Murray & Roberts (M&R) and other entities involved in the 2015 collapse of a temporary bridge on Grayston Drive are still to face justice despite a damning report by the Department of Labour, which recommended prosecution.
The Department of Labour’s report was submitted to the Johannesburg Development Agency (JDA) after four years of investigation in November last year.
The report has not been made public yet, but both the JDA and contractor M&R have publicly said they don’t agree with most of its findings.
Media reports have said the findings of the department’s report, especially those made against the main contractor, M&R, are damning, with the department having recommended prosecution of the entities involved.
National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Gauteng spokesperson Phindi Mjonondwane could not be drawn on when the prosecuting authority will make a decision on the matter.
“We can confirm as the NPA that we received the matter and allocated to one of our advocates. The matter is still under consideration,” Mjonondwane said.
M&R were awarded a contract to commence construction of the Grayston Drive pedestrian and cyclist structural bridge. Construction started in January 2015 and was still continuing when the incident occurred in October of the same year.
Two people died during the incident and 19 others were injured. M&R was appointed by the JDA to build the bridge.
Eduard Jardim, spokesperson for M&R, said: “The NPA has not been in contact with
Murray & Roberts since the final report was issued.”
JDA spokesperson Susan Monyai said the entity has lodged an internal appeal with the Department of Labour as required in terms of the rules of the department, but that the department on March 18 2020 indicated it will not consider the JDA’s appeal.
“As at 18 May 2020, the JDA, through its attorneys after receiving counsel’s opinion lodged an intention to appeal the matter with the Labour Court after the chief presiding inspector from the Department of Labour did not consider the JDA’s internal appeal,” Monyai said.
“Another letter was sent on 8 April 2020 requesting the chief presiding inspector to consider the substance of the JDA’s appeal, and to date that’s where we are in terms of the process that we are following.”
