Former cabinet minister Lord Hain (the veteran political campaigner Peter Hain) has attacked international firm Hogan Lovells for its role in alleged scandal in South Africa, accusing it of walking into a web of ‘corruption and cronyism for a fat fee’.

Peter Hain

Lord Peter Hain

Source: Thinkstock

Hain said he has asked the Solicitors Regulation Authority to withdraw the firm’s authorisation as a recognised body and sanction its senior partners, including calling for them to be refused the right to practice. The firm denies any wrongdoing. 

Speaking in the House of Lords after a debate on money laundering yesterday, Hain alleged that the firm had enabled ‘a corrupt money launderer to be returned to his post as second-in-command of the critically important South African Revenue Service, SARS.’ He is demanding an inquiry into the firm’s conduct.

According to Hain, the firm missed key evidence in preparing a report on alleged financial misconduct by Jonas Makwakwa, deputy chief of the revenue service, and his girlfriend Kelly-Ann Elskie.

Under the protection of parliamentary privilege, Hain continued: ‘Hogan Lovells spared two of the most notorious perpetrators of state capture in South Africa, Tom Moyane, head of SARS, and his deputy, Jonas Makwakwa, from accountability for their complicity in and cover up of serious financial crimes.’

Hogan Lovells said Hain’s accusations were ‘unfounded’ and that it fully reported the details of its engagement to the independent South African Parliament Standing Committee on Finance and was ‘very confident in its accuracy and probity’.

‘If Lord Hain does have evidence of corruption then that should be reported to the appropriate authorities in South Africa. We look forward to working closely with the SRA on any complaint that Lord Hain might have made to them,’ the firm said.

Hain added yesterday: ‘Hogan Lovells are complicit in undermining South Africa’s once revered tax-collection agency and thereby effectively underpinning President Jacob Zuma and his business associates, the Gupta brothers and others, in perverting South Africa’s democracy, damaging its economy and robbing its taxpayers. When Hogan Lovells was engaged by the corrupt Moyane in September 2016, it was well known that he and Makwakwa were synonymous with President Jacob Zuma’s capture of the state. Hogan Lovells could therefore not plead ignorance as they walked right into that web of corruption and cronyism for a fat fee.’

Hain said that Moyane, who was appointed to the revenue service in 2014, tried to suppress a report by the South Africa’s Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC), that revealed Makwakwa and Elskie had received ‘suspicious and unusual cash deposits and payments’.

Makwakwa appointed Hogan Lovells to conduct an independent investigation into the report. Hain's allegation is that by Hogan Lovells' failure to investigate the very reason the firm was appointed; the firm allowed itself 'to be blindly led by Moyane’, he said.

Hogan Lovells' statement added: ‘We have a fundamental duty to uphold the rule of law with integrity and professionalism, and have been strong advocates of that in South Africa. It is disappointing that Lord Hain did not contact us about our work for SARS in advance of his statement.’

The SRA confirmed it has received a complaint. ‘We take all complaints seriously and will look at any evidence given to us about alleged misconduct,’ a spokesperson told the Gazette