[ad_1]
Three prominent businessmen accused by the president of the United Democratic Movement (UDM) Bantu Holomisa of being involved in large-scale corruption and unduly obtaining funds from the Society of 39; Public Investment (PIC), won their first victory. an unpleasant and interminable battle with the politician.
On Monday, Justice Vivian Tlhapi at the Pretoria High Court granted an order preventing Holomisa from repeating any information regarding the alleged corruption involving three businessmen, who were previously receiving funding from the PIC.
He was prevented from repeating allegations about Internet posts, articles, letters, media interviews, Twitter and other social media
Businessmen who dragged Holomisa to court are Tshepo Mahloele, CEO from Harith investor General Partners Jabu Moleketi, the former Deputy Finance Minister; and Warren Wheatley, chief investment officer of the Lebashe Investment Group Financial Services Group.
Although Holomisa was gagged, the three businessmen stated that they still pursue an action for defamation against the president of the UDM
. Businessmen stepped up in June after writing a letter to President Cyril Ramaphosa accusing them of peddling influence for $ 2 billion in funding from Dr. PIC's CEO. Daniel Matjila. In his letter, Holomisa accused Matjila of personally releasing the financing without the approval of the PIC's board of directors.
Businessmen firmly rejected Holomisa's claims, saying that they were an attempt to gain political points. Read the release: Holomisa declares Holomisa shaded PIC transactions allegations are rejected
Holomisa said the alleged corruption at PIC could make the draft state capture "look like a chicken change". He asked Ramaphosa urgently to expand the arrest warrant investigation mandate of Judge Raymond Zondo, which begins in August, to investigate the PIC before "the paper trace is shredded in the dark backstage. "
Gag order
Holomisa appealed, hours after the gag order of Judge Tlhapi.
In court documents, he said that the order is a "flagrant offense" on the need to fight corruption and its right, which is protected under Article 16 of the Constitution. As a Member of Parliament, Holomisa said he enjoys the protection provided for in Article 58 of the Constitution, which protects his freedom of speech.
He added that the allegations contained in his letter to Ramaphosa were not defamatory.
"The reasonable reader would simply understand that the statements meant that allegations of wrongdoing had been made, about which the Applicants [UDM and Holomisa] were not sure of their veracity, and required their investigation by the President through the Commission "
" Allegations of wrongdoing are commonly made against many people and reasonable people do not just presume, simply because allegations have been made that such allegations are true or that the persons against whom they are founded are guilty. "
Holomisa stated that the allegations were true and for the public good since Moleketi was the chairman of the PIC under his position as Deputy Minister of Finance between 2004 and 2008. Moleketi is now the President of Harith General Partners and Harith F und Managers, and a member of the board of Lebashe Investment Group, who are all beneficiaries of the CIP funding, he said. Mr Moleketi has already chaired the ICP and the ICP funded the first, second and third respondents [Lebashe Investment Group, Harith General Partners, and Harith Fund Managers] it would be a conflict of interest, prohibited by Article 96 of the Constitution, for that purpose. he is a beneficiary of the funds from the ICP "
He said that the publication of his letter to Ramaphosa was not only" constitutionally authorized, it was mandated by the Constitution. "
" It is in the public interest that allegations of corruption be made in the public service and where the beneficiaries
Libel Proclamation
Tlhapi also ordered Holomisa to withdraw the letter that he had written to Rampahosa from the UDM. website, his social media account and that of the UDM within three hours of the granting of the order – a deadline of 13:38 Monday.
Wheatley de Lebashe said Holomisa was in contempt of the court order because he refused to comply with any of the documents referring to the letter and the allegations were withdrawn. "Wheatley, Mahloele, and Moleketi have 30 days to pursue the separate defamation case," he told Moneyweb
. Among the relief that businessmen want from the court is an official excuse for Holomisa.
Wheatley stated that Holomisa's allegations caused economic damage and damage to the reputation of businessmen as a potential business was sabotaged. "Holomisa has called us thieves and looters Our rights have been altered … All we are saying is that if you are going to make allegations, do them at least with evidence and evidence." [19659006] "Holomisa made the allegations without giving us the opportunity to respond to them or provide evidence." On the contrary, we challenged him to provide evidence, but he could not . "
Source link
