Explain this, Eskom and Brian Molefe

Surely then they ought to fire him because he'd need permssion to take up employment elsewhere while allegedly still in Eskom employ?
 
Cabinet members and SEO managers learned well from Z that court civil action takes so long one can proceed virtually untouched even whilst being completely guilty
 
How could he become a member of parliament when he was allegedly still technically employed by Eskom? Why is the dear minister and whole Eskom board not fired yet?
 
How could he become a member of parliament when he was allegedly still technically employed by Eskom? Why is the dear minister and whole Eskom board not fired yet?

This is what I wonder, taking up employment somewhere else while still employed at one company is a dismissable offence.
Please organise the disciplinary inquiry immediately...
 
I am surprised none of the MPs currently grilling the board have thought to ask these obvious questions. The board is either lying, deceitful, or incompetent (likely all of the above) and have failed miserably in terms of law to exercise their oversight role. They must be fired. From a canon.
 
Let me start by reporting that I have submitted my affidavit to court with regard to the Brian Molefe matter.

I have instructed my legal team to withdraw my opposition to Part A of the relief sought – that I set aside my appointment of Mr Molefe.

I have nonetheless deposed an affidavit as I believe the information I have will assist the court in determining its decision.

My initial advice was to oppose Part A on the basis that I neither appointed nor reinstated Mr Molefe, as well as on the basis of advice from Eskom’s Board that it had obtained an opinion from a Senior Council advocate on its handling of the matter.

But having had the opportunity to properly appraise the issues I have decided that I will abide by the court’s decision on the legality of Mr Molefe’s return to Eskom.

When Eskom’s Board approached me to inform me of its decision to bring Mr Molefe back, I said I would support it on the proviso that it was legal. I also made this point repeatedly when addressing media on the matter, though – curiously – none of them thought it worthy of reporting…

With regard to Part B of the motion, which seeks to stop Mr Molefe from conducting any work at Eskom, I have reserved my rights.

More at: https://www.moneyweb.co.za/news/sou...s-opposition-to-set-aside-molefe-appointment/
 
I am surprised none of the MPs currently grilling the board have thought to ask these obvious questions. The board is either lying, deceitful, or incompetent (likely all of the above) and have failed miserably in terms of law to exercise their oversight role. They must be fired. From a canon.
It looks that Pravin Gordhan asked these questions yesterday and commented in a manner similar to what you say.

They will rue the day when they fired PG.
 
Last edited:
It looks that Pravin Gordhan asked these questions yesterday and commented in a manner similar to what you say.

They will rue the day when they fired PG.

Good man he is, I still think the others should not have resigned as MP, for this exact reason, excluding the likes of Joemat Peterson of course.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X