Koos Bekker, Naspers chairman, has dismissed accusations of corruption against Africa's biggest media company as nothing more than mischief in a dramatic week of growing alarm over the extent of state capture in the country.
The billionaire owner of print, e-commerce and pay-TV assets faces a slew of inquiries over accusations that it paid the SABC R500-million and the then Gupta-owned TV station, ANN7, millions of rands to secure influence over the government's encryption policy for set-top boxes.
Bekker says MultiChoice could not have known, when it signed with ANN7 in 2012, that the Gupta family would subsequently be exposed as close associates of President Jacob Zuma and accused of corruption. The company's dealings with the SABC were above board, he says.
FBI investigation
As long as a year after the deal to air the ANN7 channel was signed, "respectable business leaders" attended the high-profile Gupta wedding, "so to say that MultiChoice should have foreseen [what was to come] is total nonsense", he said.
The family hosted a wedding in 2013 at Sun City that was attended by some of the country's leading politicians and businessmen and which created a furore because they landed guests at the Waterkloof Air Force Base, a national key point.
Naspers could face a probe by the FBI, which is investigating US links to South Africa's Guptas after the Financial Times reported in October that the bureau was investigating all companies associated with the family - escalating a scandal over the Guptas' alleged use of a friendship with Zuma to control state businesses.
Naspers joins a list of major corporations such as auditors KPMG, US consultancy firm McKinsey and British-based Bell Pottinger that have come under the spotlight for their dealings with the family.
This week the DA released minutes of an SABC meeting in 2013 at which MultiChoice apparently offered the public broadcaster cash in exchange for influence. The DA claimed the meetings were clandestine.
Bekker said: "That's a complete piece of mischief of the Democratic Alliance. I think that's in poor taste. They released a statement without asking us to provide input or comment."
He said Naspers had consulted two senior counsel over the minutes and they had concluded that nothing illegal had taken place during the meeting at the SABC headquarters in Auckland Park. The proceedings were recorded and minuted "in the normal manner" , he said.
"The idea, of course, is if they provoke Naspers sufficiently maybe the board will get so embarrassed maybe it will override MultiChoice and take the channel [ANN7] off the air," Bekker said.
Asked about claims that MultiChoice tried to influence state policy on encryption, he said: "That's just a sideshow. Set-top box encryption is not interesting today to anyone."
The government's set-top box project has failed to take off. It has been stalled by numerous policy disagreements, some of which have been fought in court between the industry and the government over encryption.
In 2008 the SABC supported the government's position to encrypt the boxes but made a U-turn allegedly after the meeting with MultiChoice. The DA alleges MultiChoice intended to sway government policy towards one of no encryption.
The relationship has been the subject of numerous inquiries. The Special Investigating Unit (SIU) is now investigating several SABC contracts, including the MultiChoice agreement, which comes up for renewal in 2018.
On Friday MultiChoice said its board was aware that the ANN7 channel had "caused real public concern because of the allegations of corruption levelled at the former owners of the channel".
It had instructed its audit and risk committees to assess potential corporate governance failures at MultiChoice, assess whether the total amount paid to ANN7 was comparable to payments for other locally produced channels, especially the estimated cost of running a 24-hour news channel, and report back to the board.
Bekker said the timeline of the board investigation was not confirmed.
"But I would think it's a matter of weeks rather than months. Its not a massively long thing," he said.
He said it was for MultiChoice to decide if it would continue carrying the ANN7 channel following growing calls for it to be booted off the DStv platform.
"But one has to be very careful. It's a very severe act on a platform carrying so many hundreds of channels to single one out ... it's better for someone at [communications regulator] Icasa to make the decision.
"If the ownership of the current channel is not acceptable, I don't think MultiChoice is in a very good position to judge that ... we would not like to make a political judgment like that."
Bekker said that cutting the channel soon before the ANC's elective conference would amount to "a complete interruption of the democratic discussion process", adding that MultiChoice had signed up ANN7 in the first place because the channel added to the diversity of views on DStv.
The ANC hosts its elective conference from December 16 to December 20.
Asked whether MultiChoice would terminate its relationship with ANN7 once the elective conference had been concluded, Bekker said: "I frankly don't know because the contract runs out in June next year and it's for MultiChoice to decide."
In a separate interview, Naspers CEO Bob van Dijk said parent company Naspers would "let the MultiChoice board do its job" but if the outcome of the investigation [MultiChoice board investigation] was "not fully satisfactory" then Naspers would step in.
MultiChoice, the South African and African pay-TV operations of Naspers, accounts for more than half of Naspers' revenue if the company's investments such as Chinese internet firm Tencent are excluded.
Asked about the merits of the SABC's deal with MultiChoice, the SABC board's recently elected chairman, Bongumusa Makhatini, said he understood that there were a lot of people defending the deal. "I have no problem with people defending the current deal as long as they can justify the economics of the deal and explain how it is mutually beneficial. Is it sustainable?
"In our discussion with them [MultiChoice] I can see no value in this board tackling and challenging different aspects or clauses in the contract. We are looking for a total overhaul."
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.