Eskom explains why it continues to do business with corrupt companies

rpm said:
Eskom continues to do business with corrupt companies

Eskom has confirmed that it continues to do business with companies found guilty of corruption and that stole money from the power utility.
Click to expand...
Speaking to the SABC, Eskom spokesperson Sikonathi Mantshantsha said they do not blacklist corrupt companies.
Click to expand...
That reminds me of one said engineering firm I worked at who kept on dealing with the government. Payment for any work done was not really expected but normally arrived within 12 months or more. Which rolls up to ' you add a bribe to your project budget ' because that is how you get in and being awarded. I suppose at this stage I could toss the name 'DD Mubaza' and that one soccer stadium...

Ever heard the term "I have one family here, and then another where my project is"? haha. I suppose not many will get this, but that is ok too.
 
Last edited:
Important Note: In many countries, companies are never guilty of crimes. It's always the people behind the company. Usually one or more directors, but some companies are large enough that the directors cannot be blamed for isolated crime at lower levels.

Companies can however be fined and or ordered to fix whatever damage they inflicted.
 
He's right about one thing - corruption isn't a one-sided thing on the part of the companies. People within Eskom have to be complicit.
 
R13... said:
That's some of the most ducked up reasoning I've heard. Corruption is a crime for which you can go to jail if you fail to report so how is no one in jail?
Click to expand...
Corruption is ok. Stealing is ok, looting is ok. nepotism is ok. cadre deployment is ok, inept stupidity is ok as long as the ruling dog turds are doing it.
 
ToxicBunny said:
That is just retarded logic... In the extreme.
Click to expand...
And yet as per my observation south african firms continue to do business with the government which in itself is corrupt, but we piss [only] on eskom and telkom. Imagine running with "SMEC/CESA/GIBB continues to do business with the [corrupt] government"; I'd be shocked. haha.

I mean we can call a spade a spade but that should be done across the board and not selectively, right?
 
Yirre foktog.

So let me get this right: Corruption is "unethical" and not criminal.

Am I missing something about how our esteemed Cadres view corruption?

The Prevention and Combatting of Corrupt Activities Act (2004) The Prevention and Combatting of Corrupt Activities Act is the key statute on corruption in South Africa. It provides for the general offence of corruption as well as specific offences. It also provides for investigative measures, as well as preventative measures in the fight against corruption.

The offence of corruption under the PRECCA: • In simple terms, corruption is the abuse of power for private gain. In terms of PRECCA, corruption has the following elements: • Someone giving (offering to give) / Someone receiving (or agreeing to receive); • Someone in a position of power; • Gratification5 ; • To use their power illegally or unfairly

In addition to creating the general crime of corruption; PRECCA also criminalises specific corrupt activities: • Offences involving contracts: it is a crime for anyone to accept gratification to influence who gets a contract. • Offences involving a public official: if anyone in the private sector offers a public official any gratification to give them a benefit they will be guilty of corruption.
Click to expand...

Why the **** are those that are guilty of corruption not in jail? I struggle to understand the logic of calling it "unethical" and not CRIMINAL.
 
Herr der Verboten said:
And yet as per my observation south african firms continue to do business with the government which in itself is corrupt, but we piss [only] on eskom and telkom. Imagine running with "SMEC/CESA/GIBB continues to do business with the [corrupt] government"; I'd be shocked. haha.

I mean we can call a spade a spade but that should be done across the board and not selectively, right?
Click to expand...

Ethically I don't disagree, but government is a huge revenue source for many companies (and it is that way in many countries) so business would be stupid to choose not to do business with the government.

In terms of government doing business with proven corrupt entities though is a different story. Unless the company is the sole supplier of something, then that company should be blacklisted from ever touching a government contract from any department/SOE ever again. As always consequence management and accountability is a foreign concept in this country. As if "its ok, they were only corrupt there, we can still trust them elsewhere".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter