More corruption at Eskom? COO accused of ‘finding jobs for in-laws’
It’s meant to be a new era at Eskom, but COO Jan Oberholzer has been accused of undertaking some corrupt activities during his time at the firm.
Eskom COO Jan Oberholzer is under the cosh once more this week after it was revealed that the business executive had actively sought-out positions for family members without declaring their relations.
The COO has previously admitted to calling a senior executive and asking him to find a job in Cape Town for his brother-in-law, Gregory Jacobs. Nepotism, of course, was an underlying factor in Eskom’s Gupta-sponsored collapse during the height of state capture.
Who is Jan Oberholzer, and what is he accused of?
As Bloomberg report, a 15-page report has lifted the lid on what Oberholzer has been accused of doing since he was appointed to the board. The allegations include the following:
- Jan Oberholzer is believed to have increased an Eskom contract linked to a construction firm he held shares in.
- A R42 million payment Oberholzer ‘authorized’ to construction company Aveng Ltd is also under scrutiny.
- In a recently-filed report, Oberholzer was accused of “using of the F word and shouting at the top of his voice” -continuously threatening to fire people for non-performance.
- Mark Chettiar – a whistleblower in an internal investigation – has faced an internal disciplinary procedure (initiated by Oberholzer) over the allegations he made. It’s now understood that Chettiar has been moved to a position in HR, much to his consternation.
Eskom CEO accused of ‘corruption, nepotism’.
The Aveng payment promises to be a particularly troublesome matter for Jan Oberholzer. Nazeer Cassim, a former high court judge, processed the report into his behaviour: Although Eskom has suggested a form of ‘counselling’ to teach the executive about their best practice, Cassim believes the R42 million transaction requires a stronger form of retribution:
“Jan Oberholzer breached the provisions of the Eskom policy – he should have abstained from the transactions in totality. I propose and recommend that the CEO or a nominated board member counsels Oberholzer on the matter… But there is no reason why the Aveng issue cannot be the subject matter of a disciplinary hearing.”
Nazeer Cassim