You are currently viewing our desktop site, do you want to download our app instead?
Moneyweb Android App Moneyweb iOS App Moneyweb Mobile Web App

NEW SENS search and JSE share prices

More about the app

Steinhoff is funding police investigation into its affairs, not the NPA’s

With PwC producing the forensic report.
The NPA says PwC’s original accounting-driven report puts it in ‘an ideal position’ to produce a report for a criminal investigation. Image: Dwayne Senior, Bloomberg

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has confirmed that the South African Police Service (SAPS) and not the NPA will be the recipient of the forensic report into suspected accounting irregularities at Steinhoff.

The report, which will be drawn up by PwC, is being funded by Steinhoff to the tune of R30 million.

Much of PwC’s work for SAPS is expected to involve trawling through the same information used to generate the 3 000-page report the audit firm completed for Steinhoff in 2019.

According to Steinhoff’s annual report it paid PwC €35 million (close to R632 million) for the investigation and for technical accounting support following initial reports of possible accounting irregularities released in December 2017.

It is unclear whether PwC’s assistance will include the drawing up of a charge sheet or whether this will be left to the NPA, which might not have the capacity to sift through a new forensic report from PwC for that purpose.

Criticism

After days of criticism about potential conflicts of interest, on Wednesday the NPA issued a media statement clarifying that it was not the recipient of R30 million worth of funding for the investigation but that SAPS was.

NPA spokesperson Sipho Ngwema said it was accepted practice locally and internationally for complainant companies (Steinhoff in this case) to commission these kinds of forensic exercises.

“The NPA can use the findings appropriately for the purposes of preparing any possible prosecutions,” said Ngwema.

He added that in 2019 Steinhoff granted SAPS and the NPA access to the 3 000-page report, which had taken two years to finalise.

A 12-page summary of the report, which was deemed legally privileged, was all that was made available to the public. It’s not clear whether the new report will be legally privileged.

Accounting vs criminal investigation

Ngwema described the 3 000-page report as “an accounting-driven report and not a report that primarily focuses on criminality and the criminal court process”.

He also noted that although PwC had generated an accounting-driven report, the firm was “in an ideal position to produce a forensic audit report for the purpose of criminal investigation and prosecution with a reasonable time span, notwithstanding what might be perceived as a conflict”.

Read:

One lawyer told Moneyweb there is a danger the public might suspect PwC would provide information selectively to SAPS aimed at enhancing any legal action Steinhoff intends taking.

Managing perceptions

A number of measures have been put in place to manage this perceived conflict of interest, including a signed certificate in terms of Section 4 of the Protection of Information Act and findings supported by objective evidence such as bank statements, journals, ledgers, databases, emails, memos and contractual agreements.

In addition, Ngwema said, PwC has given an undertaking that “no evidenced obtained during the criminal investigation will be divulged to Steinhoff, even for the purposes of civil litigation”.

He stressed that the arrangement between Steinhoff and SAPS “is neither irregular nor uncommon”.

Please consider contributing as little as R20 in appreciation of our quality independent financial journalism.

AUTHOR PROFILE

COMMENTS   6

Sort by:
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Top voted

You must be signed in to comment.

SIGN IN SIGN UP

I don’t get it. PwC was paid R632m for the initial report and now they are getting another R30m to write an executive summary of their own report. Isn’t that daylight robbery?

my personal opinion: directly based on the quality of work delivered currently by the police in general, i don’t know if they even really understand what the report actually says / means

How on earth can PWC be doing the police forensic report??? PWC must be conflicted given the work it does for Wiese and for Steinhoff (and who knows what they provide to other implicated persons)

I had to read this article twice as I could not believe what I was reading. Admittedly I don’t have that much knowledge of the inner working of SAPS, but does this mean that in the entire SAPS system in SA that there is not even one forensic unit or department with people specializing in financial fraud? I had always assumed that there was such an unit and that its expertise had just been eroded as all other areas where government is in control.

Side Bar: world’s most expensive toilet paper being made in SA

So PwC is gonna sift through the document they authored – its really nice in this country of ours.

End of comments.

LATEST CURRENCIES  

USD / ZAR
GBP / ZAR
EUR / ZAR

Podcasts

INSIDER SUBSCRIPTIONS APP VIDEOS RADIO / LISTEN LIVE SHOP OFFERS WEBINARS NEWSLETTERS TRENDING PORTFOLIO TOOL CPD HUB

Follow us:

Search Articles: Advanced Search
Click a Company: