- Accused no. 1 is a businessman and director of companies. At all times material to the indictment herein, he was the sole shareholder and director of the second accused, a private company incorporated as such, named Indiza Infrastructure Solutions (Pty) Ltd (“Indiza”).
- The two accused are charged jointly with diverse charges of fraud, forgery and uttering, all of which have their origin in a so-called “Service Level Agreement” (“the SLA”) entered into between the KwaZulu Natal Provincial Department of Education (“the DoE”) and Indiza, in terms of which Indiza was appointed to provide stationery to all schools established in terms of Section 20 of the South African Schools Act, 1996 (Act 84 of 1996) in KwaZulu Natal.[1]
- The SLA assumes a prominent place in the factual matrix of this matter, in that:
3.1. Indiza’s rights, duties and obligations vis a viz the DoE were regulated largely by its provisions;
3.2. the fraud charges in the indictment have been formulated on the basis that the alleged breaches of the terms of the SLA by the accused constitute misrepresentations to the DoE;[2]
3.3. The forgery and uttering charges are likewise predicated upon the State’s peculiar interpretation of the terms of the SLA. As will be demonstrated in more detail hereunder, the evidence in support of counts 13, 14, 16 and 17[3] is fundamentally flawed, precisely because it is anchored to the erroneous notion that Indiza’s contractual duties in terms of the SLA precluded it from marking-up the goods it sold and delivered to the schools.
To download the full document: Click Here – Jabulani Mabaso heads 220213 final
Leave a Reply