The latest plot twist in the national soap opera comes from business mogul, former Gauteng premier, one-time presidential hopeful and apparent scam victim Tokyo Sexwale. The Mvelaphanda Group founder shocked the nation recently when he said in a television interview that trillions of rand had been stolen from a mysterious heritage fund set up by a foreign “powerful family” that had appointed him as joint mandate holder. The money was to be used to fund infrastructure projects and free education, Sexwale maintained, but was instead looted by unnamed forces, apparently operating from inside the Reserve Bank.
Finance minister Tito Mboweni was quick to dismiss Sexwale’s claims, saying he’d been scammed. The National Treasury and Reserve Bank issued a joint statement saying there was no record of any such fund and Sexwale’s claims had several similarities to a global scam that often invoked the “White Spiritual Boy Trust”. The scam also sometimes mentioned a “Spiritual Wonder Boy Trust”.
At this point one would have expected a healthy dose of scepticism to have accompanied any reportage of Sexwale’s allegations. Yet even after a rambling, two-hour media conference in which Sexwale failed to present a shred of evidence to support his claims, certain members of the public and media continued to entertain Sexwale’s story. This has been especially pronounced on social media, but some traditional media have been similarly credulous. When a listener called in to a popular talk show on Radio 702 to argue that Sexwale should be taken seriously, the host agreed that “we can’t just dismiss the allegations”.
On the contrary, dismissing unsubstantiated allegations is precisely what we should do. Or does the old maxim that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” no longer apply in SA? The Directorate for Priority Crime Investigations (Hawks) apparently believes it no longer applies. It has announced an official investigation into Sexwale’s allegations, despite the amount said to have been deposited in the aforementioned “trusts” being in excess of R100-trillion — a figure so absurd it could be mistaken for the ransom demands of a spoof James Bond villain.
One has to ask why the Hawks are putting scarce resources into investigating outlandish, unsubstantiated claims when they could be directing their resources towards credible evidence of crimes having been committed that has emerged during testimony before the Zondo commission into state capture.
But the finger must also be pointed at the wilful gullibility of so many in SA. Consider the airtime granted to one Fanie Fondse, a man who says an international syndicate inside the Reserve Bank is responsible for looting the mystery heritage fund. Fondse, who claims to be a Reserve Bank shareholder, also believes Hendrik Verwoerd was murdered by an “international banker syndicate” that has established what he calls a fake financial system.
Yet despite spouting such obvious conspiracy theories Fondse was happily interviewed by both the SABC and Newzroom Afrika. However, at no point did they ask him why the donors behind the alleged multitrillion-rand fund would appoint him — a man who comes across more like a woodwork teacher than a fund manager, with no apparent track record in financial services — as the “mandate holder” for the entire continent of Africa.
While it is easy to find humour in the Sexwale debacle, it also highlights a sinister development in SA society in which unsubstantiated — and sometimes fabricated — allegations are afforded the same credence as those with obvious merit. Just ask Eskom CEO André de Ruyter, who is being investigated by his own board for alleged racism based on the claims of someone who brought the allegations to light after he became the subject of a disciplinary hearing.
Former minister Derek Hanekom was accused of being an apartheid spy by former president Jacob Zuma, the person who appointed him to the tourism portfolio, and had to go to court to clear his name. President Cyril Ramaphosa has also faced insinuations that he was an apartheid collaborator, despite an absence of evidence.
SA would be far better served if citizens treated unsubstantiated allegations with greater scepticism. As the late Christopher Hitchens put it in an aphorism that has become known as Hitchens’s Razor: “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.