Controversial former SABC COO turned politician Hlaudi Motsoeneng has applied to the Constitutional Court to rescind its decision that he repay the R11-million success fee to the public broadcaster.
The amount has ballooned to R18-million due to accumulated interest.
On September 18, the Constitutional Court denied Motsoeneng an opportunity to appeal a Supreme Court of Appeal decision concerning the success fee, but this week he applied to have the judgment overturned.
The Special Investigating Unit has docked R6.4-million of his pension funds.
In his affidavit, Motsoeneng argued that his application raised new constitutional issues that the court had not yet addressed.
He submitted that the court should review these significant issues.
“It is in the interests of justice for this court to grant leave to appeal,” he said.
He claimed it was unfair and illegal to demand payment of R11 508 549.12 when he had received only R6 790 043.98 in his account.
He contended that the right to fair labour practices protected his success fee due to his SABC employment.
He pointed out what he termed procedural irregularities in the handling of the case.
Motsoeneng said that during his tenure at the SABC, the broadcaster sought to make
significant financial and technological investments to improve its competitiveness and
profita¬bility.
“I was a senior employee of the SABC at the time, and as a graduate of business studies at Gordons’ Institute, I decided to experiment with a business proposal to introduce new channels that would be fully funded by the private sector.
“The SABC was licensed to run three channels, and so my idea was that these channels would operate as pilot projects funded by private investors and running on commercial principles applicable to private sector development,” said Motsoeneng.
In his private time, he said, he discussed investment opportunities in the broadcasting sector, particularly in public broadcasting, with businesspeople he met.
“One of the issues that I was interested in was how to market my business proposal for investment in SABC in a manner that the private sector would find attractive,” he said.
He then met numerous businesspeople in his private circles and engaged them in discussions about business opportunities. One of these was a MultiChoice executive.
He said that MultiChoice submitted a proposal, which he carefully looked at, and that he was satisfied that the treaty would constitute a positive financial investment in the SABC, in particular, that the financial injection would give the broadcaster a chance at being competitive and financially viable.
The SABC legal division vetted the agreement and expressed satisfaction that it aligned with its mandate.
Initially, the plan involved operating the new channels as pilot projects and incorporating them into the SABC business family upon the amendment of the Broadcasting Act.
“The agreement was presented to the SABC board, and after careful consideration, the finance committee directed that I sign it on behalf of the SABC. I did so,” he said.
He said SABC did not have a policy on the payment of success fees for business deals.
The fundamental question in this application, according to Motsoeneng, is whether the agreement between the SABC and MultiChoice and the success fee he received were in line with the Constitution of the republic.
