The deal was such a disaster – with only a limited number of trains delivered, and some that were not fit for South African railways – that Transnet now wants to cancel the outstanding contracts. Singh also stands accused of giving a Gupta-linked company massive amounts of money from Eskom’s coffers.
However, these costs were already factored into the initial amount, when he first presented it. “The reasons advanced for the increase were thus misleading and negligently made. The evidence suggests that Mr Singh played an important role in the production of the memorandum and therefore he would have either known or been told of the actual reasons for the increase in the total cost of acquisition,” SAICA found.
In addition, he motivated that the deal should be split: two bidders for diesel and another two bidders for electric locomotives. This was despite advice against it, given the cost implications. Transnet’s board also did not approve the splitting of the award. “He ought to have appreciated that batch splitting would result in additional costs to Transnet but he flagrantly dispelled the potential for any additional costs without considering the effect this would have for Transnet,” SAICA found.