Company Announcement - Recent claims purporting to be fact, asserting that the South African National Roads Agency Limited has not responded to and decisively dealt with allegations of construction collusion with regard to road improvements done ahead of the 2010 Soccer World Cup, are not only incorrect but are also misleading. The matter has in fact been handled by the Competition Tribunal – an authoritative body and an organ of state – with the findings having already been made public.

The case is also being investigated by the Hawks. The Competition Tribunal last year fined 15 construction companies a combined R1.46-billion after the investigation into collusion. These fines do not only relate to projects of the Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project, but various other projects including the World Cup soccer stadiums.  To put matters into perspective, there were 17 that were tendered for road and bridge works. Out of these, five were deemed to be questionable and were consequently dealt with by the Competition Commission and Tribunal. And as stated, fines were paid and this money has already been paid to the government fund.

SANRAL has also laid criminal charges against the companies that were found guilty of collusion. A complaint has been laid with the Hawks against all contractors concerned and SANRAL has also received a case number. Moreover, we will lodge a civil claim against all contractors concerned. However, the alleged damages suffered are nowhere near the exaggerated number of R7 billion as stated by OUTA. SANRAL remains committed to both punitive and restorative justice in this matter and will ensure the recovery of public money from those companies and individuals who were involved in the collusion.

Indeed, these efforts demonstrate SANRAL’s prudent financial policy. SANRAL is committed to corporate governance and this has certainly been validated by the clean audits that SANRAL has received over the last couple of years. It is regrettable that organisations like the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance are resorting to making baseless claims, without any proof or evidence, that are simply motivated by their disagreement to e-tolling. The matter was dealt with by the Competition Tribunal even though OUTA might differ with the quantum of the fines that were imposed. It is not for SANRAL to dictate to the Tribunal what fines to impose, though it is within SANRAL’s right and affected institutions to pursue other avenues to ensure justice is done. In fact, the Tribunal said as much.

It appears that OUTA shows the same disregard for the Competition Tribunal, like it has with court judgments in the past. It would serve the country well if it were to place any evidence of corruption in its possession with law enforcers.

While OUTA’s Chairman Mr. Wayne Duvenage is within his right to make a career out of opposing SARNAL, even former CEO’s like him do need to be familiarise themselves with the facts. What cannot be left unchallenged is his assertion that SANRAL is not addressing the tender collusion and price fixing scandal.