that the donations were made “in good faith”.

Maphatsoe added: “Our relationship with the Guptas is not something we have been hiding.”

But the specifics of what the Guptas were funding may indeed have been hidden.

Omry Makgoale, an MK vet who has been openly critical of Maphatsoe and his fellow MKMVA leaders, told Scorpio: “We were not aware that [the Guptas] funded that conference. We thought that maybe [MKMVA leadership] got money from the Department of Military Veterans. We didn’t know, but we are not surprised.”

Makgoale is part of a group of dissident MKMVA members who are taking Maphatsoe and his cronies to court over what he says has been continued looting of the MKMVA trust.

“We know that the Guptas have been funding Kebby Maphatsoe and [former Treasurer-General] Sparks Motseki, all these guys. About five years ago we did a presentation for MK comrades showing how the Guptas are linked [to MKMVA].”

Makgoale put it bluntly: “MKMVA is captured by the Guptas. They funded them, and from there tell them what to do. MKMVA is colonised by the Guptas the same way that President Zuma is.”

In Makgoale’s view, the major utility of the MKMVA to the Guptas lies in the group being instructed to support the Guptas’ preferred presidential candidate.

The MKMVA does not have voting rights at the ANC’s electoral conference in December, but they still hold some sway at a branch level. The veterans have made it clear that Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma is their choice for South Africa’s next candidate.

“Most of our members are leaders of their branches,” Maphatsoe told the Mail & Guardian in June. “So we have our way of how to influence the African National Congress processes.”

• The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism is an independent non-profit. Be an amaB supporter to help it do more. Sign up for its newsletter to get more.
• Scorpio is the Daily Maverick’s new investigative unit. If you’d like to support its work, click here.

This amount relates to the Gupta-owned company’s sponsorship of the “Impi” team introduced during the 2011-12 T20 domestic competition in South Africa.

The Impi were drafted in as a short-lived seventh franchise during that season. At the time, reports suggested that the team was cobbled together haphazardly and sold as a “development” side.

The team was based at Willowmoore Park in Benoni which, at the time, was sponsored by the Gupta-owned company, Sahara.

The Impi lasted just one season, having lost 10 out of their 12 fixtures with the other two being wash-outs. CSA were quick to admit their failure on the pitch, but it seems now that there were some serious failures off it, too.

A CSA spokesperson told Scorpio that the money, pledged in sponsorship but never paid over, was written off after several attempts to recoup it failed.

But a failed team isn’t the only deal The New Age had a hand in.

The #GuptaLeaks further reveal that disgraced former CSA CEO Gerald Majola lobbied the Department of Sport and Recreation for “sponsorship” to the tune of R10-million for the second edition of The New AgeFriendship Cup, held in 2012.

The Friendship Cup was a one-off T20 match between South Africa and India, with the first edition in 2011 being marred by accusations it was partly used as a political platform for the ANC.

The second and last edition was held on 30 March 2012, by which time Majola had already been suspended for his role in accepting an undeclared bonus from the Indian Premier League (IPL).

The emails do not show whether the R10-million was ever actually paid and both CSA and then Minister of Sport and Recreation, Fikile Mbalula, say it wasn’t.

The department’s official financial records also show that an amount of R981,000 was transferred to CSA in the 2011-12 financial year.

Mbalula told Scorpio that he “fired” Majola, seemingly referring to the commission of inquiry he instigated against him following the IPL bonus scandal.

But Majola’s brazenness in lobbying for such big amounts of money, all while under investigation, is startling.

E-mails show that on 15 February 2012, Max Fuzani, then special adviser to Mbalula, sent an email to Majola saying: “The Minister have given us the go-ahead to organise this Cricket SA Game with India. We must meet urgently to discuss this matter.”

A few days later, on the afternoon of 20 February 2012, Majola sent a reply to Fuzani, saying: “The purpose of my mail is to formally accept the offer made by the Department of Sport and Recreation after our telephone discussions at 16H00 on 20 February 2012 which is outlined below.

“In bringing the President of the Republic of South Africa’s request on 9 January 2011 to fruition, the Dept of Sport & Recreation shall assist Cricket South Africa host a T20 friendly match between the Proteas and the Indian National Cricket team on 30 of March 2012.

– The friendly match will be followed by a music concert

– The Department of Sport & Recreation shall financially contribute R10-million to Cricket SA to perform the activities mention above.

In order to expedite the process, I kindly request that you insert the attached draft letter on your letterhead, sign and return via email to me at your earliest convenience. Please make the necessary amendments as you deem fit.”

The letter referred to in the emails detailed all the arrangements set out in the email.

Fuzani responded saying that Mbalula could not commit to the budget of the department and that the responsibility rested with Director-General, Alec Moemi.

Fuzani reiterated that the “the Minister agreed in principle to support the event” but added that further documentation “delineating roles of all the stakeholders involved in this important tournament” needed to be provided before there could be sign-off.

Mbalula told Scorpio he does not recall ever being approached about funding.

Majola denied any involvement and referred further queries back to Cricket South Africa.

A formal invitation from Majola’s former PA, inviting President Jacob Zuma to the match, was later forwarded to Ashu Chawla after it was sent to the President’s office.

Almost all of Majola’s communication with the department was also passed on to Nazeem Howa, then CEO of The New Age and to Atul Gupta.

Present at the T20 at the Wanderers in March were a number of high-ranking politicians, including President Jacob Zuma and his son Duduzane. The Presidency even proudly posted a video of the event on their YouTube channel.

How exactly the event was paid for still remains unclear. The Indian National team does not just get on a plane and agree to play a one-off vanity T20 some 8,000km away from home.

CSA say that The New Age paid R500,000 and an “allocation of advertising” for naming rights to the event and an “allocation for advertising” in the paper.

Acting CSA CEO at the time, Jacques Faul, said he had always questioned “the business sense” in the agreement.

Considering the exposure such a T20 received, R500,000 is an astonishingly low figure for such an event and sources have previously claimed that Majola presented no budgets to CSA’s FinCo at the time, but the CSA claims that this was done.

Keep in mind that the exchanges between the department and Majola requesting funding only took place a little over a month before the match was played.

It raises some serious questions over CSA’s governance at the time as well as other deals done under Majola’s reign.

By the time the match actually took place, however, Majola had already been suspended by the CSA for his part in the IPL saga, which saw the 2009 Indian league matches being played in South Africa.

Majola was suspended and later fired for failing to declare to CSA a R1.4-million bonus he negotiated on the side with the IPL.

But even after leaving the CSA, Majola seemingly maintained a relationship with the Guptas. The emails show he often emailed the family with “business opportunities”, including a coal mine and “push to talk” technology. The emails do not reveal if any of these ever came to fruition.

He later travelled, seemingly on the Guptas’ account, to Sachin Tendulkar’s final Test in Mumbai in November 2013 and was invited to the wedding of Varun and Tanvi Gupta in Jaipur – an invitation Majola accepted but later cancelled.

In 2014, a curious email was sent to Ajay Gupta. It was sent from Thando Booi at Border Cricket to Majola and then on to Ajay Gupta with the message: “Please receive a copy of the Warriors/Chevrolet sponsorship agreement which you are offered from 1 May 2015 together with stadium naming rights of both St George’s Park in PE and Buffalo Park in EL which can both be offered immediately.”

The contract that was attached contains all the details of an agreement between the teams and General Motors, signed in 2013. Nothing came of it, but it does raise some questions as to why Majola, somebody who had been suspended for being economical with the truth, would have acted as a middleman between the Guptas and Border cricket. Majola did not respond to our request for comment on the matter.

None of this comes as a surprise, though. The Guptas were central to the IPL being relocated to South Africa in 2009 and have a close relationship with former IPL commissioner Lalit Modi.

Modi is still being sought by the Indian Enforcement Directorate for alleged money laundering and other offences flowing from his early stewardship of the IPL.

In 2010 he fled to London, where he has up until now successfully fended off Indian extradition efforts.

Gary Naidoo, the Guptas’ spokesperson, did not respond to our request for comment.

• The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism is an independent non-profit. Be an amaB supporter to help it do more. Sign up for its newsletter to get more.

• Scorpio is the Daily Maverick’s new investigative unit. If you’d like to support its work, click here.

The latest episode of the #Guptaleaks looks at Bell Pottinger, the UK-based PR firm that brought South Africa to the brink of a race war to protect the reputations of the Zumas and the Guptas.

• The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism is an independent non-profit. Be an amaB supporter to help it do more. Sign up for its newsletter to get more.

• Scorpio is the Daily Maverick’s new investigative unit. If you’d like to support its work, click here.

This was revealed through a couple of emails sent by Gary Naidoo, a Gupta family spokesperson who works at TNA Media, to Atul Gupta in November 2013. The emails are part of a tranche of leaked Gupta emails which have emerged in the last few weeks.

There has been much speculation about what happened at the revenue service in 2014, which saw most of the members of the NRG (National Research Group), its most successful high profile investigations unit, ousted from SARS and publicly humiliated with a slew of allegations thrown at them.

Its head Johann van Loggerenberg and former SARS spokesperson Adrian Lackay in their book Rogue pointed at the tobacco industry, who under a project named Honey Badger, they were looking into.

But, the unit was also said at the time to have been investigating more politically sensitive cases, which could also have led to them being targeted.

There was an indication from the emails Naidoo sent to Atul Gupta that they had some sort of insight into this. On November 15, 2013 at around 15:00, Naidoo sent an email titled “Bloemfontein SARS”.

It is a brief email and its lack of context seems to indicate this was a topic they had discussed before. If this was the case a later email indicates their interest was investigations surrounding the president.

The email lists a SARS team in Bloemfontein: “Johann Van Loggenberg, Johannes Muller, Patricia de Lange, Jacqueline Mgade, Sameera Khan – not based in Bloemfontein”.

All of the people mentioned were a part of SARS at the time, although not all in Bloemfontein. Langa was head of the National Projects unit and Mgade was the manager of the Free State region.

There is no further information in the first email until two hours later when Naidoo sent another email to Atul.

SARS investigations

This email gave information on investigations SARS was allegedly busy with.
“I was given some info by my investigative contact that SARS was investigating the President,” the email said.

“While he was in the Free State this week he met someone from SARS who mentioned that they are not investigating the President but rather people close to him.”

Naidoo then says his contact gave him a list of people being looked at.

These were named as: Chief Douglas Zondo from Vryheid who “apparently had a contract to build part of Nkandla”, his wife, daughter and son “are also under investigation and they claim he owes SARS around R48m”; the Guptas; a Mr Parak from the Newcastle area; and a Mr Mohamed from Durban or Pietermaritzburg “who is apparently close to the KZN ANC structures and to the president”.

Atul Gupta then forwarded the emails to Shivani and Tony Gupta with the acronym “FYI”. There is no further indication what the Gupta family did with this information, if anything.

But in May 2014 attorney and triple agent Belinda Walters laid a complaint against Van Loggerenberg, in October the first mention of a rogue unit emerged in the media and by 2015 the unit was completely dismantled.

Naidoo received WhatsApp queries on the emails but at the time of publication had not responded

• The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism is an independent non-profit. Be an amaB supporter to help it do more. Sign up for its newsletter to get more.
• Scorpio is the Daily Maverick’s new investigative unit. If you’d like to support its work, click here.
  
  

The key, as they saw it, was to win some of the lucrative government advertising their existing media assets have benefited from – through pro-government positioning.

Should the Guptas buy the Mail & Guardian? This was the question being mooted by the family in early January 2016, when they traded emails discussing the matter they had codenamed “Project M”.

As The Times reported on Monday, the Guptas weighed up the possibility of buying the newspaper to reposition it as a pro-government, pro-Zuma, pro-Gupta newspaper, and thereby win valuable government advertising contracts.

But the Mail & Guardian was not the only media outlet in the Guptas’ sights – and certainly not the most desirable. It was Primedia – the company which owns radio stations including 702 and Cape Talk; the Eyewitness News service; and Ster-Kinekor – that a Gupta employee characterised as “the jewel in the crown”.

In a memo sent to Tony Gupta on 3 December 2014, Oakbay’s Vim Rajbansi announced: “We are studying Primedia…We have started bringing them to the table to talk. We have done a high level financial valuation on the entity.”

He stated that one of the group’s major shareholders, private equity firm Brait, was looking to sell its stake in Primedia, and that there were “legacy issues” with another shareholder, the Mineworkers’ Investment Company (MIC).

Emails show that two months previously, Nazeem Howa and other Oakbay executives had met with Clifford Elk, CEO of MIC. “[Howa] discussed our business model and Clifford bought in,” Rajbansi reported.

“Primedia needs to make decisions and act. We are not desperate buyers and they not desperate sellers so our talk of collaborating on media business to add value to the business model [sic]. We want to expand our business and there is a strategic fit.”

Elk reportedly said that he would discuss the Guptas’ offer to buy a 51% stake in the company with fellow shareholders Brait. In a later email, Rajbansi elaborated on the plan: “We merge with Primedia and list together [on the stock exchange] in 3 years.”

A presentation on the proposed Primedia merger, from November 2014, explains the rationale further. “As we grow we need to do bigger investments,” it reads. “Smaller ones become irrelevant. Bigger bits of big companies at acceptable prices.

The Primedia merger is the biggest deal. Target investments that would show the company as a serious business partner and a significant player in the media industry.”

It continues: “Where can we be together in five years? Primedia has gaps in their portfolio and we successfully entered television.” The presentation also suggests: “Consolidation will be good for the [media] industry.”

A meeting was scheduled with Primedia’s erstwhile chairman Kuben Pillay in January 2015. From there, the track goes cold on the leaked emails.

Was Rajbansi exaggerating the level of interest in the proposal to impress his boss?

“The board of Primedia never considered a transaction with the Guptas,” Primedia CEO Roger Jardine said on Tuesday. “I am not aware of any discussions between a director or shareholder of Primedia with the Guptas or their representatives.”

With regard to the question of whether Primedia would have been open to a hypothetical merger with the Guptas, Jardine said: “The board and shareholders of Primedia are very mindful of the need for a strong and independent media in South Africa. I can confidently state that if a transaction of this nature was ever tabled at our board it would receive no support.”

The Guptas may have failed to secure stakes in the Mail & Guardian or Primedia, but they progressed further with another plan – to buy into Independent Media, publishers of 18 South African newspapers.

Back in happier times, the Guptas enjoyed a close friendship with Iqbal Surve, the chair of Independent Media’s owners Sekunjalo. Surve, his wife and two children were guests at the wedding of the Guptas’ niece in Sun City in 2013. Emails show that Surve even had his PA request a better hotel room for him at the wedding, as “Dr Surve is a good friend of the Guptas”.

Things soured, however, after Surve entered into negotiations to buy Independent Media in 2012. As amaBhungane previously reported, Surve offered the Guptas a conditional stake in his consortium at the time that amounted to 27.5% of Independent Media – which would have been a bigger stake than Surve’s own.

The idea was that the Guptas would bring to the table experienced media hands like Nazeem Howa, and financial help with the Independent buyout.

What would the Guptas get in return? For one thing, the right to appoint the editors of newspapers like the Cape Times and The Star. This has been confirmed by the leaked emails. In an April 2015 email to Oakbay’s lawyer, Howa writes: “The appointment of [Independent] editors was a hard-won victory in the negotiations.”

The Guptas had already made a play to purchase Independent Media on their own, and been rejected. Going through Surve represented another bite at the cherry. But Surve reneged on his pact with the Guptas amid a dispute over what the shares were worth, and the two parties have been locked into legal processes since.

In February 2016, Surve approached the Public Investment Consortium, which helped finance Sekunjalo’s Independent Media purchase, to ask whether the PIC would give its blessing to the Guptas taking such a large stake of Independent.

The PIC’s chief executive Dan Matjila cited the possibility of “anti-competitive behaviour” in his response, and resolved that it would not “be in the best interest of our investment” to approve this move.

Oakbay’s lawyer Gert van der Merwe told amaBhungane at the time that all that Matjila’s decision revealed was that Majitla was “biased, ill-advised and not authorised to express an opinion”.

At time of writing, then, the Guptas have thrice been rebuffed in attempts to extend their media holdings in South Africa. To envisage what would have happened to the three respective media outlets if they had been successful in these plans, we have the example of The New Age and ANN7.

On Tuesday, the Democratic Alliance announced that a reply to a DA parliamentary question revealed that the government Communications Department spent R988,689.84 on a single The New Age breakfast briefing in May 2016. An Oakbay brochure boasts that the company has hosted 50 such breakfasts, amounting to taxpayer sponsorship of potentially up to R50-million.

This is in addition to the R4-million spent by the Free State Provincial Government on The New Age advertising in 2016; R1-million from the SABC in The New Age subscriptions in 2016; and a further R10-million spent by the Communications Department on advertising in the newspaper in 2015. There have been many millions more of taxpayers’ money landing in the Guptas’ coffers in this way.

The deal is clear: The New Age wins the lion’s share of government advertising, in exchange for producing a pro-government newspaper. Emails show that the plan for making the Mail & Guardian profitable was identical: change the editorial positioning to pro-government, and watch government advertising stream in.

No doubt the same approach would have been taken with Primedia’s media outlets and the Independent newspapers.

There is no evidence from the emails that the question of what this would have done to a free and vibrant media in South Africa exercised the Guptas in the slightest. As their Primedia proposal stated: “We are investors – we invest at acceptable prices because we look to profit from the result of the enterprise.”

• The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism is an independent non-profit. Be an amaB supporter to help it do more. Sign up for its newsletter to get more.
• Scorpio is the Daily Maverick’s new investigative unit. If you’d like to support its work, click here.

It may have displeased the Guptas’ pals in high places, for instance, to learn that the family was hoping to persuade the Dalai Lama to attend an ANN7 event in 2014 as an honoured guest.

“Your Holiness,” began the letter signed by former Oakbay Investments CEO Nazeem Howa.

“I write to you on behalf of the shareholders and management of African News Network, South Africa’s youngest and most technologically advanced television news station, to invite you to be our special and honoured guest on September 6, 2014 at the inaugural South African of The Year awards ceremony which will take place as part of our first anniversary celebrationof” [sic].

The letter was dated 18 August 2014, meaning that ANN7 was giving the Dalai Lama under three weeks’ notice of the event they wanted him to be present at.

Howa outlines what the evening would consist of – “a musical journey through South Africa’s 20 years of freedom” – and assures the Tibetan spiritual leader that the event “will be attended by leading opinion-shapers across the spectrum”.

The CEO proceeds to make some bold claims about the Guptas’ TV station.

“Since its launch, ANN7 has been receiving accolades for its coverage of, among others, Madiba’s death and funeral and the 2014 national elections,” he writes. “It is fast transforming the broadcast landscape in our country with pioneering and innovative concepts.”

Howa concludes: “We hope you will join us as our special guest to hand over the Lifetime Achievement award as well as to help us celebrate the remarkable strides we have made as a news channel over the past twelve months as well as the achievements of remarkable South Africans.”

After sending the letter to the office of the Dalai Lama, Howa forwarded it to Sahara CEO Ashu Chawla.

Chawla in turn sent the mail on to Naresh Khosla, who was the vice-president of Sahara’s Indian operations until leaving in late 2015. “I’ll work on this and revert in the morning,” Khosla replied.

Since 1959, the Dalai Lama has been living in exile in the northern Indian city of Dharamsala.

E-mails show that Khosla had previously served as a go-between in dealing with visas for Indian citizens visiting Sahara Computers in Johannesburg.

He had on several occasions asked officials at South Africa’s Department of International Relations and Co-operation for assistance in expediting the visas of Indian guests of the Guptas to South Africa.

If Khosla did attempt to intercede, his efforts were in vain. By August 20, Howa had received a response from Tenzin Taklha, the Dalai Lama’s secretary.

“I regret to inform you that His Holiness will not be able to accept,” wrote Taklha. “His Holiness’ travel schedule for 2014 and even parts of 2015 has already been finalised and it will not be possible to consider your invitation. In all honesty, we receive many invitation requests for His Holiness and it is not possible for us to accept the majority mainly due to the lack of time in His Holiness’ full schedule.”

Planning documents for the event the Dalai Lama was invited to – ANN7’s 2014 South African of the Year award ceremony – show that the organisers had hoped that the Dalai Lama would present a “Spirit of Humanity” award together with Archbishop Desmond Tutu. The minutes of a planning meeting for the event record: “Need to properly address Dalai Lama”.

In the unlikely event that the Dalai Lama had accepted ANN7’s invitation, even the Guptas might not have had the necessary clout to see the South African government issue him with a visa.

The Tibetan Holy Leader has been unable to enter South Africa for the last 13 years, having been refused an entry visa in 2009 and 2011. To deny the Dalai Lama a visa to attend Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s 80th birthday celebrations, but allow him one to walk the red carpet at the ANN7 awards, may have raised some eyebrows.

Given that the Dalai Lama’s office turned down the invitation, we will never know what would have happened if he had accepted. There is no evidence from the leaked e-mails to suggest that the Guptas or their employees discussed the matter with anyone from the South African government.

• The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism is an independent non-profit. Be an amaB supporter to help it do more. Sign up for its newsletter to get more.
• Scorpio is the Daily Maverick’s new investigative unit. If you’d like to support its work, click here.

In so doing, the firm directly undermined the ANC’s capacity to communicate its own policies and programmes to South Africans and hijacked the ruling party’s message, seemingly to benefit the image of the Gupta family.

Victoria Geoghegan later invoiced the Marketing Quotient, a Dubai-based company part-owned by Gupta family lieutenant, Salim Essa, a “project fee” of £100,000 (About R2.3-million according to exchange rates in January 2016) for a consultation with Duduzane Zuma.

The two met to discuss a brief for a five-month campaign which Duduzane later described in a reply to Geoghegan as “not primarily one to affect the outcome of the elections [2017] but to turn the tide of our country’s trajectory in the long term”.

Earlier Geoghegan wrote to Duduzane that Bell Pottinger was keen to build a long-term partnership with Zuma and that “we want to stand shoulder-to-shoulder in communicating such a vital message for South Africa. The future of the country in terms of fair economic growth, an inclusive society and political stability, depends on it.”

Attached to the mail to Duduzane is a document titled “Reflections on meeting and next steps” in which Geoghegan sets out how she has had time to “reflect on our conversations and now have a deeper appreciation of the focus of the project and the potential for a long-term partnership between us”.

It reads: “1994 was a seminal year in South Africa’s history. The peaceful handover of power raised the hopes of many, and the expectation of imminent political AND economic enfranchisement was justified. The reality is that whilst political freedom has been attained there is a feeling that expectations of economic empowerment have not been met, with the wealth of South Africa sitting within a small grouping.

“With unemployment levels in excess of 20%, with the ANC approaching the 2017 elections following unbroken rule since 1994, with the political opposition (DA & EFF) upbeat there is a feeling that the next big key issue facing South Africa is that of delivering genuine economic empowerment. This feeling is widespread and has been expressed to us in emotive language using phrases such as ‘economic apartheid’ and ‘economic emancipation’.

“Furthermore, given that a lot of current criticism (for almost all of South Africa’s ills) is directed at President Zuma, and indirectly at the ANC, there is a need to explain in clear, unambiguous language that it is vital ‘economic emancipation’ is addressed.

The people of South Africa need to be told that their dissatisfaction is being heard and that concrete actions are being, or will be taken to address them.

“In addressing this issue, the language and psychology used will be crucial. If world markets become spooked by fears of a Mugabe-style programme of asset seizure, then it is all South Africans who will suffer. However, if the message is one of a process that generates wider economic inclusion, using contemporary business models, then ALL South Africans will benefit equally.

“Equally, the message we wish to disseminate is not one that can be sold overnight. For this campaign to be believed and to achieve credibility there will need to be discipline, continuity and consistency over a period, ideally running up to the 2017 elections and beyond. The key to any political messaging is repetition and we will need to use every media channel that we can, to let our message take seed and to grow.

“Below is a set of recommendations based upon an initial project, with the opportunity for further projects to evolve. These tactics are not exhaustive and would be developed into a full and comprehensive strategy.

• Create a non-party political narrative around the existence of economic apartheid and the vital need for more economic emancipation. This narrative should appeal to both potential third party advocates in the business and academic communities and the grass-roots population;
• Provide assistance and advice on the setting up of a vehicle (the ‘entity’) to be the public face of the narrative;
• Whilst the narrative/vehicle is intended to be political party-agnostic, it will create opportunities for political commentary and participation;
• Bell Pottinger will package the narrative into speeches, press releases, website content, videos/broadcast content, slogans and any other material required;
• The initial project would draw on the strengths of both parties:
• Bell Pottinger’s strategic messaging skills, experience, international reach, and overall brand & credibility; and
• This would be complemented by the South African team’s access to domestic media outlets, digital capabilities and its in-country network;
• Utilise compelling research, case studies and data which illustrate the apartheid that still exists, and the need for truly inclusive growth. Bell Pottinger will analyse the data (for example: power generation, ports) and create fact sheets and easily understood collateral for wider dissemination;
• Engage media both domestically in South Africa, and internationally. This will reach both the all-important domestic audience, but also achieve international endorsement which will add credibility to the narrative and feed back into the domestic media also;
• It is critical that the narrative grabs the attention of the grass roots population who must identify with it, connect with it, and feel united by it. In order to reach this audience, the Bell Pottinger and South African teams will need to strategise the appropriate engagement tactics, be this radio, social media and/or slogans e.g. #endeconomicapartheid #growthforall.

“We will draw our team from across the Bell Pottinger Group. The day-to-day account management will be overseen by Victoria Geoghegan, Jonathan Lehrle, Nick Lambert, Darren Murphy (Tony Blair’s political adviser), and supported by a much wider team. Lord Bell will be available for strategic counsel as and when required. We will also have in reserve other divisions (digital, crisis communications) should we need a wider skillset.

“Bell Pottinger is keen to build a long-term partnership with you. Given our deeper understanding of the assets you have at your disposal, we envisage an initial five-month project (February 2016 to June 2016 inclusive), at a fee of £100,000 per month, excluding costs.

“Any costs would be communicated to the South African team in advance, and would not be incurred without your prior approval. Principal costs would chiefly involve travel and accommodation and we envisage a team from Bell Pottinger visiting South Africa each month.

“We hope that this demonstrates our commitment to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the South African team in communicating such a vital message for South Africa. The future of the country in terms of fair economic growth, an inclusive society and political stability, depends on it.”

On January 20, 2016 Duduzane responded to Geoghegan thanking her for her time and for making the trip to South Africa “on such short notice which created an immediate impression of the degree of seriousness from your side and I appreciate that.

You come highly recommended and you represent a powerful brand, I do not take that for granted.”

He writes that he has gone through Geoghegan’s document and, “I am quite happy and enthused by your understanding of what needs to be done and the time frames in which we need to do it in. I have to reiterate that, which you correctly put it, this ‘journey’ is not primarily one to affect the outcome of the elections but to turn the tide of our country’s trajectory in the long term.”

He ends with two requests, one that she forward the invoice to him and also asking for advice on another campaign he appears to be working on.

“It will include dispersing critical information, which I have researched and will share, in a short period of time. It will also require a visual campaign of sorts T-shirts/banners etc. Where I will require assistance whether it be in the designing and creating a hard hitting message along the lines of the #EconomicEmancipation or whatever it is.” 

• The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism is an independent non-profit. Be an amaB supporter to help it do more. Sign up for its newsletter to get more.
• Scorpio is the Daily Maverick’s new investigative unit. If you’d like to support its work, click here.