Reaction and comments on claims and accusations in Enver Motala's media statement

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 1

The Joint Provisional Liquidators have at all times acted within the confines of the law, and on instructions from the Major Secured Creditors. Notwithstanding this, organised labour (the trade unions) have been consulted with regularity on varying aspects of the administration of these estates, including the selection of the Preferred Bidder.

Solidarity's response 1

In a press release by Mr Enver Motala on 14 October 2009, Mr Motala indicated that Aurora will only be appointed subject to formal and unconditional approval by the four trade unions concerned. Solidarity did not give its required approval and on 16 October 2009 Solidarity withdrew its support from Aurora. Standard Bank intervened as transactional advisors and a meeting was arranged with Aurora a few days later, only to find that Aurora had already been appointed. Mr Motala therefore needs to submit copies of the official approval provided by the NUM, Solidarity, STEMCWU and UASA as per the requirements reflected in the earlier press release issued by Mr Motala on 14 October 2009. See press release attached as Annexure A.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 2

Solidarity requested the Master of the High Court to appoint the same Liquidators that were appointed in the other Pamodzi matters for the following reasons:

1. The whole Pamodzi Group was interlinked and the forensic investigation which the Provisional Liquidators had indicated that they wish to undertake will be hampered if different liquidators were appointed.

2. The current liquidators had done an excellent job in the administration of the other Pamodzi Subsidiaries.

3. Continuity should be maintained in the administration of all the Pamodzi estates.

The letter of recommendation to the Master of the High Court was from the then Deputy General Secretary of Solidarity, Mr Gideon du Plessis.

Solidarity's response 2

Solidarity's support regarding the appointment of the liquidators came at the backdrop of the successful sale of the President Steyn Mine to Harmony Gold. As a JSE listed entity,

Harmony adhered to all legal requirements and corporate governance principles. This positive experience paved the way for Solidarity's letter of support. Only a few weeks after the said letter of support was written by Solidarity, Mr Motala introduced Aurora Empowerment Systems that became the preferred bidder. Aurora's conduct was totally opposite to the unions' experience with Harmony Gold.

Secondly, as per item 1 of the reasons provided for support, there was an understanding that the liquidators will conduct a forensic investigation into the financial dealings of the Pamodzi Gold directors. Contrary to what Mr Motala told the portfolio committee on 13 April 2011, Solidarity established that the said investigation was never carried out. See Annexure B where Enver Motala indicated on 14 October 2009 that the said investigation would commence soon.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 3

The only other credible bid received, from Simmer and Jack in an amount of R110 000 000 had onerous conditions attached to it, inter - alia the cancellation of all employment contracts. This offer was subsequently also ultimately withdrawn.

Solidarity's response 3

The trade unions were engaged in intensive negotiations with Simmer & Jack and reached agreement on staffing issues and, as a result, the unions decided to support Simmers. When the deal fell through, the unions called for Mr Motala's removal as a result of his poor handling of the Simmers bid. When Simmers withdrew their offer, they inter alia pointed out that Mr Motala's conduct during the negotiations were one of the reasons for their withdrawal. The IDC also wrote a letter expressing their total dissatisfaction with the manner in which the Simmers bid was handled. In November 2010, Mr Motala suddenly had a change of mind and seemingly acknowledged his mistake and poor judgement and indicated that they will accept Simmers' offer if it was still available. Solidarity met with Simmers and they indicated that they would take over the mine for R1 as a result of Aurora's destruction of the mine. See Annexure C - Union's response to Motala and request for his removal. Annexure D - IDC letter. Annexure E - Motala calling for Simmers to resubmit their offer.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 4

At some stage the joint provisional liquidators even called upon trade unions NUM and Solidarity to assist financially, as they were extremely vociferous in their desire to remove Aurora from the mines. However, these trade unions refused to do so. Instead Solidarity approached the joint provisional liquidators and requested that they be placed in control of the East Rand Mine, which they would run for their own profit or loss. The joint provisional liquidators advised the secured creditor HVB/UniCredit Bank and they rejected this out of hand as these were their assets to be dealt with on their instructions. It was at this stage that Mr Gideon du Plessis, the Deputy General Secretary of Solidarity became somewhat antagonistic towards Enver Motala and began a calculated media campaign to discredit him, notwithstanding that the joint provisional liquidators were acting jointly and on instructions from the major secured creditor.

Solidarity's response 4

Regarding Mr Motala's request for union funding, Solidarity and the NUM are members' organisations and receive funding through monthly subscription fees from the union members. The unions were not prepared to throw the members' money "down an empty shaft", and opted to rather fund food projects. Both unions have spent in excess of R1.5m on feeding schemes for Aurora workers.

It is a false allegation that Solidarity wanted to take over the mining operation. Solidarity held a meeting with the care and maintenance team which included Solidarity members, NUM members and non-union members on 17 August 2010. At the time, the employees had been working for six months on the care and maintenance team, but only received payment equal to one month's salary. As a result, Aurora owed the employees 5 months' salary. The care and maintenance team proposed that they should also be allowed to mine on their own and sell scrap metal to pay for their arrear salaries. The mine manager intervened and indicated that the Aurora directors made a promise that arrear salaries would be paid. Consequently, the proposal which Solidarity submitted on behalf of the care and maintenance team was withdrawn. Aurora then reneged on the agreement and Solidarity and the Department of Labour commenced with renewed legal action against Aurora.

Mr Motala's assumption and allegation are therefore totally incorrect and false, and if he had the interest of the workers at heart, he would have intervened in the matter, in light of the fact that Aurora reported to the liquidators.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 5

Allegations published in the media include:

Under Aurora's control the mines are being stripped, and assets are being sold. Many of these allegations have emanated from the trade unions NUM and Solidarity. Repeatedly, we have requested proof of these allegations including sworn affidavits, to enable us to vigorously pursue the perpetrators. To date, we have received no such proof, nor have we received any sworn affidavits from the unions concerned. If the Joint Provisional Liquidators receive evidence to the contrary, they will act decisively against the perpetrators without fear or favour. Aurora have also informed us that in some instances employees, some of whom are union members of both NUM and Solidarity, have also allegedly been the perpetrators of the stripping of some assets and the sale of scrap, in some instances to defray outstanding salaries and wages. The Joint Provisional Liquidators are awaiting evidence from Aurora in this regard, and should such evidence be available they will act as we are advised to do under the circumstances.

Solidarity's response 5

Since the trade unions mistrusted Mr Motala, sworn affidavits were not submitted to him, but various affidavits were submitted to the Master of the High Court. Solidarity also provided clear footage and concrete evidence during the Portfolio Committee Meeting on 13 April 2011 regarding the stripping of the mine in the presence of Mr Motala. During the same hearing, the parliamentarians were also informed that the Bhana family, who were appointed by Aurora, indicated that they received permission from Mr Motala to continue with stripping the mine of its assets. The NUM regional secretary confirmed the latter. In an article published in the Mail & Guardian dated 8 October 2010, Mr Motala admitted that he was aware that "scrap" was being sold. A month later Mr Motala denied that he had given a mandate for the selling of scrap (property). See attached Annexure F1 and F2.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 6

It is also common knowledge that there has been illegal mining in South Africa on endemic proportions. Aurora have advised that they have laid approximately 1450 criminal charges against illegal miners, including some members of NUM and Solidarity.

Solidarity's response 6

Mr Motala needs to provide proof that Solidarity members were involved.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 7

We have been accused in the media of favouring and protecting Aurora. There is simply no merit in these accusations. The simple truth is that while the Aurora deal has had its problems, care and maintenance, until very recently, was being provided by Aurora. This coupled with the fact that for a very long time there were no other meaningful offers on the table, were the only reasons that the Joint Provisional Liquidators in consultation and on instructions from the major secured creditors entertained.

Solidarity's response 7

Aurora destroyed 5 300 jobs; razed 13 operational shafts; contravened four basic Human Rights in terms of the South African Constitution (in terms of the Portfolio Committee findings); disregarded all the prevailing labour legislation; did not adhere to mining legislation and regulations; issued various false press statements regarding back payment of wages; polluted the wetlands at Grootvlei; made various deductions from the salaries of the employees and failed to credit the relevant third party; remained at the forefront of extremely negative media coverage locally and abroad since February 2010; etc. The aforementioned makes Aurora the worst employer this country has ever seen, and no concrete action other than a few meaningless statements in the media, was taken against Aurora. In addition, if Aurora is successful in securing the required funding, Solidarity and the NUM will definitely oppose Aurora as a potential owner at the Competition Commission due to Aurora's track record as worst employer in South Africa. Aurora will therefore never be able to obtain the mining assets, but they will definitely be held liable for the damage caused to the mining assets.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 8

Time and time again, I am on record, on behalf of the Joint Provisional Liquidators, explaining that the Joint Provisional Liquidators act jointly and are by law required to do so, and on the instructions of the major secured creditors. No single Liquidator can take decisions on his own, nor is it competent in law for him to do so. The Joint Provisional Liquidators have at all times acted in the best interests of the general body of creditors. We have exhausted every possible avenue in an attempt to rescue these mines and save thousands of jobs, like we have done in the President Steyn Mine in the Free State. It would have been very easy for us to have broken up the mines and sell the assets.

Solidarity's response 8

If the above was indeed the case, then Mr Motala would not have been removed by the Master of the High Court as a liquidator. Secondly, at the Portfolio Committee hearing held

on 13 April 2011, the Committee instructed Mr Motala to furnish them with proof that his presentation was supported by his co-liquidators. To date, Mr Motala failed to submit the proof.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 9

There have also been innuendos in the media that Aurora is being protected, due to their political connections, particularly so as amongst their Directors are Mr Khulubuse Zuma, the nephew of the Honourable President Mr Jacob Zuma, Mr Zondwa Mandela the grandson of the iconic and Honourable Ex President. Mr Nelson Mandela, and Mr Michael Hulley, Personal Legal Advisor for the Honourable President Mr Jacob Zuma. There is simply no truth to this. Liquidators are by law required to act without fear or favour, and in the best interests of the creditors of liquidated estates. In these estates, we have did just that, under extremely difficult circumstances, notwithstanding the complexity of these estates.

Solidarity's response 9

See our response at item 7 above. Furthermore, Aurora's type of conduct would never have been allowed if the perpetrator had been Anglo American or BHP Billiton, for example.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 10

The Joint Provisional Liquidators had repeatedly suggested to both Solidarity and NUM, to consider and support an application to the High Court by the Joint Provisional Liquidators , authorising them to cancel the employment contracts of the ex Pamodzi employees, with adequate safety measures in place for the reinstatement of these contracts, (in the event that these mines can still be rescued, and the many thousands of jobs saved), to enable the employees to claim from the UIF (Unemployment Insurance Fund). This would give much reprieve to these vulnerable workers. To date, we have had no positive response, from them.

Solidarity's response 10

Due to Mr Motala's lack of credibility, Solidarity and the NUM ignored the proposal and instead used the Department of Labour as mediator to negotiate a deal with Aurora to retrench the employees that were laid off by Aurora. Secondly, Mr Motala's proposal was not practical or legal since the employees were employed by Aurora (or an affiliate) and, as a result, were no longer employed by Pamodzi Gold. Thirdly, the employees would have received fewer benefits if Mr Motala's proposal was implemented.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 11

It is no surprise to me that Mr. Gideon du Plessis, from trade union Solidarity has embarked on an aggressive disinformation media campaign since our unlawful and irregular dismissal to discredit me and the entire liquidation process to date. He has done so for all the reasons mentioned above, more specifically following his unsuccessful attempts to secure management of the Pamdozi East Rand mine for the members of Solidarity, so that they can mine them for their own profit or loss. As mentioned above, naturally the secured creditors and joint provisional liquidators did not approve this. He has since become antagonistic towards me and has been waging a personal vendetta against me, which was further exacerbated following the parliamentary hearings on the matter, where I publicly highlighted Mr. du Plessis' attempts to do so.

Solidarity's response 11

Mr Du Plessis' criticism against Mr Motala is similar to comments made by the NUM, COSATU, Cope, Minister of Mineral Resources during a parliamentary debate in 2010, journalists, political commentators and the general public, especially comments made in the social media. In addition, it became apparent in the social media that a large number of the public's negative responses towards Mr Motala were based on information people obtained by doing a search on Mr Motala's track record as liquidator. Examples are attached as Annexure G.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 12

Further to this, it is also pertinent to note that Solidarity have no members at the Pamdozi Gold Orkney mine - there are only NUM and UWASA members at this mine. Despite this fact Solidarity have also been trying to control the mining operations there.

Solidarity's response 12

Solidarity had close to 30 members working at the Orkney mine at the beginning of the Aurora saga and, even if none of Solidarity's members were affected, Solidarity would have done the same thing to fight against the biggest human rights violations since 1994. Nevertheless, Mr Motala is invited to visit the hostel at Orkney (and Grootvlei) with Solidarity to experience the massive support and popularity Solidarity enjoys as a result of Solidarity's fight for justice.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 13

The recent media coverage reporting on the latest developments in the Pamdozi liquidation has also been driven by Mr. Gideon du Plessis, often on behalf of the remaining team of

liquidators. This puts into question the motive behind the latest actions, as well as raises questions around who is leading the liquidation process following the unlawful and irregular dismissal of Gavin Gainsford and I.

Solidarity's response 13

A Section 381 enquiry was held that stretched over a two week period. Solidarity and the NUM made a joint presentation for the first two hours of the enquiry which basically reflected the information which the two unions shared with the Portfolio Committee on 13 April 2011. Numerous people testified during the rest of the two week period. Nevertheless, Solidarity applauded the remaining four liquidators for the open and transparent manner in which they started dealing with Solidarity and the NUM after Mr Motala's removal as liquidator. A joint task team was established and various productive meetings were held between the liquidators and the unions since Mr Motala's removal. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that the secured creditors, whom Mr Motala blamed for not providing the liquidators with permission to remove Aurora, suddenly authorised the immediate removal of Aurora as preferred bidder four days after Mr Motala's removal.

Enver Motala's media statement excerpt 14

One important area of disinformation currently being fed to the media by Mr Gideon du Plessis on behalf of Solidarity, is the claim that "new" investors have come forward since Gavin Gainsford and I were dismissed. This is factually incorrect as the JSE listed entity and other potential investors had been engaging with the joint provisional liquidators before our unlawful and irregular dismissal.

Solidarity's response 14

While Aurora was the preferred bidder and incumbent, all other proposals were compared to Aurora's false bid and Aurora's removal levelled the playing fields for other interested parties. It is also Solidarity's view that with Mr Motala's removal, the credibility of the liquidation process had been restored.

Issued by Solidarity, June 2 2011. For addenda see: www.solidaritymedia.co.za

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter