Boxing bosses bob and weave the truth in Parliament
● Boxing South Africa’s executive members ducked hard questions in Parliament on Friday, and some made statements that could be interpreted as factually dubious.
They pushed their own spin in a four-hour grilling, such as focusing on their unqualified audits, but sport, arts and culture portfolio committee members kept shifting the spotlight onto the auditor-general’s findings, which included irregular expenditure of R1.5m.
The regulator’s chairman Luthando Jack and his board offered feasible explanations to some questions, but they ignored others and blamed bad publicity received in the past year on reactionary forces and “three media houses”.
Acting CEO Erick Sithole claimed that the Sunday Times had not contacted him before publishing a story. He was apparently referring to an article that appeared on July 30.
But my WhatsApp showed that questions sent to him at 8.52am on July 28 were blueticked, as was a follow-up sent at 11.07am the following day asking if BSA was on track to answer the questions.
The same questions were sent to Jack and board member Dr Azwitamisi Nthangeni and all three chose not to respond.
One query pertained to allegations made by former acting CEO Cindy Nkomo in her resignation letter from September 2021 that board members were interfering in operational matters, often in contravention of the Boxing Act and regulations that govern the professional sport.
Asked by DA member Veronica van Dyk what action had been taken as a result of Nkomo’s claims, Jack replied: “No, we did not address that matter because there was nothing to address because we disagreed with the former acting CEO in terms of her observations.”
The closest anyone came to admitting BSA flouted its regulations was Sithole, who spoke about a gap in the legislative framework that required improvisation by the board, such as allowing celebrity fights.
He also said they accepted letters of commitment from government departments sponsoring tournaments, instead of cash.
However, BSA is legally required to receive purse money at least 14 days before a tournament, and on their watch an increasing number of shows have been cancelled or postponed well inside that period.
Sithole said updated regulations had been drafted.
Board member Khulile Radu avoided answering questions about what qualified him to conduct training courses on behalf of BSA and how much he was paid.
Requests to name the consultants who were paid R2.15m as well as which promoters owed BSA the most went unanswered.
Radu got creative justifying the board overturning its sanctioning committee and permitting an unrated fighter to challenge for the South African junior-lightweight title a few months ago.
He said the division had only seven listed contenders and not the maximum 10 — most of the 17 divisions suffer a dearth of decent, active fighters — and this meant the board could add the boxer in question in at number eight. The chairman of the ratings committee, Andre de Vries, resigned as a result.
Radu made it clear that Jack had driven the move. “On the instruction, of course, of the chair we looked into what was available and found that other boxers who were supposed to be in the last three [spots] should have been there.”
The tournament the fighter featured in was promoted by Ayanda Matiti, whose name frequently came up in questions which also went largely unanswered.
Jack said BSA had signed a non-disclosure agreement in its settlement with the fired former CEO Moffat Qithi, who won his labour dispute that BSA took all the way up to the Constitutional Court.
It is believed that BSA lost this case because of a procedural blunder, but a question on that also went unanswered.
Sithole said BSA, which gets nearly R20m a year from government and spent more than half on salaries for 2022/23, needed R40m to operate efficiently.
The board’s three-year term ends next month.