Brian’s no show

Brian’s no show

23 May 2006

As expected, former Saru president Brian van Rooyen failed to pitch for his disciplinary enquiry that started in Bloemfontein on Tuesday.

The disciplinary inquiry into corporate mismanagement allegations against van Rooyen took place without the central figure nor any of his legal representatives as former Chief Justice Joos Hefer presided at the offices of the Free State Rugby Union.

Van Rooyen, who was found guilty of corporate mismanagement during an internal investigation by Saru last year, had 11 charges officially tabled against him on Tuesday.

The main charge detailed allegations that Van Rooyen initiated and promoted the establishment of an office for the president of Saru in Johannesburg at the premises of Labat Africa Ltd to the tune of millions of rands – where Van Rooyen was managing director.

SA Rugby’s legal services manager, Christo Ferreira, told Sapa that Van Rooyen’s absence on Tuesday was unfortunate. “In terms of our regulations the defendant has a choice to be at the disciplinary hearing or not. It would have been first prize if he could have stated his side of the story, but the process must go on,” he said.

SA Rugby’s finance manager Basil Haddad and KPMG’s Jannie Lubbe testified at the hearing on Tuesday. Former deputy-president of Saru, Andre Markgraaff, and former SA Rugby board chairman Theunie Lategan are expected to testify on Wednesday.


14 Comments

  • 1.Vinnie: Reply to this comment
    23 May 2006, 18:42 pm

    *yawn*

    Can anybody tell me what Brian apprently lied to Jake about?

  • 2.min_gepla: Reply to this comment
    23 May 2006, 18:48 pm

    Nee ek wil ook weet. kyk wat gebeur as die regering poletiek in rugby in bring

  • 3.wpforever: Reply to this comment
    23 May 2006, 20:58 pm

    brian is a big doos

  • 4.keo: Reply to this comment
    23 May 2006, 21:39 pm

    the hearing will prove meaningless. it will all come down to technicalities. Really brave stuff from SARU. Wait till the guy is gone and then institute proceedings. Why couldn’t they do that when he was there?

  • 5.Groen_en_Goud: Reply to this comment
    24 May 2006, 05:14 am

    Drag him by his balls to the case if they must. No wait… Silly me. That would be impossible, he doesn’t have any.

  • 6.Obronie: Reply to this comment
    24 May 2006, 06:54 am

    This case might have value if evidence gets submitted which indicated that one of the current SARU officials was either aware of dishonest practises or was even taken part in it.

    Then they can use this to clean up the admistration a bit. That will however require balls.

    Btw Keo, your comment is incorrect, they did voted to institute this hearing when he was there, luckily your buddy was voted out.

  • 7.BobZimmerman: Reply to this comment
    24 May 2006, 08:11 am

    keo 4
    Surely you jest!
    Unlesss Im missing something, isnt it Saru instigating this inquiry, if so, I doubt that van Rooyen would have pushed for an inquiry into himself while he had the power in his hands.
    By the way is van Rooyen still involved in Rugby in capacity?

  • 8.BobZimmerman: Reply to this comment
    24 May 2006, 08:13 am

    Andrew
    What are the other 10 charges?

  • 9.ddrek: Reply to this comment
    24 May 2006, 08:30 am

    Ever since Brian the lion has been off the scene we have had virtually no headlines about the new guy. Its been great and quiet,as Brian VR used to dominate the news.
    But I do wonder if (forget his name) is doing much.Man he’s so obscure I cannot remember his name….BVR’s successor !

  • 10.Balikibaba: Reply to this comment
    24 May 2006, 08:30 am

    Keo, how can you make a comment like that? Surely it can only be to generate debate and heated replies to your comment. BvR is an unethical, crooked businessman who was found out for what he is when he he thought he could make SA Rugby his own. Unfortunately he forgot that the whole of South Africa are interested in how their national sport is run unlike no one caring how Labat is run. He was found out, welcomed an investigation to “clear” his name, but now that he has that chance to “clear” his name he has the arrogance to decide not to show up. No, Keo, the man is a mampara and deserves criminal action if you ask me. Well done SARU for getting rid of this piece of rubbish!

  • 11.ddrek: Reply to this comment
    24 May 2006, 09:50 am

    Well said baba

  • 12.ddrek: Reply to this comment
    24 May 2006, 09:53 am

    Hey,baliki
    Does your nik come from Bishops rugby warcry???
    I always remember wondering what the hell they were singing,butbeing from the enemy school,we never allowed ourselves to ask.
    Some tradition thing ofcourse? Baaaa-liki-BABA ,bishops,bishops,bishops !!!
    ????
    Or Ig,you could answer this…

  • 13.leitz: Reply to this comment
    24 May 2006, 11:25 am

    I hear Markgraaf is also testifying against him. Now who’s the daddy!!!

  • 14.DEE DAH: Reply to this comment
    24 May 2006, 12:03 pm

    The more this continues the funnier it gets

Keo.co.za has always promoted uncensored views, but has never tolerated racist or crass outbursts. Come on guys and girls. If you can't moderate yourselves or each other then I am going to be forced to regulate the posts and enforce a registration process for comments. The choice is yours.

Have your say

You must be logged in to post a comment.