April ordered the illegal payment;
Lottering sanctioned the illegal payment;
Lott made the illegal payment.
This is the crime for which Noël Pietersen received a 5 year jail sentence
News with intent!
Your advertising is only as good as the people who see it – repeatedly! You want to do business with OO readers – people with money and control of corporate budgets. Click here
Oudtshoorn. 11 September 2012. 16h45. The ratepayers of Oudtshoorn paid the legal fees of the lawyer who defended “The Honourable” Executive Mayor of the Greater Oudtshoorn, Alderman Gordon April, on charges of theft of municipal property – sand and stone belonging to ratepayers.
OO has been researching this story for months, and has only now attained the required proof supporting a clear conviction that Mayor Gordon April; Director Community Services Ron Lottering; and CFO Deon Lott defrauded ratepayers in the amount of R31,977.00.
The then Senior Process Administrator, Contracts & Legal Services, of the Municipality, Warren Muller, instructed attorney Hardy Mills on December 22 last year:
Dit het onder die aandag van die kantoor van die waarnemende Munisipale Bestuurder, Mnr Ronnie Lottering, gekom dat die Uitvoerende Burgemeester Raadsheer Gordon April gelas is om more 23 Desember 2011 in Oudtshoorn Landdros hof moet verskyn. Daar is klaarblyklik n klag van Diefstal geopen teen die Agbare Burgemeester.
In opdrag van Mnr Lottering word u versoek om in terme van Artikel 109 A* van die Stelsels Wet namens die Agbare Burgemeester op te tree.
Muller simply submitted an email upon instruction and can not be seen to be part of this fraud.
Mills, who has not breached any professional rules in representing April, and is under no suspicion as he received payment for legitimate representation, responded transparently to OO’s request for information:
I wrote Mills on September 9:
Dear Mr Mills
You represented the Executive Mayor of the Greater Oudtshoorn, Alderman Gordon April, on December 23 last year, and on March 5 this year when he appeared in the Oudtshoorn Magistrate’s Court on charges of theft of sand and stone belonging to the municipality.
Please confirm that your fees were not paid by the Oudtshoorn Municipality.
Mills responded today:
Beste Mnr. Baird,
Neem asseblief kennis dat my rekords toon dat die Oudtshoorn Munisipaliteit my die bedrag van R31 977-00 betaal het vir die Staat v Gordon April (die sand- en klip) saak.
Ek vertrou jy vind dit so in orde.
I also wrote April’s other attorney, Clyde Avontuur, on two recent occasions, September 3 and 9, to learn whether the municipality also paid for April’s little legal adventure against me in the Equality Court, but I have had no response to date.
While April and Mnyimba are currently in Johannesburg on Salga business, CFO Deon Lott, who ultimately made the payment, is taking the day off, claiming to suffer from extreme stress.
Ron Lottering, the director community services, authorised the s109 payment on behalf of the mayor. This is outrageous and illegitimate, and Speaker Stoffels should immediately have launched an investigation into the matter when April accepted the spurious arrangement.
But the speaker is a member of the NPP, and Lottering is, for all practical purposes, the sectretary-general of the NPP, reporting directly to the NPP president, Badih Chaaban; so when Lottering decides on a course of action, it is not for his acolyte, Stoffels, to question the decision.
Also, the NPP is in a fiendish coalition with the ANC and will not do anything to aggrieve its ANC master. Therefore Chaaban either ordered the s109 sanction, or turned a blind eye in favour of his personal relationship with the ANC Western Cape leader, Marius Fransman, who is protecting April against all odds in a desperate attempt to retain some semblance of a foothold in Oudtshoorn.
So ultimately corrupt is the ANC that no member above Councillor, not a regional, not a provincial, not a national executive member, has lifted a finger to address this illegal action by the ANC mayor.
There are a number of concerned ANC members who are opposing the “looting spree” – a term used by the dissidents – in Oudtshoorn.
But they do nothing other than talk.
OO wants action and the absence of action to halt the pillaging is nothing but condonation.
The legal liability that Lott faces for his role in using ratepayers’ money to fund the mayor’s defense on charges of theft of ratepayers’ property, has reduced the poor man to a state of nervous collapse. He first claimed severe flu earlier today, but OO has determined that his absence from the office is due to severe stress.
The dissidents wanted Lott today to sign a letter removing Thandekile Mnyimba from office in answer to the resolution of July 26 calling for Mnyimba’s removal. Lott recanted on his initial undertaking, as he did previously, on August 15, when his lack of backbone was exposed for all to see. Poor Deon Daantjie is in bed, a whimpering heap of nerves, not worth anything to clean government.
If the ANC had any inclination towards clean government, some functionary would already have acted. OO rejects the so-called ANC resolve to see Oudtshoorn saved from the savagery of April and his cadres.
What should be done, and done expeditiously, are the following:
1. Criminal charges must be brought against April, Lottering; and Lott;
2. The speaker must launch an investigation into the illigitimate s109 approval of ratepayers’ funds to pay for the mayor’s criminal defense.
Why are we waiting?
Don’t talk to me about dissidents and cadres keen on change!
Show me the money or make way for someone who can show me the money.
Of course, the DA is not even on the park. They’re hiding somewhere in a dressing room, at the wrong stadium, warming up to run onto a dark pitch with nobody in attendance.
* s109. The LOCAL GOVERNMENT: MUNICIPAL SYSTEMS ACT 32 OF 2000 stipulates at s109A that a municipality may, subject to such terms and conditions as it may determine, provide an employee or councillor of the municipality with legal representation where-
(a) legal proceedings have been instituted against the employee or councillor as a result of any act or omission by the employee or councillor in the exercise of his or her powers or the performance of his or her duties; or
(b) the employee or the councillor has been summoned to attend any inquest or inquiry arising from the exercise of his or her powers or the performance of his or her duties.