Mngoma’s return to the stand on Friday morning happened after an abrupt adjournment of proceedings during Thursday evening, reportedly for security reasons. She had started responding to Gigaba’s responses to her previous evidence in April, being led by the commission’s Advocate Anton Myburgh.
Mngoma also testified on the process that the commission had taken her through since December last year, when she was first asked to depose to an affidavit to elaborate on allegations she made against Gigaba, in an interview with eNCA, about his relationship with the Guptas. Among the issues she raised was the lack of support from the commission for her security needs, after she allegedly started receiving threats from people who claimed to know that she was consulting with the commission’s lawyers.
According to Gigaba, Mngoma only granted eNCA the interview because she felt bitter over their divorce, and because he had not submitted to her extortion attempts for a large settlement arrangement. Mngoma denied this, saying she could not go after Gigaba financially as he did not have much to fight over. The house the pair still share with their two sons is rented, she said, and the only property that Gigaba owns has a large bond bill against it still. The two were married out of community of property, and for most of her marriage, Mngoma said she had taken care of herself. The only time she was spoiled by Gigaba was when he would provide her with a credit card when she went on overseas holidays without him, and even then set it at a R100,000 limit.
Mngoma told the commission that she went public about her husband’s affairs after he orchestrated her arrest six months earlier, in June, and humiliated her, following infidelity rumours. Her much publicised arrest by the Hawks was a ruse so that Gigaba could gain access to her electronic gadgets, said Mngoma, adding that after they were confiscated, all information linking her to the Guptas was erased.
“I started opening my gadgets and discovered everything Malusi had said we needed to delete that related to the Guptas was gone,” she said of the return of her gadgets by Hawks officials, following her release on bail.
“They did not delete all my data, but deleted everything that related to all our trips to Dubai that the Guptas paid for, and it was all the pictures of the car that the Guptas gave him as a gift. And also a picture that I took at the Gupta wedding in Sun City.”
She had told the commission earlier that Gigaba had initially asked her to give him the gadgets so that an IT specialist he had hired could remove incriminating evidence. According to Mngoma, this would include pictures taken on holidays sponsored by the Guptas, e-mails containing trip details and itineraries of these trips, and even pictures she had taken of a BMW vehicle that was gifted by Ajay Gupta. Gigaba had also raised concern, she said, over the true nature of his relationship with the Guptas as well as electronic evidence of how many times the couple visited the family’s Saxonwold home.
He has denied this and numerous other allegations, including that it was through Gupta that he learned of his pending appointment to the post of public enterprises minister in November 2010. Gigaba says in his affidavit he only knew that he would be going to a new portfolio when former president Jacob Zuma told him, on the eve of his cabinet reshuffle announcement.
So excited was Gigaba over his new role that he would look forward to meetings with Gupta in Saxonwold. It was in this period, in 2011, that Mngoma first visited alongside him, on the insistence of Gupta, who wanted to meet their new-born son. There would be many more gifts like that, including lunches with Gupta and his family. On many occasions Gigaba would have work-related meetings at the home. He denied Mngoma’s allegation that his relationship with Gupta soured after Gigaba started avoiding his calls and instructions on how to run state-owned enterprises under his watch.
According to Gigaba, Mngoma’s evidence should be struck off the commission’s record simply because it relied on media reports and gossip she received from his detractors, including members of the top six, among whom was the person who leaked a pornographic video of Gigaba in 2018. It was from these quarters too that Mngoma was receiving help in her recent actions, including her allegations before the commission.
“Malusi came to me and said one of the top six members leaked the video. Also, when he resigned [from the finance minister post in 2018] he said he was forced to and didn’t do it voluntarily,” said Mngoma.
Mngoma revealed that she was the first to initiate a discussion on divorce in early 2020, but Gigaba would not entertain it, telling her that not only was he working on his submissions for a PhD, but he was also preparing his affidavit for the commission. He also told her that for the sake of spousal privilege, he would prefer that they halt discussions on divorce until after the commission had concluded its work.
Gigaba is next on the stand.
This article was originally published on Corruption Watch.
Corruption Watch (CW) is a non-profit organisation launched in January 2012, and operates as an independent civil society organisation with no political or business alignment. CW is an accredited Transparency International chapter that fights against the abuse of public funds, relying on the public to report corruption. These reports are an important source of information to fight corruption and hold leaders accountable for their actions.
Go to: www.corruptionwatch.org.za
