It has got to the stage lately where market observers and media commentators alike wince when they hear – from one quarter or another – something related to DRD’s ongoing corporate governance clean-up.

    Chairman and CEO Mark Wellesley-Wood – while sympathetic – is unapologetic.

    “I can understand people’s weariness with the public relations polemic; even I’m tired of that,” he says. “But that isn’t to say I do not believe the company has a responsibility to keep its stakeholders informed of developments; indeed, that is part of good corporate governance.”

    It is how communication is done that matters, Wellesley-Wood believes, and the company – from its side, decided towards year-end on a new tack.

    “Straight batting” Wellesley-Wood calls it.

    “We are simply not going to get drawn into any more public slanging matches, through the media for example, on the whole issue,” he says, “nor are we going to rise to more sophisticated public relations ploys that seek to deflect attention from those who, ultimately, will be answerable in courts of law for their actions.”

    Rather, the company has embarked upon a process of keeping stakeholders informed of developments through periodic publication of updates on its website. The first such communication was published in April to coincide with the release of DRD’s third-quarter results.

    “I would be the first to admit it is far from a ‘sexy’ read,” Wellesley-Wood says.

    “But it sketches in simple, un-emotive terms – easy for those who are genuinely interested to assimilate – the entire background to the corporate governance clean-up; the rationale for and current status of litigation; and the company’s perspective of related events such as the resignation of various of its officers.”

    And it is in this vein, he says, that the company intends to continue to report to its stakeholders on developments.

    “Whenever there is something substantive to tell people, we will do so in straightforward terms.”

    It was in May 2000, shortly after his appointment as DRD’s non-executive chairman, that Wellesley-Wood was obliged to assume – with some vigour – an additional role as “new broom”.

    He was given information about various irregularities, largely relating to recent investments DRD’s executives had made in the Rawas mine in Indonesia and an Australian company, Continental Goldfields. Investigators and forensic auditors were brought in and by the end of the 2000 financial year, significant losses to the company had been identified.

    The DRD board appointed a special committee, headed by Wellesley-Wood, to oversee further investigations and conduct ensuing recovery processes. Following discussion with its auditors, DRD was obliged to write off R590 million in its audited annual financial statements for 2000 as a provision for the impairment of its assets. A significant part of the write-off was attributable to the identified irregularities. It also came to light that the company had incurred additional losses relating to a series of irregular payments to officers of the company and others.

    Wellesley-Wood, backed by his board, is adamant he will see through the corporate governance clean-up process. Some of the misappropriated funds have been recovered without recourse to the courts but he is under no illusion that litigation under way in two jurisdictions – South Africa and Australia – will be short and sweet.

    Is it all worth it? That is a question put to him frequently.

    “Yes, on two counts – one material and the other ethical,” he says. “I’m confident we will recover more for our shareholders than we are being forced to lay out on legal and other costs but more importantly, at the end of the day, we will have sent a clear signal to all concerned that we stand for clean business.”