By ROD AMNER
The National Prosecuting Authority’s (NPA) investigation into the theft of 5954 solar geysers from the municipal storage in the Indoor Sports Centre earlier this year has been withdrawn due to “insufficient evidence”, the SABC has reported.
In May, Grocott’s Mail reported that just 46 of the 6000 solar-powered geysers donated to Makana in 2019 by the Department of Energy and the Central Energy Fund were in a state to be installed. The rest were mysteriously stolen or rendered inoperable because essential copper and brass parts were stolen from their ‘packs’.
The unit cost for each solar geyser was R5000, with a further R3000 per geyser for “assembling components”. The 5954 stolen or stripped geysers rendered inoperable were worth R47.6 million in an intact state (5954 x R8000 = R47.6 million).
According to SAPS spokesperson Brig Tembinkosi Kinana, a criminal case was opened at the Joza Police Station and handed over to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). However, the case was subsequently withdrawn due to “insufficient evidence”.
Public Service Accountability director Jay Kruuse told the SABC that there were no apparent signs of forced entry. “This suggests that the persons who got access to those premises either had permission or arranged permission – and, so, many questions remain unanswered.
“We need an update on the investigation from the SAPS. We also need an update on the action taken by the Makana Municipality. Surely, the remaining parts of these geysers could be used? Is there action to acquire and replace the copper parts that were stolen? Hopefully, we can see residents receiving geysers. Many of our residents need this kind of support,” Kruuse said.
Residents interviewed by the SABC said they were outraged that no one would be held accountable for stealing the geysers and components.
News of the crime was first disclosed in a Makana Infrastructure Development Portfolio Committee meeting on Wednesday, 18 May.
In May, commentators on the Ward 4 Service Delivery WhatsApp group speculated that in the absence of any signs of forced entry, the robbery must have been an ‘inside job’ or executed by ‘an expert lock picker’.
