Media Statement

20 April 2018
Johannesburg

Attention Stephan Hofstatter

Official Response to questions sent by Stephen Hofstatter in Business Day on 19

April 2018

There are two parts to Eskom’s main application. The first part is a review
application by Eskom of its own decision in relation to the two McKinsey
contracts under review. The second part is a request that the court order a
repayment of the respective fees paid to Trillian and McKinsey.

Following a separate application brought by Eskom, Eskom has also reserved its
own rights to oppose any civil forfeiture proceedings which may be brought by
the AFU against McKinsey and Trillian.

The Eskom review and repayment application is significant for Trillian. Trillian is
now facing two different civil processes by two different organs of state for the
same recovery. This would also apply to McKinsey.

For this reason alone, Trillian would have had to oppose the Eskom Application.
However, in addition, Eskom’s review application provides a forum for Trillian to
file papers and present its defense in relation to the McKinsey contracts.

Furthermore, the court will be able to consider all relevant aspects of the Eskom
McKinsey case including the report from Eskom’s own independent lawyers
exonerating Trillian. Trillian sees this as an opportunity to fairly present its case in
the appropriate forum and has confidence in the judicial process. Trillian is
working under advice of senior counsel and the basis for its opposition will be in
accordance with such advice.

Trillian will file its full defense within the time to be agreed with McKinsey and
Eskom’s attorneys and when it does so the defense affidavit will become part of
the public record. It would be premature to share the contents of this affidavit
with you and unfair for you to call for it until it has been filed in court.

Trillian has always denied any corrupt dealings in relation to these contracts and
would ask you to inform your readers that independent reports show that Eskom
saved at least R22-billion as a result of work done by Trillian and McKinsey and
that McKinsey itself are waiting for the contract to be declared unlawful by a
court of law before paying back any monies.

These allegations have caused harm to all the highly qualified consultants that
worked on the project and who to date have not had the benefit of a right of
reply.

Trillian requests that you kindly publish this response in full.

ENDS