MBABANE – Swazipharm Director, Kareem Ashraff, has criticised Minister for Finance, Neal Rijkenberg, for presenting a Funduzi report that contains legal disclaimers.
Ashraff said the report, tabled by the minister on Wednesday, discredited suppliers even though the auditors included a disclaimer protecting themselves from legal action in case of inaccuracies.
He stated that if Funduzi Forensic Services were confident in their findings, there would have been no need for such disclaimers. According to him, the inclusion of disclaimers shows that the auditors were uncertain about the report’s accuracy and credibility.
Ashraff recalled that the same auditors had previously caused to be tabled a report in Parliament alleging that government had paid for donated drugs.
Reacting, he said he had to write a letter of complaint to the World Health Organisation (WHO) headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, which led to the UN health agency issuing a press statement denying that Remdesivir had been donated.
Although Zakhele Dlamini, Director of Funduzi Forensic Services, later denied mentioning that WHO donated the drugs, the company’s report stated that government had been charged E9 million for them.
Dlamini reportedly told other publications that ‘Funduzi’s position had always been misunderstood.’
In the previous Funduzi report, the issue is titled ‘Fraudulent Purchase of a Donated Trial Drug.’ A senior procurement officer has been suspended amid allegations that she colluded with a pharmaceutical supplier to charge government E9 million for Remdesivir, which had allegedly been received as a donation during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ashraff questioned the auditors’ approach, saying: “It looks like Funduzi is changing goalposts now. What is this ‘don’t sue us for our report’?”
He explained that a disclaimer is a legal statement limiting liability, essentially meaning: “We are not responsible for any harm or losses arising from the use of our service or product.” Generally, disclaimers are used to protect companies from lawsuits.
Ashraff argued that if Funduzi was uncertain about the credibility of its evidence, it should not have mentioned names in the report. He also questioned why the Finance minister tabled a report containing such disclaimers.
“During the implementation of the report, must I not cite Funduzi as a respondent if I am aggrieved or if there’s a need for redress or legal intervention? Should I not refer to the report or cite Funduzi as the first respondent? They must come clean. Are they targeting me? Do they want my business?” he asked.
He added: “I welcome competition. They must come out and compete fairly, but they must not try to destroy me because I will resist.”
Ashraff also requested clarification on the relationship between Funduzi Forensic Services and FDZ Forensic Services, asking for transparency regarding any connection between the two entities.
He further highlighted the relationships among key players in the health supply chain, government and himself. Ashraff said he had assisted The Luke Commission during a time of financial and technical difficulty and personally introduced its management to senior leaders.
*…
Neal clarifies his role in tabled AG’s report
MBABANE – The Minister for Finance, Neal Rijkenberg, has clarified his role in the tabling of the auditor general’s report in Parliament.
He emphasised that he acts purely as a conduit for the submission of the report and has no influence over its contents.
Responding to concerns raised by Ashraff regarding the inclusion of legal disclaimers in the audited report, Rijkenberg said: “If you can please double check the Constitution and just see, you’ll see what the rules are around tabling stuff. What the auditor general produces, he submits to the minister for Finance who tables. It’s not about my opinion, it does not count here. My view on Funduzi doesn’t count. What is in his report, in fact, the truth is I don’t even know what’s in the report. It’s not my business. He reports to Parliament. It’s just that because he doesn’t sit in the House, he needs someone to table and I’m that person that tables.”
He further stressed that his role is strictly procedural and guided by constitutional provisions.
“So if you can, please make sure that whatever you’re going to be saying and doing about this article and you make it very clear that the minister for Finance is purely, I’m purely the vehicle to table. It’s not about my view or not my view or what I can or can’t, what he gives to me, I have to table is what the Constitution is very clear about. So please look at that, quote that Constitution if you’d like.”
Rijkenberg explained that the auditor general operates independently, and any interference from the Ministry of Finance would amount to a constitutional breach.
He explained: “It’s how I see my role at doing the auditor general’s work. He is an independent someone. Look at the Constitution on that too. He does what he does independently. If I interfere there, I’m breaching the Constitution.”
*Full article available in our publication
Leave a comment