South Africans are forced to endure Stage 6 load shedding indefinitely as Eskom deals with the breakdown of generating units and a delay in returning others to service.
The intensified power cuts are implemented while the country experiences a cold front which is likely to contribute to additional pressure on the electricity grid.
Stage 6 load shedding
Eskom spokesperson Daphne Mokwena said the embattled power utility will publish another update should any significant changes occur.
“Eskom’s load demand is forecasted to increase to 29 542MW. The anticipated return to service of a generating unit each at Kendal, Matla and Matimba power stations has been delayed, necessitating the continuous implementation of Stage 6 load shedding until further notice.
Mabuza in intelligence report
Meanwhile, the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) and the Hawks have refused to be drawn into former deputy president David Mabuza’s involvement in a private intelligence report on corruption at Eskom.
The SIU and the Hawks shared their findings of the intelligence report commissioned by former Eskom CEO Andre de Ruyter during the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (Scopa) meeting on Tuesday.
Advocate Lekgoa Mothibi and Lieutenant-General Godfrey Lebeya confirmed that the report does link politicians and others to the crimes at the power utility.
The Democratic Alliances (DA) Alfred Lees pressed Lebeya to confirm reports that Mabuza feature among those implicated.
“Is the name of David Mabuza in that report?”
However, Lebeya said there was no supporting evidence of this.
“There are no affidavits attached. It’s only the information, there is just written notes.
“As the SIU indicated, there are names mentioned in this report. We have analysed them, but we need evidence to link them to specific crimes,” Lebeya said.
No authority
Earlier, Mothibi told Scopa Eskom did not “authorise” the intelligence report into corruption by De Ruyter.
Mothibi said legal action could not be ruled out against De Ruyter over the Eskom probe.
“The former GCEO [group chief executive] did not have authority to investigate the affairs of Eskom and it does appear he had a distrust of law-enforcement agencies.
“As the GCEO, it was incumbent on him to raise the distrust appropriately but he commissioned a parallel investigation.
“Consideration should be given to holding the former GCEO to account. It becomes a legal question as he is no longer employed by Eskom, and in this regard, we will consider the options available, together with the board, and advise accordingly,” Mothibi said.