Eskom has laid a criminal charge against the Democratic Alliance for contravening the Regulation of Gatherings Act 205 of 1993 and is planning to lay another charge against the party for alleged fraud‚ claiming some of the signatories of a petition it presented to the electricity supplier are not “authentic”
This follows a protest on Wednesday at Eskom’s Megawatt Park head office in Sunninghill by the DA led by the party’s spokesperson on public enterprises Natasha Mazzone.
Mazzone handed over a petition to the electricity supplier calling on its executives to repay R73 million in bonuses they had received since load-shedding commenced in 2008.
“DA members‚ Mazzone et al arrived at Eskom’s Head Office on Wednesday‚ 20 January 2016 without prior approval and proceeded to occupy the reception area in a rowdy manner demanding to see Eskom Group Chief Executive‚ Mr Brian Molefe‚” Eskom stated‚ adding that it had laid a charge against the party at the Sandton Police Station .
Mazzone however charged that the handover of the petition “was a pre-arranged meeting and took place in an orderly fashion”.
Eskom said its mandate was powering South Africa and all its employees were committed to discharge their duties.
“We have not implemented load shedding for close to five months and we continue to do maintenance on our plant to ensure long-term sustainability. It is therefore disturbing to note that a political party could act in a manner that seeks to disturb and derail the focus of a company from doing its core business by keeping it busy with nonsensical petitioning.”
The power utility said it had appeared in Parliament where Ms Mazzone sat 91 times between April 2012 and November 2015.
“Additionally‚ we have dealt with hundreds of parliamentary questions of which 11 dealt with the issue of remuneration in the past three years. Her disturbance yesterday was unnecessary and smacks (of) cheap politicking antics‚” it stated.
“Eskom will be laying another charge of fraud later this afternoon following a brief investigation that revealed that the information of some of the signatories of the ‘petition’ is not authentic‚” it added.
“Upon inspection of the petitions‚ it was most alarming to note that some signatures appear to have been executed by the same person and the petitioners somehow managed to sign the petition on one page in first name alphabetical order. Identity numbers of the signatories are either incomplete or nonsensical (e.g. 780567…‚ 870431…‚723652…) and at least one cell phone number proved to be call centre number of the Financial Services Board‚” Eskom charged