Albright crowns city with new peace institute

Princess Margriet of the Netherlands and former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright were among high-profile guests attending the ceremony for the launch of the Institute for Global Justice in The Hague - International City of Peace and Justice. 

The Institute has been established by the Municipality of The Hague and the Hague Academic Coalition, supported by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation.

The new Institute will become an independent knowledge centre in the field of international law, peace, security and social and economic development.

The Hague Institute for Global Justice (IGJ) aims to give concrete answers to international questions on issues where the lack of law and justice could lead to political, military, social or economic instability and inequality.

Authoritative top institute

Critics say the € 17.45 million made available by the government of the Netherlands last year for the foundation of the Institute for Global Justice could have been better invested in expanding existing institutes in the city. But Maria van der Hoeven, former Minister for Economic Affairs, said the IGJ will be an authoritative top institute in the field of peace, justice, security and development, making a vital contribution to the promotion of international justice.

"The foundation of the Institute is totally in line with the government’s vision for the international reinforcement of the Randstad conurbation. We must strengthen what is already strong internationally. The IGJ will promote the profile of The Hague as an international city. In economic terms, this is welcome as it will boost the city’s appeal as a business base. Furthermore, it will have an economic spin-off for the city", van der Hoeven said.

The Institute aims to synthesise the most innovative knowledge from national and international sources, by mobilising various disciplines, actors and geographic and cultural perspectives.

The Hague: base for new knowledge

Mayor Jozias van Aartsen said the IGJ will provide The Hague with an institute of global importance. "The strength of the existing institutes in The Hague relating to peace, justice, security and development will be combined and reinforced through the IGJ. The Hague will become the base for new knowledge, products and services that can provide a solution to the complex problems facing the world", said van Artsen.

By assembling the best multidisciplinary knowledge and expertise that the world has to offer, The Hague Institute for Global Justice says it seeks to acquire a strong international competitive position.

Source: The Hague

Hold off with the schadenfreugasms

"[Tuesday’s] events remind us that we do not live in an ordinary or normal country. We live in a country where some people (politicians and the old business elite among them) eat sushi from the bodies of semi-naked models; are protected by bodyguards and high walls from the young men and women who have no money, no jobs and little to lose; a country where some people travel across the world in first class and throw lavish parties, while the majority of South Africans languish in poverty and do not have the life chances to make meaningful decisions about their own lives."

Source: Constitutionally Speaking

South Africans Protest Over Hearing for Zuma Rival

The police in South Africa on Tuesday confronted crowds of angry demonstrators supporting Julius Malema, the firebrand leader of the governing party’s influential youth league, as he attended a disciplinary hearing that could sway both his own political career and that of President Jacob Zuma before party elections next year.

Under attack by Malema supporters burning the party flag and throwing rocks and bottles, the police fired stun grenades and water cannons outside the Johannesburg headquarters of the African National Congress, in power since the first post-apartheid elections in 1994.  Protesters chanting “Zuma must go!” also burned T-shirts and posters bearing the president’s portrait, according to Internet postings by South African news services in Johannesburg. The police erected razor wire barricades while a police helicopter hovered. At least one officer was wounded by a flying brick, a police spokesman said, and a South African news channel said one of its television crews was attacked near the party headquarters, Luthuli House.

The hearing on Tuesday came days after an elite South African police unit known as the Hawks said it was investigating Mr. Malema’s lucrative financial dealings, South African news reports said.  It was not immediately clear when the internal disciplinary panel conducting the hearing would announce its findings. But the A.N.C.’s secretary general, Gwede Mantashe, announced later in the day that it was moving the panel to an unspecified location outside Johannesburg because of the violence. The panel is to resume deliberations on Wednesday.

In a statement on its Web site, the A.N.C. also condemned the mayhem and blamed it on the leadership of the youth league. “It is our view that those who have taken the responsibility to mobilize the crowds to gather outside Luthuli House — the leadership of the A.N.C. Youth League — should also take full responsibility for the violence, criminality and ill discipline that has accompanied these crowds,” the statement said.

Mr. Malema, 30, and other members of the youth league were appearing before the panel to determine whether they should be expelled or suspended for bringing the party’s name into disrepute after calling for the overthrow of the government in neighboring Botswana and criticizing the party leadership. If Mr. Malema is exonerated, South African analysts said, he may feel emboldened to challenge Mr. Zuma, to whom he brought decisive support in a leadership battle in 2007. But if Mr. Malema is sidelined, the party may be able to pack the youth league leadership with loyalists likely to throw their weight behind Mr. Zuma, ensuring his re-election as A.N.C. leader.

Under party rules, its leader is also its presidential candidate, so, the analysts said, the fight with Mr. Malema could determine the country’s future leadership. Mr. Zuma is currently visiting Norway.
The dispute between the two men reaches deep into South Africa’s post-apartheid society. With calls to nationalize mines and banks and to seize white-owned farmland, Mr. Malema has caught the imagination of the country’s disaffected youth, telling them that they are missing out on the economic fruits of political freedom. Referring to Mr. Malema’s travails with his party, Reuters quoted him as saying on Monday: “If the A.N.C. defines your future as expulsion, we are ready for that. This does not delay our economic struggle,” he said. “We see this as a setback for the revolution we are pursuing. We will continue to push for economic freedom in our lifetime.”

The hearing on Tuesday was the second involving Mr. Malema this year. In May, he was fined and ordered to apologize for sowing discord within the party and undermining its leader’s authority.  On July 31, he publicly urged the ouster of President Seretse Khama Ian Khama of neighboring Botswana.

The episode was only one of many that have made Mr. Malema an irritant to the authorities as much as a champion among his more radical followers. While his statements have solidified his support, they have often troubled potential foreign investors and members of the country’s sizable white minority.
When he supported Mr. Zuma for the leadership of the party, Mr. Malema said he was ready to kill for him. He has called Helen Zille, the main opposition leader, a cockroach. While the South African government has professed neutrality in efforts to resolve the political and economic crises in neighboring Zimbabwe, Mr. Malema openly supported President Robert G. Mugabe. He once expelled a BBC correspondent from a news conference, saying he had “white tendencies.” Only months ago, Mr. Malema also stirred heated debate about the limits of freedom of expression and the definition of hate speech by singing a song from South Africa’s liberation struggle — “Shoot the Boer.” The word Boer is usually translated from Afrikaans as meaning white farmer but is sometimes used to refer to any white South African.

The party has shown increasing exasperation with him. Some of his statements last year prompted it to order him to attend anger-management classes. But party leaders rallied to Mr. Malema over his choice of songs, supporting his assertion that the “Shoot the Boer” refrain referred to the anti-apartheid struggle and did not represent a call for murder.

Source: New York Times

Journalists: Enemy of the people?

During his disciplinary hearing, Julius Malema's supporters ran riot outside at Luthuli House. But as soon as he began speaking to them afterwards, the young lions became as meek as lambs.

As demonstrators holding a T-shirt-burning vigil in support of embattled ANCYL leader Julius Malema became violent, a photographer was thrown out of Luthuli house and his camera smashed, rocks were thrown at journalists and e.tv's satellite vehicle was damaged.

When Malema exited Luthuli house in a black beret, even he had to urge his hundreds of supporters not to attack the media. "You cannot throw stones at journalists because journalists are just messengers ... if you attack journalists, you will lose public sympathy." Despite Malema's words, many reporters and photographers are beginning to feel that journalists are under siege. "The press has become the enemy," says the Star news photographer Chris Collingridge. He remembers when members of the media were welcome in townships and supported by the ANC. The ANC used us to tell their story during apartheid, he says.

The ANC's spokesperson, Jackson Mthembu, says he has not received a complaint about a man who had been thrown out of Luthuli House by officials and had his camera destroyed. But, he says, if such a thing had occurred, the ANC would not hesitate in condemning it. "The ANC had already condemned the violence of youth league supporters outside Luthuli house [on Tuesday]," adds Mthembu.

Consensus among photographers from some of South Africa's top newspapers is that attacks on journalists are becoming increasingly common. Raymond Louw, the acting chair for media freedom on the South African National Editor's Forum (Sanef), blames government ministers and the ruling party's antagonism towards the media for the growing tension between the public and the media. "Cabinet ministers frequently speak negatively about the media, makings accusations that are seldom proven," says Louw. "The government has created an environment in which demonstrators, who tend to be prone to violence, are more likely to turn against press photographers". Photographers are targeted more often because their camera identifies them -- although all journalists that can be identified are vulnerable, he adds.

The man whose camera was smashed when he was thrown out of ANC headquarters on Tuesday was roughed up by Luthuli House officials in front of journalists. Police chose not to get involved and pushed him away towards the guards, because they said he had been trespassing. An Eyewitness News journalist was called "bitch", Sapa photographer Werner Beukes was hit on the back of the head by a rock, and e.tv journalists were injured by rocks hurled at them by Malema supporters. Malema himself has at times shown little patience towards journalists, in one notable instance having the BBC's correspondent Jonah Fisher thrown out of a press conference, calling him "tjatjarag" and "you bloody agent".

On Monday, Times photographer Halden Krog was trying to take a photo of the only protester who had turned up at Luthuli house a day too early to show his support for Malema. He says was pushed by a man wearing ordinary clothes from Luthuli house, into the street and told him to, "Get the f*** off the site". He says he was even hassled when he went to the other side of the street.

In two incidents last week, press photographers were assaulted by members of the public, who tried to prevent them taking photographs. Beeld photographer Craig Nieuwenhuizen made headlines after a punch-up with security guard at Unisa campus in Pretoria while trying to report a story, and in a less-publicised incident in the Eastern Cape youths stoned a Daily Dispatch photographer who was trying to take photographs of young men running away from police following a protest at the Cathcart Magistrate's Court. Mail &Guardian photographer Lisa Skinner, who has been shot at by security guards, says she can count on one hand the number of photographers working in Johannesburg who have not had an incident where they have been physically prevented from doing their jobs. But more often than not, Skinner adds, it is the police or politician's bodyguards who stop them from taking pictures and assault photographers.

Experts say South African law allows photographers to document what is happening in public places. Photographers are usually prohibited from taking pictures of "national key points". A national key point is a government building, harbour or military installation that has been declared by the government to have a higher security clearance in order to protect national security. In short, photographers are legally permitted work in public places without permission.

Trespass laws and privacy laws would usually apply to the press, meaning that photographers would have to ask for permission to take pictures on private property. But sometimes photographers can take pictures on private property if it is in the public interest, media lawyer Dr Dario Milo told the M&G. Asked why the law which allows journalists to work in public places is increasingly ignored, Milo tells the M&G there is "a sad disconnect" between the law and practice: "There is more and more abuse of power".

Franz Krüger, the M&G's ombud and an adjunct professor at Wits University's journalism department, says that in many cases "the Constitution and law is often far ahead of popular sentiment".

There is huge hostility to the media in the ANC, and sometimes in the police, and at times it boils over into the street, he says, adding that Malema's supporters were probably angry with the media for reporting about his involvement with tenders, questions over his finances and the disciplinary charge he faces.

The ANC has been accused of trying to undermine the freedoms of the press with its push for the media to submit to outside regulation in the form of a media appeals tribunal. But the ANC's Mthembu says speculation that the ANC regards the media as its enemy is "hogwash". "The ANC are respectful to journalists. Many of our friends are journalists. There are even people at Luthuli house who started out as journalists."

Mthembu acknowledges there is disagreement over the need of a media appeals tribunal, but says this does not mean party members bear the media any ill will. "All we are calling for is recourse if journalists err," he says. "If I disagree with you about recourse for people who have fallen victim to the media does it mean I hate you?" asks Mthembu. "The ANC respects the right of journalists to do their jobs."

Elston Seppie, the president of the Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI), says media houses are not doing enough to defend the right of journalists to report on the news, and should make a bigger issue about photographers being stopped from taking pictures. "I get the impression that newspaper owners or editors don't always take action against people who assault or prevent journalists from doing their jobs, other than writing a story on the incident," he says. Media owners must go to court more often to stand up against the treatment of press photographers or journalists will increasingly find it harder to do their job, Louw urges.

Krüger agrees that media houses have a responsibility to support their staff. "Photographers are very often on the front line and take risks for their employers" and media houses should look after them, he says. "The media will fight for everyone else but we don't fight for ourselves," laments Krog. But the Star's photographic editor Steve Lawrence says it can be frustrating to follow that path. After a photographer working with him had his equipment damaged a few years ago, he opened a case -- but it was buried. "Court cases just disappear," he says.

The people who should stop the harassment of photographers are the government, says Louw. "They started it," he says. "They can end it."

Source: Mail & Guardian

'ANC must adhere to the rules'

SENIOR advocate Patrick Mtshaulana says he will ensure that ANC disciplinary procedures are followed to the letter when he represents Julius Malema and Floyd Shivambu. Malema, who is the first accused, will appear today and Shivambu tomorrow to face charges of bringing the ANC into disrepute and sowing divisions within its membership.

Mtshaulana, a former uMkhonto weSizwe combatant, told Sowetan yesterday that he was drafted into the case late. Mtshaulana is a member of the Duma Nokwe group of advocates. The Sandton-based group of lawyers is named after the late Nokwe who was first African advocate of the Supreme Court of the Transvaal and an ANC stalwart.

"I am meeting Malema and Shivambu today. I have not held consultations yet. I am not sure whether I will also be representing all the other ANCYL members who have been charged," Mtshaulana. "I do not wish to comment further about the case except to say that we will assist in making sure that the disciplinary procedures are followed."

Source: The Sowetan

10-Year Sentence for Newest Political Prisoner in Burma

Nay Myo Zin was sentenced to ten years in prison by a Burmese court last week. His wife reported that he was arrested because Burmese secret police had found an email in his inbox that discussed national reconciliation.

Zin was charged under the Electronic Transitions Act 33a, which criminalizes “doing any act detrimental to the security of the State or prevalence of law and order or community peace and tranquility or national solidarity or national economy or national culture.” This law is frequently used to arrest dissidents (pdf).

Nay Myo Zin was the first person to be arrested for political reasons since the new Burmese government took power earlier this year. His arrest and sentencing is another a sign that despite its claims to be on the path to democracy, the government has not changed. In addition to Nay Myo Zin, there are 1,995 other political prisoners in Burma, according to the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners Burma.

PHR urges the Burmese government to embrace principles of democracy and release all political prisoners.

Source: Physicians for Human Rights

War Crimes in Libya

Libyans first took to the streets to protest Colonel Muammar Qaddafi’s autocratic rule in February 2011. His response was quick and brutal: attack protesters and target civilians in a deliberate campaign to quash dissent across the country. As Qaddafi troops closed in on the eastern city of Benghazi and threatened to decimate the population in March, the Arab League called for international intervention. Despite NATO’s subsequent air campaign to protect Libyan civilians, untold thousands suffered unspeakable horrors at the hands of Qaddafi forces since the uprising began.

In June of 2011, PHR sent an investigative team to the coastal city of Misrata shortly after rebel forces liberated it. Witness to War Crimes: Evidence from Misrata, Libya (pdf) details the lives of ordinary citizens during a two-month siege and sheds light on Qaddafi’s systematic assault. In-depth interviews with 54 residents provided evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity including murder, torture, rape, forced internment, and disappearance.

Charting a new course for the country in a post-Qaddafi era requires that perpetrators are brought to justice and held to account for their abuses. Individual accountability for crimes under the rule of law is the best guarantee for preventing future human rights violations and ending a cycle of violence.

Source: Physicians for Human Rights

19 arrested for corruption in Mpumalanga

Mpumalanga police say six police officers and 13 home affairs department officials were arrested on Friday for allegedly accepting bribes from foreigners in exchange for letting them into the country. The illegal entry of foreigners had been taking place at the Lebombo border post near Komatipoort, Lt-Col Leonard Hlathi said.

All the home affairs officials had already been suspended. The arrests, made during a joint police and home affairs operation, were part of efforts to combat illegal immigration. The group was expected to face charges of corruption in the Komatipoort Magistrate's Court on Monday.

Source: Times Live

NADEL do not recommend Justice Mogoeng

On 20 August 2011 the Judicial Services Commission (“JSC”) resolved to interview the President’s nominee for the position of Chief Justice, Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng, and to invite relevant stakeholders, including the National Association of Democratic Lawyers (NADEL), to make submissions on his suitability for the position.

NADEL is committed to the promotion of the values enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa within the legal profession, judicial system and society at large.

NADEL’s Constitution is aimed toward the realisation of the goals and objectives as set out in the Constitution in particular to meaningfully and assiduously strive for a truly democratic and just society, free from oppression and exploitation; and combat and prevent all instances of injustice, malpractice and unfair discriminatory practices based on race, colour or creed.”

NADEL raise a number of serious concerns by Mogoeng J’s record regarding his commitment to the espousal of foundational values of the Constitution, his knowledge and appreciation of the nature and reality of domestic violence and sexual assault, his seemingly sexist views of women’s rights within the home and his role as an Apartheid prosecutor.

NADEL feels strongly that under the circumstances Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng’s appointment as Chief Justice, in light of the importance of the position and its requirements, is not recommended.

Source: Constitutionally Speaking

The National Association of Democratic Lawyers (NADEL) is a voluntary organisation of progressive lawyers and a significant stakeholder in the South African legal profession. Its primary goal is a legal and judicial system that realises access to justice for disadvantaged people, fosters the rule of law and constitutional values.

NADEL was founded in 1987 by among others, the late Adv Dullah Omar, who became the first Minister of Justice in our democratic South Africa, Chief Justice Pius Langa and Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke.

NADEL membership comprises members of the legal profession including attorneys, advocates, academics, legal advisors, paralegals and law students. Most members are private practitioners who have traditionally serviced working class and poor communities and who practise primarily in the areas of human rights, gender and access to justice.

Info Bill a threat to media's sources, says DA

Opposition parties accused the ANC on Wednesday of seeking to use clause 18 of the Protection of Information Bill to force journalists to reveal their sources to the authorities. The clause obliges anybody who comes into possession of a classified document to hand it to the police or the intelligence services to avoid prosecution.

Democratic Alliance MP David Maynier asked African National Congress colleagues on the committee drafting the state secrets Bill: "Could it be explained to me what the purpose is of handing the document to the police? "Is the danger not that the police could try to determine who had leaked that document to the journalist?" Luwellyn Landers, who leads the ANC's arguments on the ad hoc committee drafting the Bill, responded: "There is nothing wrong in that." He added: "Mr Maynier incidentally reveals his whole approach to the law. He finds leaking to be a virtue."

Maynier said his position was "a democratic one", while the ANC's was not. He added it was unthinkable that journalists who received classified information would rush to a police station to get rid of it. "It will never happen in a million years, ever. This is madness."

The issue had cropped up repeatedly in recent deliberations on the Bill, with the ruling party insisting the clause would stay. It had rejected opposition proposals for exemptions from prosecution for possession of state secrets. According to the latest draft, the only exception is where possession is authorised by another law. The DA had argued the new law should explicitly rule out prosecution where the information was wrongfully classified or concealed wrongdoing.

Dennis Dlomo, the special adviser to State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele, said on the sidelines of deliberations that since the latest draft did not criminalise possession per se -- provided the police were alerted -- the recipient could then, without fear, approach the minister with a request to declassify it. In this regard, the clause no longer riskeild creating what constitutional law expert Pierre de Vos called "an Orwellian situation", where one could not ask authorities to declassify a document, because admitting that one had insight into it could land one in jail. But African Christian Democratic Party MP Steve Swart said in the absence of a public interest defence to protect journalists and whistleblowers, going to court would in reality be "the only route" for somebody who uncovered classified information that concealed corruption.

Opposition parties argued that an independent appeal authority on declassification must be created, because the cost of going to court was beyond the means of most South Africans. Work on the Bill got bogged down in acrimonious argument on Wednesday after significant changes to it were agreed earlier this week. On Tuesday, the ANC accepted a narrower rewording of a clause that imposes prison sentences of up to 20 years for disclosure of state secrets.

It was hailed as a breakthrough by opposition MPs and civil rights groups who feared the earlier version could be abused to muzzle the media. They also welcomed a hard-won agreement to narrow the definition of national security as grounds for classifying information, and to limit the power to keep secret files to the intelligence and security services. But observers had little hope the ruling party would relent on calls for a defence to enable the press and whistleblowers, when prosecuted for exposing classified information, to argue they acted in the public interest. This was one of the sticking points that prompted the Congress of South African Trade Unions to warn three months ago that it would refer the Bill for constitutional review unless it were amended significantly.

Source: Mail & Guardian

South Africa: Truth and Reconciliation

Give power back to the branch – Mantashe

African National Congress (ANC) branches must be allowed to think for themselves and leadership choices must not be dictated by a "well-resourced, narrow circle" of party members, ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe said on Tuesday. "Branches must be allowed to say 'that comrade did not do the work that he or she was given to do. Change that comrade'. And we are saying that culture must continue," he said at a media conference in Johannesburg.

The conference followed a four-day meeting of the ANC's national executive committee, which ended on Monday night. "But if we do what is called succession, you are actually killing the branches of the ANC. Branches of the ANC must be allowed to think and not be given a list of slates developed by a narrow, well-resourced circle in the ANC... That is a leadership responsibility; to liberate these branches from the vice of groupings that are intelligent, have the monopoly of wisdom, have resources, have a lot of cash-flow around elections... We must liberate the ANC from that."

He said nationalisation of the mines could not be used as a tool for punting leaders ahead of the next year's elective conference. "We must sustain nationalisation as a policy debate. You can't use a policy debate as a lobbying tool," he said.

The NEC met as the party's national officials – the top six leaders – brought disciplinary charges against ANC Youth League president Julius Malema and league spokesperson Floyd Shivambu. The charges related to comments critical of the Botswana government and about helping to strengthen opposition in that country.

Malema had said the league would support leaders, when the ANC went to its elective conference next year, who supported the league's economic programme including nationalisation of the mines and land reform without compensation.

Mantashe said the issues raised in the debate around nationalisation were pertinent, it was a "correct debate". "You can't use it as some mischievous tool of lobbying," he said. The debate had to be "anchored" in the content. The NEC re-affirmed its position on the so-called "succession debate" – that it was not yet opened for discussion. The ANC holds its next elective conference in December next year. The ANCYL and the Gauteng chapter of the party called for the opening of the debate on identifying the leadership to be elected at the conference in Mangaung.

Even some within the NEC wanted the leadership debate to be opened – Gauteng provincial chairperson, Paul Mashatile, made the call earlier this year. Malema, an ex-officio member of the NEC, also agitated for the opening of the debate at the league's own elective conference in June. "The fact that we had to remind the NEC of all the procedures, traditions and how these issues are handled in the ANC was informed by the observation that there was temptation in many structures of the ANC to jump the gun and start the nomination process today," Mantashe said.

He likened the ANC to an elephant – very slow, but very decisive when it started moving. "We reminded ourselves that we did take this decision and as members of the NEC there is an expectation that we must be loyal to our own decisions. That is part of that slow movement of an old organisation." The run-up to the Polokwane elective conference, during which President Jacob Zuma ousted former president Thabo Mbeki after a divisive leadership battle, was a "disaster", Mantashe said.

He said there would be no "silencing anybody" ahead of the 2012 conference. Lobbying should be done with respect. He was responding to questions on the disciplinary action taken against Malema. "So there is nothing political or silencing anybody. "Once you appreciate that election in 2012 is not a life and death issue for individuals, then you appreciate that there is a responsibility on this leadership to enforce discipline whether you are elected or not. "Whether you are liked or hated it doesn't matter, the organisation must not be allowed to collapse because you want to be popular and you want to be re-elected. It can't be allowed to happen... there is a term of five years, it ends in the 53rd national conference [2012]. "When we are told to stand off the stage, that is the end of our term. Before that any thing that happens, we are responsible. "Otherwise lobbying can be an open season of ill discipline, it cannot be allowed."

Mantashe described the meeting – which largely focused on discipline – as "candid and open". "That's why it took four days. It ended at 9 on Monday, day four. "We left that meeting understanding each other better."

Source: Polity

'We can't be seen to be weak': Mantashe takes aim at Malema

ANC secretary-general Gwede Mantashe launched a veiled attack on Julius Malema on Tuesday ahead of the ANC Youth League president's appearance before a disciplinary committee next week. At a press briefing at Luthuli House in Johannesburg following the ANC's special national executive committee (NEC) meeting at the weekend, Mantashe denounced the discipline problems besetting the party. "The NEC decried the crumbling of discipline in the ANC and it has emerged as a serious concern. Our failure to act on these issues will lose us the respect we enjoy in South Africa, the continent and the world," Mantashe said.

Malema, along with his spokesperson Floyd Shivambu, is due to appear before a party disciplinary hearing next week after being charged with misconduct last Friday for comments made on working towards regime change in Botswana. If found guilty, Malema faces being suspended from the party for up to five years, as he already has a suspended sentence against him following sanction last year. Mantashe's comments should come as no surprise as the youth league has been pushing for his ouster -- along with President Jacob Zuma -- at the ANC's next elective conference in Mangaung at the end of 2012.

Mantashe revealed that the NEC decided in its meeting to tackle unlawful business dealings within the ANC, saying it is part of their mandate as the ruling party to stamp out corruption. "It is our revolutionary duty to act against corruption and deal with it decisively -- we can't be seen to be weak," Mantashe said. This has been interpreted as a further stab at Malema, who is facing a flurry of investigations into his business dealings, with specific reference to the Ratanang trust registered in his name. The youth leader claims the trust is used to raise funds for charitable causes but is currently being probed by Public Protector Thuli Madonsela as well as the Hawks on allegations that he receives money through the trust for securing tenders in Limpopo.

Mantashe also attempted once more to quash the debate over who should lead the ANC after Mangaung, saying the discussion would commence at branch level once party leaders have given the process the green light. "The branches will have the opportunity to nominate their preferred candidates at an appropriate time [which] will be decided in due course," Mantashe said.

While not confirming disciplinary action would be taken against anybody discussing succession before the ANC officially declares it is safe to do so, Mantashe said debating the issue is a violation of the party's constitution. "The fact [that] we have to remind everyone is [due to] the temptation for members to jump the gun. We won't discuss leadership issues now and it would be deviant to do so," he said. This is a further swipe at Malema, who has been not only calling for Mantashe's head, but also began rallying support for Zuma to be replaced by Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe in Mangaung next year.

When quizzed by journalists about the specifics of the charges against Malema and the forthcoming disciplinary committee hearing, Mantashe would not be drawn into commenting, saying that doing so would prejudice the case. "The ANC will not comment on disciplinary procedures, so don't try to trick us into doing so," he said. Indications are that Malema will face a tough time in staving off disciplinary action, after the Mail & Guardian heard from party insiders that the youth league leader's support within the ANC is waning. The youth league is seeking a meeting with their mother body ahead of the scheduled hearing against their leader in the hopes that a political solution might be found to the situation.

If this does not result in a positive outcome from the league, ordinary youth league members confirmed to the M&G that a march is planned to ANC headquarters on the day of the hearing in a show of support of Malema. Mantashe confirmed the request of a meeting but would not comment on the possibility of it leading to the situation being defused before the hearing. "The process must be allowed to unfold and we will deal with any adventurous actions should they happen," he said.

Source: Mail & Guardian

South Africa: Farmworkers’ Dismal, Dangerous Lives

Workers in Western Cape province who help produce South Africa’s renowned wines and fruit are denied adequate housing, proper safety equipment, and basic labor rights, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. The government of South Africa, along with the industries that employ these laborers, should take immediate steps to improve their working and housing conditions, Human Rights Watch said.

The 96-page report, “Ripe with Abuse: Human Rights Conditions in South Africa’s Fruit and Wine Industries,” documents conditions that include on-site housing that is unfit for living, exposure to pesticides without proper safety equipment, lack of access to toilets or drinking water while working, and efforts to block workers from forming unions. While the Western Cape’s fruit and wine industries contribute billions of rand to the country’s economy, support tourism, and are enjoyed by consumers around the world, their farmworkers earn among the lowest wages in South Africa. The report also describes insecure tenure rights and threats of eviction for longtime residents on farms.

“The wealth and well-being these workers produce shouldn’t be rooted in human misery,” said Daniel Bekele, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “The government, and the industries and farmers themselves, need to do a lot more to protect people who live and work on farms.”

The report is based on more than 260 interviews with farmworkers, farm owners, civil society members, industry representatives, government officials, lawyers, union officials, and academic experts.

South Africa has laws guaranteeing wages, benefits, and safe working and housing conditions for workers and other farm dwellers. But the law affords workers much greater labor and housing protections than they receive because the government largely has failed to monitor conditions and enforce the laws, Human Rights Watch said.

Human Rights Watch found the housing for some workers uninhabitable. One farmworker showed Human Rights Watch the former pig stall without electricity, water, or protection from the elements where he has lived with his wife and children for 10 years. “It makes me very unhappy,” his wife said, “because I can’t guarantee [the] safety of [my] children and can’t provide for [my] children.”

Many farmworkers live on farms as part of their employment arrangement; they are joined by family members and former workers, including those who can no longer work because they are too old or injured. These farm dwellers’ land tenure rights are protected under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, enacted in 1997. Yet, by civil society estimates, more than 930,000 people were evicted from South African farms between 1994 and 2004. The government does not keep statistics on numbers of evictions, but people interviewed described a steady pace of evictions, particularly when laborers are no longer able to work. Evicted workers who spoke with Human Rights Watch had not been given suitable alternative housing or adequate compensation to find new housing.

Farmers sometimes resort to illegal tactics to get farm dwellers to leave, including cutting electricity or water. In one case, farm managers severed electricity for more than a year for a family with two children. Security guards on the farm harassed families in the middle of the night with dogs.

Although it is a crime for owners to evict occupiers from land without following required procedures, the authorities rarely initiate criminal proceedings. And even when farmers follow legal procedures, evicted farm dwellers often have no place to go. Municipal governments are generally unprepared to assist them, and some end up homeless.

Occupational health and safety conditions on many farms endanger workers, Human Rights Watch found. The majority of the current and former farmworkers interviewed about these conditions said they had been exposed to pesticides without adequate safety equipment. In addition, many employers jeopardize workers’ health by not providing them with access to drinking water, hand washing facilities, or toilets, even though these are required by labor regulations. When farmworkers are ill or injured, as is fairly common in this line of dangerous work, they are almost always refused the paid sick leave required by law unless they provide a medical certificate.

“Given what we know about the effects of pesticide use, it is unconscionable that some of these workers are not provided appropriate safety equipment, even after they ask for it,” Bekele said.

Farmworkers are some of the most poorly organized workers in the country, with estimates of union “density” – the percentage of workers represented by trade unions – in the Western Cape agricultural sector as low as 3 percent, compared with 30 percent among those with formal employment in the country as a whole. Human Rights Watch found that some farmers try to prevent workers from forming unions, though the right to organize is protected under South Africa’s constitution and international law.

The problems that farmworkers and farm dwellers face are not unknown to the South African government, farmers, or retailers who purchase their products. Indeed, in 2003 and again in 2008, the South African Human Rights Commission documented similar abuses. But steps taken by the government and industry to improve conditions have not been sufficient to ensure that overall conditions on farms meet the basic standards required by South African law.

At the time Human Rights Watch conducted its research, in March 2011, the Western Cape had 107 labor inspectors, responsible for inspecting over 6,000 farms and all other workplaces in the province. Moreover, an agreement between the Department of Labour, Agri South Africa – the main farmers’ association ­– and other parties that requires labor inspectors to give farmers notice of inspections undermines the inspectors’ capacity to identify violations, Human Rights Watch said.

Conditions on farms vary, and not all farmworkers with whom Human Rights Watch spoke had encountered rights abuses. In a small number of cases, farmworkers and farm owners described full compliance with the law as well as a variety of positive practices by employers that went beyond the legally requirements. Some farmers give workers land to grow their own crops, pay the full cost of medical visits, provide free food to workers in the winter, or have set up trusts that benefit farmworkers. Farmers who provided these benefits to farmworkers noted that these efforts can be profitable.

South African fruit and wine is sold domestically and exported overseas. The United Kingdom and the Netherlands are the top destinations for Western Cape fruit, and the UK and Germany are the biggest importers of South African wine. Canada, the United States, and other European nations are also important markets for South African wine. On about one-half of the farms whose conditions Human Rights Watch studied, either farmers or workers said that the products were produced for the export market. The report did not trace the supply chain for the products and does not identify farms to reduce the risk of retaliation against workers.

Industry bodies, farmers’ associations, and ethical trade initiatives should ensure that workers’ rights are respected, Human Rights Watch said. They should work with the South African government to guarantee that the workers who help produce fruit and wine receive adequate housing, benefits, and health protections.

“The answer is not to boycott South African products, because that could be disastrous for farmworkers,” Bekele said. “But we are asking retailers to press their suppliers to ensure that there are decent conditions on the farms that produce the products they buy and sell to their customers.”

Source: Human Rights Watch

Malema charged with fraud in tender saga

The Hawks confirmed that they were investigating African National Congress Youth League president Julius Malema for fraud and corruption, eNews reported on Saturday. "From the information that we have, we have enough to tell us that we need to do a full investigation ... there's a lot that tells us that we have reason to worry," Hawks spokesperson McIntosh Polela said.

The Hawks would examine the flow of money through companies linked to Malema, including the Ratanang family trust. Polela said the Hawks would need time to work through large amounts of electronic data linked to Malema's financial dealings and therefore could not say when the investigation would be completed.

ENews also reported that the South African Revenue Service (Sars) initiated its own investigation into Malema's financial affairs and alleged failure to pay tax. This came a day after the dates of the disciplinary hearings for both Malema and party spokesperson Floyd Shivambu were announced. "The dates that have been established ... are the 30 and 31 August, which we believe gives them adequate opportunity to prepare themselves for the case," ANC national disciplinary committee chairperson Derek Hanekom told eNews on Friday. Malema and Shivambu would be "charged individually". "Both ... have been charged with various violations of the ANC constitution, including bringing the ANC into disrepute through his utterances and statements on Botswana and sowing divisions in the ranks of the African National Congress."

Malema recently said the league would send a team to Botswana to consolidate local opposition parties and help bring about regime change. It believed the government there was "in full cooperation with imperialists" and undermining the "African agenda". The ANC publicly rebuked the league and the league in turn said it did not believe it was in the wrong or going against ANC policy. It expressed disappointment at being publicly rebuked before the matter had been internally discussed.

Source: Mail & Guardian

More dodgy deals in department of public works

The department of public works has paid R68-million so far in rental for an empty building to the property group the Mail & Guardian revealed last week was represented in major deals by President Jacob Zuma's son-in-law. In addition to the dodgy lease, we now have evidence suggesting that the Billion Group channelled a payment of R1-million to the ANC or its senior office bearers.

As we reported, the company, controlled by little-known tycoon Sisa Ngebulana, is at the centre of a row over a proposed R1-billion tender to build new offices for the department of public service and administration. Lonwabo Sambudla, the husband of Zuma's daughter Duduzile, hosted officials central to driving the tender at their wedding and joined Ngebulana in a meeting with top public works officials. Both he and Ngebulana admitted that Billion had paid him a commission on at least one previous deal. South African businessmen and dodgy officials are making hundreds of millions of rands from leasing scams. But how does it work? Watch our dummy's guide. Now it appears that the Billion Group has benefitted from another dubious lease and that it is assiduous in courting political favour.

Justice Minister Jeff Radebe confirmed earlier this month in a written reply to a parliamentary question from the Democratic Alliance's Debbie Schafer that the department of public works had leased a building in Pretoria for use by his department at a rental of R3.6-million a month. He did not mention the name of the company benefiting from this extraordinary arrangement.

The M&G has now confirmed that the R612-million deal was awarded to Phomella Property Investments, a subsidiary of the Billion Group. Phomella Property Investment bought the Salu building in Pretoria for R163-million from AgriSA. Investec Bank gave Phomella a R270-million bond on the property. According to the lease agreement, Phomella committed to have the new offices ready by December 30 2009. Although the company did not finalise the upgrade on time, the public works department has been paying a monthly rental of R3.6-million since January 2010. The new office, Radebe said, would be ready only in November this year, meaning the department would have spent R84-million to lease a building that had been standing empty.

Justice department spokesperson Tlali Tlali said he did not know why the public works department started paying before the building was occupied by the justice department. Appearing to distance the justice department from the decision, he said: "It is standard practice in the property industry to have rent payable upon occupation of the building when all tenant installation has been completed and the building has been handed over to the lessee. The department of public works could be in a position to provide clarity on the matter."

Public Works spokesperson Thamsanqa Mchunu said the department was obliged to pay the rental in line with the lease agreement as the landlord was not responsible for the delay. He said both the department of justice and public works took too long to sign the necessary documentation relating to the building. Mchunu claimed that the two departments and Phomella Property Investments had agreed that the landlord would reimburse all rental paid between November 2010 and November 2011, but did not explain why such a curious arrangement had been reached. Meanwhile, it has emerged that Sambudla is not the only politically connected recipient of Billion's cash.

The M&G has obtained bank and cellphone records confirming a dubious R1-million payment which Ngebulana told colleagues was a donation to the ANC. Asked via SMS whether to proceed with the payment of R1-million to "KZN energy solutions" that was being queried by First National Bank, Ngebulana answered: "Yep, it's all in order, why do they [the bank] want to know if they should as its FNB to FNB! Its ANC Luthuli House for Durban last weekend event donation! Will let you know when I'm back."

The ANC national general council was held in Durban from September 20 to 24 last year. It is not clear whether Ngebulana was suggesting that the payment was a donation toward the event or a payment arranged while party leaders were in Durban attending it. Unaware that the M&G was in possession of the SMS, Ngebulana first denied ever making any donation to the ANC event in Durban. "We as a company have never donated any money to the ANC towards any event held in Durban. As a business, we do from time to time agree to requests for donations from all political parties. Should we donate in a private capacity, this is a private and confidential matter. As an organisation, we have agreed to donate to all political parties equally in proportion to their national representation. KZN Energy Solutions is a consultancy business that we work with from time to time. We duly pay them for their services," said Ngebulana.

Confronted with the SMS on Thursday, Ngebulana initially denied sending it. He then said that KZN Energy Solutions performed "very serious work" for his companies, including forensic audits. He then added: "As a successful black business person, you are under pressure when asked for donations and things. You need to give or there is a lot of jealousy." Asked for corroborating information, Ngebulana referred the M&G to Myesh Pillay, who he said was a director of the company, but who is not listed as such in company records. Although Pillay confirmed that she worked at the company and said she knew Ngebulana and the Billion Group, she was unable to provide details of services provided to the Billion Group. Asked why there was nothing about a forensic audit on the company's website, Pillay claimed the website was under construction and that other services including the forensic services would be added to it at a later stage. KZN Energy Solutions is affiliated to other companies, including an entity that styles itself as a corporate consultant.

The payment is recorded in Billion's bank statement simply as "fees". ANC treasurer general Matthews Phosa said the party had never received a cent from Ngebulana. "I never asked for money from him [Ngebulana]. The ANC NGC was funded by a few people and I know all of them. He [Ngebulana] is not on that list. [If he claims he paid], then the money went to individuals not the ANC. People are abusing the name of the ANC for their own selfish reasons," said Phosa. Sources within the ANC familiar with its financial arrangements told the M&G Ngebulana had previously made payments to some senior ANC leaders, whose names are known to the M&G. Ngebulana this week dismissed the allegation of payment to senior ANC leaders as untrue.

Billion Group founder Sisa Ngebulana has kept a low profile, despite being one of the wealthiest black entrepreneurs of the post-1994 era. His name has not featured in the list that includes noted plutocrats such as like Patrice Motsepe, Cyril Ramaphosa and Tokyo Sexwale. But with assets estimated in the billions, the 45-year-old from the Eastern Cape is definitely up there.

A former Eskom employee, Ngebulana started a construction company, Afcon, in 1996, specialising in the construction of upmarket homes. In 1997, he consolidated all Afcon's activities into the Billion Group. Since then, he has made his mark in property development. Ngebulana is said to be close to politically connected individuals within both the ANC and government. His company has won several government tenders, including lease deals with the South African National Defence Force, the justice department, the National Prosecuting Authority and the City of Johannesburg.

Ngebulana has also built up as a R3.6-billion office and retail portfolio through acquisitions and development. Billion Group chief operating officer Mike Rodel said: "This is a remarkable achievement in a sector that has been difficult for black entrepreneurs to break into. Sisa has strengthened the team by introducing people with listed property credentials." One of Ngebulana's companies, the Rebosis Property Fund, was listed on the JSE in May this year. Ngebulana owns a R55-million house in Chartwell, which boasts a nine-hole golf course. Other assets include private jets, a helicopter, a Bentley, a Porsche and a Lamborghini.

Source: Mail & Guardian

Dikgang Moseneke: It's not about what the ANC want

Zuma overlooking Moseneke has interesting implications. They belonged to different liberation movements, separated by ideology but united by the goal to defeat apartheid and to establish a democratic order in which the oppressed African majority would enjoy human rights. Jacob Zuma of the ANC and Dikgang Moseneke of the PAC - a 1959 breakaway of the ANC - were jailed on Robben Island by the apartheid regime for their political activities.

On his release Moseneke, who had studied law and politics through Unisa while in prison, pursued a career in law. He practised as an advocate in the Pretoria Bar before he joined the private sector, where he held high-profile positions. For his part Zuma, who informally taught himself to read and write, became a career politician and government MEC. Both had taken part in the drafting of the new democratic constitution they would later be expected to uphold in their different capacities.

Zuma was central in delivering the violence-prone IFP to the transitional negotiation table that led to the adoption of the Constitution. While practising law, Moseneke took part in the technical drafting committee. Once the interim constitution was adopted and Moseneke had left the Bar, then-president Nelson Mandela persuaded him to leave his lucrative plum business career for the high court as a judge. Moseneke was among a few black judges expected to uproot the apartheid era jurisprudence and build a new one based on the new Constitution.

The Constitution of which the drafting had united Moseneke and Zuma, had also become a source of the necessary separation as part of the division of powers between the judiciary, executive and parliament. Enter then-president Thabo Mbeki, who appointed Zuma as his deputy and Moseneke as deputy to Chief Justice Pius Langa. This meant Zuma and Moseneke held similarly powerful positions respectively in the executive and judiciary.

Zuma later became head of the executive with the power to appoint a chief justice. When Justice Langa retired, he appointed Justice Sandile Ngcobo, who was due to retire from the court, overlooking Moseneke. Ngcobo delivered his last judgment on Thursday last week after his own court had earlier dismissed as unconstitutional Zuma's attempts to extend his term of office. Zuma was very comfortable with Ngcobo. Ngcobo had ruled favourably in cases crucial to Zuma's political life.

When the Constitutional Court found valid Scorpions search-and-seizure warrants on Zuma's lawyers, Ngcobo was the only dissenting voice. When the court found that the government was duty-bound to establish an independent anti-corruption unit, Ngcobo dissented. Now that Ngcobo has retired, the legal fraternity has been anxious about whether Zuma would appoint Moseneke, with whom he appears to disagree in his judgments and political thought.

Yesterday, Zuma nominated for the chief justice post Judge Mogoeng Mogoeng, a lay preacher, who joined the Constitutional Court in 2009. At the heart of Zuma's decision to overlook Moseneke are the remarks he made a few years ago shortly after Zuma's Polokwane victory, that he would spend his tenure in the judiciary serving the people of South Africa - "it's not about what the ANC want".

Zuma reacted angrily to the comments, as he believed, quite wrongly, they were oppositionist to the ANC. The political furore the statement caused was followed by a meeting between ANC Deputy President Kgalema Montlanthe, Moseneke and Langa, who was still in office. After the meeting, preceded by claims that judges were "counter-revolutionary", the ANC issued a statement, saying it was satisfied with Moseneke's explanation. According to Motlanthe the meeting concluded that Moseneke's statement was misunderstood as he sought merely to stress judicial independence from all political parties. Motlanthe later told a gathering in Cape Town the ANC accepted Moseneke's explanation.

Zuma's overlooking of Moseneke - which in itself is not legally wrong but politically naive - will have interesting implications. Firstly, if Zuma's problem lies in Moseneke's judicial philosophy of non-deference to the executive, then tough luck to him. Judging by his recent comments about judges who overturn legis-lation passed by Parliament, it makes sense that he liked Ngcobo's executive deference approach. But appointing Mogoeng is unlikely to change the court's philosophical posture. The present political context, in which unconstitutional laws are being proposed and corruption runs rampant, obviously has a psychological effect on the judiciary, who could feel constitutionally obliged to stop the malaise. Zuma's gripe will remain personal and petty rather than substantive. It won't swing the court's activism stance. Not now. The edifice of jurisprudence will take decades to undo.

Secondly, appointing anyone less experienced than Moseneke in Constitutional Court matters and in running of the court itself, means Moseneke remains a towering figure in that court.

Thirdly, avoiding Moseneke means despite his claims that he follows in the footsteps of Madiba, Zuma is unable to be reconciliatory. He is unable to rise above personal petty political bitterness triggered by a misunderstanding which was explained to the satisfaction of his own party.

Fourthly, it means Zuma places high premium not on who is well qualified for the top job, but on who he is politically comfortable with. This also places an unfair burden on Mogoeng because public perception would have a certain narrow political expectation of him. He will have to continue to defer to the executive. It has paid dividends, unless he works to prove a point.

Fifthly, it means Zuma has forgotten the bigger political contribution Moseneke made in the struggle against apartheid simply because Moseneke appears to be too independent for his liking.

Finally, it also means that Zuma would rather work with the Freedom Front and National Party ministers, sharing cabinet secrets with them, than trust a well-qualified freedom fighter with whom he once shared the prison for a noble cause.

Mkhabela - editor of Sowetan
Source: Sowetan

Deadly dangerous Judgment Day

Many South Africans were stunned this week by President Jacob Zuma's nomination of Constitutional Court Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng to succeed Sandile Ngcobo as chief justice.

It would appear a wholly inadequate appointment and from informal settlements in Durban to law offices in Johannesburg, the initial stupefaction gave way to conversation. Talk was not merely about the number of years Mogoeng has spent in judicial robes, as the presidency would have us believe judging by a spurious statement it released on Wednesday which set out to address the "disappointing inaccuracies and distortions in the responses and commentary on [Zuma's] nomination". South Africans are more sophisticated than that.

From shack dwellers who have successfully approached the court to fend off legislation allowing arbitrary eviction from their homes to middle-class human rights activists buoyed by the prospect of a more humane society after the repeal of the death sentence, we have been analysing the probity, jurisprudence, independent-mindedness and integrity of the man Zuma has chosen to lead the highest court in the land.

It matters to us. Our fundamental human rights, as enshrined in the Constitution, are essential, as is the attainment of a more egalitarian society. The judicial guardians of the Constitution are vital to these rights and aspirations. Yet, instead of selecting a stellar defender of the Constitution Zuma appears to have made a political appointment, choosing someone with a lack of constitutional experience, who, by virtue of his unlikely appointment over the heads of more suitable colleagues, is indebted to the executive.

A jurist who, considering the paucity of reported judgments and an inability to rouse himself in court to engage with legal arguments, appears patently wanting. There is also the no-small matter of his lack of judgment: Mogoeng has failed on more than one occasion to recuse himself from hearing matters in which his wife has acted as prosecutor.

He will be a chief justice cast very much in the image of the president: someone with dubious judgment, a social conservative, a traditionalist, with apparently homophobic tendencies and religious to boot -- they are both ordained pastors. This, while the message sent out to the judiciary is that subservience to the executive, not independent-mindedness, will get you promoted.

Mogoeng, if confirmed, may go on to prove his numerous detractors wrong. But there is a frightening lack of sophistication in both the president's and the ruling ANC's understanding of the expected tension among the three arms of government in a constitutional democracy.

In statements made this week ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe suggested that, because of some of its rulings, the Constitutional Court was hostile to Parliament and the executive and that the judiciary as a whole sought to "arrest the functioning of government". What is, actually, the normal modus operandi of a constitutional democracy -- the constitutional testing of legislation -- appears to be a "problem" for Mantashe.

Mantashe's problem with the judiciary appears to be that it is unelected, unlike the ANC, which purports to represent the will of the masses. Zuma's gripes appear much more personal. Following various Constitutional Court judgments against him, including his most recent attempt to extend Ngcobo's term, the president seems driven by malice when engaging with that court. There is a profound lack of understanding by two of the most powerful men in the land about the role of the judiciary in a constitutional democracy. It is deadly dangerous.


 Source: Mail & Guardian

State's advisers may not interfere, says public protector

Public protector Thuli Madonsela's findings are subject to the Constitution and the law, and state legal advisers have no authority to tell government what to implement, she said on Wednesday. Madonsela said state attorneys have been advising the government against implementing remedial action she recommended. "In the event organs of state are unhappy with our findings and the accompanying remedial action, they should take us to court on review." She said courts were the only institutions that had a final say on whether her findings and the need for remedial action were rational or not.

Madonsela was speaking at a meeting with stakeholders, which included provincial government leaders, local government authorities and civil society in Polokwane. Her spokesperson, Kgalalelo Masibi, said delegates including Limpopo's provincial minister of agriculture, Dipuo Letsatsi-Duba, and Polokwane mayor Freddy Greaver agreed with Madonsela. "[They said] failure to implement the public protector's remedial action was defeating the institution's purpose of supporting and strengthening constitutional democracy," she said in a statement. "They added that leaders in government had a responsibility to act promptly upon receipt of the public protector's report with a view to ensure administrative justice and accountability."

The meeting formed part of a nationwide road show dubbed The Public Protector Dialogues with the Nation. The road show aimed at soliciting feedback regarding Madonsela's work and highlighting the importance of implementing her suggestions for remedial action.

Source: Mail & Guardian

South Africa: Unions Reach a Deal

Unions representing more than one million South African state workers said Tuesday that they had reached a wage increase deal with the government, averting a strike that could have slowed Africa’s largest economy. But as midyear negotiations, known locally as strike season, were winding down, striking municipal workers in Cape Town set fire to trash heaps on the streets and looted roadside stands. Work stoppages in the mining and fuel sectors have caused more than $200 million in lost output.

Source: New York Times

Zuma picks Mogoeng as chief justice

President Jacob Zuma on Wednesday said Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng was his preferred candidate for the new chief justice. Zuma said in a statement that Mogoeng had demonstrated his "expertise and keen interest" in the transformation of the judiciary and played a leading role in programmes designed to promote court efficiency and transformation. The statement said the position had become vacant at midnight on August 14 "as a result of the discharge from active service of former chief justice Sandile Ngcobo".

In June, Zuma extended Ngcobo's 12-year term under Section 8(a) of the Judge's Remuneration and Conditions of Employment Act, which was met by a Constitutional Court challenge by civil society organisations who argued that it was unconstitutional for the president to extend the chief justice's term of office. Only an Act of Parliament may do so, they said. According to the presidency's statement Mogoeng was part of a five-member committee, led by former chief justice Pius Langa, which investigated allegations of racism and gender discrimination within the judiciary. He also organised workshops for judges and magistrates on leadership and sensitivity training as well as workshops for magistrates on judgment writing and trial administration.

Professor Steven Friedman, director of the Centre of the Study of Democracy at the University of Johannesburg, told the Mail & Guardian on Tuesday that the choice of Mogoeng was a "missed opportunity". "On the one hand you could have had continuity as well as the message that our government is comfortable with a chief justice with clear political independence in the appointment of Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke instead of Mogoeng. "Additionally, it could have been a great coup for the empowerment of women if either Justice Sisi Khampepe or Bess Nkabinde were appointed," said Friedman. Nonetheless, Friedman said he had no reason to believe Mogoeng's appointment was not in the best interests of the Constitution.

Mogoeng started his professional career as a supreme court (now high court) prosecutor in Mafikeng, holding this position between March 1986 and February 1990, when he resigned to undertake pupillage at the Johannesburg Bar. He then practised as an advocate in Johannesburg until the end of 1991. He then terminated his membership of the Johannesburg Bar and became a member of the Mafikeng Bar Association (now known as North West Bar Association) until May 1997. While at the Mafikeng Bar, Mogoeng served as the deputy chairperson of the Bar Council and as the chairperson of the Bophuthatswana chapter of Lawyers for Human Rights. He was also a part-time senior lecturer in criminal law and criminal procedure at the University of the North West's Mafikeng Campus from 1992 to 1993. He was a member of the Industrial Court from 1989 until it ceased to exist. In 1994 he served in the legal section of the Independent Electoral Commission in the North West province. In June 1997 he was appointed a judge of the North West High Court in Mafikeng. He was appointed as a judge of the Labour Appeal Court in April 2000. In October 2002 he was appointed judge president of the North West High Court.

Mogoeng was born in Goo-Mokgatha, north-east of Zeerust on January 14 1961. He graduated from the University of Zululand with a B Juris in 1983. In 1985 he completed his LLB at the University of Natal in Durban. In 1989, he completed his studies at the University of South Africa, where he studied towards a LLM concentrating on labour law, the law of property, the law of insurance, the law of evidence and the law of criminal procedure.

Mogoeng is also an ordained pastor. Prior to joining the judiciary in 1997, Mogoeng also served as chairperson of the North West Parks Board and as chairperson of Golden Leopards Resorts. He was also a member of the Black Lawyers Association. He has since resigned from these positions.

Source: Mail & Guardian

A cellular licence to print money

The proverbial licence to print money is not the chain of casinos or bottle stores of a generation ago. It’s the telecommunications company, exploiting the now universal desire for people to be online and electronically in touch. This is a sector that generates massive revenues. Vodacom, South Africa’s biggest network provider with 26.6-million customers, in the past year turned over R54bn and almost doubled its net profits to R8bn. International player MTN, with 18.8m local subscribers, increased profits by 20% and had SA revenues of around R37bn.

This is also the sector that draws the most consumer complaints, along with the pharmaceutical/healthcare industries, retail and banking. It is then logical that the new National Consumer Commissioner, Mamodupi Mohlala, targeted telecommunication providers as a priority in implementing the recently passed Consumer Protection Act (CPA).

One of Mohlala’s first acts was to force SA’s four cellular network operators and two fixed-line providers to bring their customer contracts in line with the CPA. Despite knowing the intentions of the Act for five years, not a single one was compliant and, in most cases, 75% of their cellphone contracts were in breach.

Basically these companies were quite happy to take advantage of consumers – many illiterate and poor, and for whom a cellphone is a necessity that comes at a disproportionately large monthly cost – for as long as they could get away with. Since then Vodacom has come under further pressure from the commissioner, who ruled that it should compensate those of its subscribers who suffered financial loss when the Vodacom network collapsed a few months back. Vodacom has point-blank refused to comply. As an aside, Vodacom’s media liaison division failed to respond to repeated calls from this writer. Ironically, this is the company that sponsors an annual series of journalism awards.

Given the greed and arrogance that prevails, it should then come as no surprise that the cellular providers have since lobbied to be exempted from the CPA, on the grounds that they are already regulated by the Independent Communication Authority (Icasa). Fat lot of good Icasa would be. Writing in Business Report a few months ago, economic empowerment strategist Thabo Masombuko outlined a stinging assessment of ICASA’s consumer policing abilities, which have made the sector “a haven for tariff looting, exorbitant charges and ridiculous costs … While costs have ballooned, cellular and landline services have become an out-of-reach pie in the sky for millions of users.”

There is an established pattern to this. When cellular licences were first issued to Vodacom and MTN, part of their obligation was the rolling out of rural coverage as a development of national infrastructural that it was hoped would improve the countryside’s potential to create jobs. Unfortunately, it was an obligation only scrappily met, given the lure of lucrative urban rollouts — and the lovely tax from the resultantly dazzling profits — with the result two decades later of unreliable, low-speed rural coverage.

Nor has state entity Telkom, met its statutory obligation to provide countrywide communication systems. Faced with endemic cable theft, the Telkom’s outrageous solution has been simply to cut off both telephone and landline broadband services in rural areas, in favour of a wireless voice service that verges on the useless, in the view of its critics. By the Telkom example, this week’s theft of cabling serving the Gautrain would be dealt with by mothballing the service and suggesting that passengers use taxis instead.

The opportunity costs of these failures are enormous. The World Bank estimates that a 10% increase in broadband penetration delivers a 1.3% rise in economic growth. Is is however an unpalatable fact that in SA, just a dozen or so kilometres outside of the major cities and towns, broadband access is virtually unobtainable. And when available, SA’s mobile broadband remains prohibitively expensive, among the dearest in the world. This inertia and indifference by both the private sector and the state, impacts directly on government’s objective of providing the infrastructural backbone that will allow local communities to grow local jobs, instead of encouraging a growing flow of job seekers to the cities.

When Roy Padayachie took over the long-neglected Communications portfolio he set as his ministerial goal to partner with the private sector to harness telecommunications technology to economic growth. It’s a laudable but unrealisable dream, unless he can get the cellular providers to take their developmental responsibilities a little more seriously.

Source: Mail & Guardian Thought Leader: William Sauderson-Meyer

A.N.C.’s Youth League Issues Apology

The Youth League of the governing party in South Africa apologized Saturday to the bloc’s leadership for comments in which it called for the ouster of Botswana’s democratically elected government.

The governing party, the African National Congress, publicly criticized the Youth League and its leader, Julius Malema, this month for the remarks. A party spokesman, Jackson Mthembu, told eNews Channel that its leaders would discuss the matter but would not say whether Mr. Malema would be disciplined.

The Youth League said in a statement that it “has never, and will never, define itself outside the policy confines and directives of the A.N.C., and will whenever expected be available to listen to political and organizational guidance from the leadership.”

Mr. Malema has already been a thorn in the side for the party over his racially divisive comments and repeated calls for the nationalization of mines in South Africa, a major supplier of platinum, gold and diamonds. But he also holds a significant populist appeal for much of South Africa’s black population, and senior party leadership has often turned to courting him publicly.

Source: New York Times

According to Transparency International, Botswana is the least corrupt country in Africa and ranks similarly close to Portugal and South Korea.

‘Outrageous’ handshake for Ithala boss

Sipho Shabalala, the man police say facilitated a R1 million “donation” for the ANC from a businessman who got a huge state tender, has been given an almost R2 million golden handshake to leave his government job.

The Sunday Independent this week saw documents which show that Shabalala, who headed state-funded development entity Ithala, was given the severance package on the eve of his court appearance on money laundering, corruption and racketeering charges.

Opposition political parties in the provincial legislature have expressed outrage at Ithala’s payment to Shabalala of R1 900 041, in cash, on July 31.

According to a 10-page document titled Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release, the payment represents R696 572 in respect of his salary that would have been paid during the unexpired period of employment. Then there is payment of R374 650 for leave that would have accrued, plus an R870 715 ex gratia payment.

Shabalala is key among the 25 accused in the Intaka case, along with the Speaker of Parliament Peggy Nkonyeni, Economic Development MEC Mike Mabuyakhulu and Gaston Savoi, owner of Intaka, a company that won a R42 million tender from the government and in the same month paid a R1m “donation” to the ANC in KZN, via Shabalala.

Shabalala’s contract with Ithala was due to end on October 31.

Last August he was suspended when he was charged, almost a year after our sister paper, the Sunday Tribune, exposed how he solicited the R1m from Savoi and allegedly had it paid into the trust account of Durban lawyer Sandile Khuboni, also charged.

IFP MPL and the party’s KZN shadow minister of finance, Roman Liptak, said: “The real test for those politicians who have shielded Shabalala for so long and smoothed his way from one plush government job to the next is whether he will be allowed to walk into another top management position within our civil service.”

The DA’s Johann Krog said the move was aimed at buying Shabalala’s silence. He said Shabalala had been rapped over the knuckles by co-accused Mabuyakhulu for a questionable R280m school project, which merited more serious sanction.

“The DA has consistently called on Scopa and the finance committee for disciplinary action on advice of all the law-enforcing agencies. The province could have saved his salary of more than R100 000 a month for the past year, and the R2m payout,” he said.

Krog insisted that had Ithala waited for his contract to expire in October, the cost to taxpayers to end the relationship would have been much less than a “shocking” R2 million.

ACDP MPL Jo-Anne Downs said: “It’s outrageous. If they wanted to get rid of him they could have instituted internal disciplinary action, but no, they had to pay him to leave,” said Downs.

Shabalala was this week furious that details of his package were leaked to the media.

He said, “I will not be surprised to learn that the intention of those who leaked this agreement to you is to vilify me in the court of public opinion as a greedy fat cat who ‘blackmailed’ the government to give me one final ride on the proverbial gravy train before setting off to enjoy his ‘ill-gotten gains’.”

He said he had signed a two-year contract with the Ithala board in October 2009 (this was after he had hastily been moved from Treasury to Ithala in January 2009). He said there was an understanding that he would have to apply for a full-term contract when the Ithala leadership position was eventually advertised, which happened two weeks ago and for which he was asked not to apply.

“Then came the suspension by the Ithala board in August 2010 with (MEC) Mabuyakhulu an- nouncing an intention to set up a task team that would monitor the developments relating to the criminal investigations and advise the board on the impact, if any, this had on his employment relationship with Ithala,” he said.

Shabalala said he hadn’t heard anything from Ithala or Mabuyakhulu about this matter until just a few weeks before we reported that Mabuyakhulu himself was set to join Shabalala as an accused in the Intaka matter.

He said the message from Ithala, at that time, was that the company wanted to summarily terminate his employment contract, pay him out for the remainder of his contract and obtain an assurance from him that he would not apply for the job of Ithala boss.

The Sunday Independent can reveal that Ithala agreed terms with Shabalala that they “fully and forever release each other from, and agree not to sue concerning any and all claims relating or arising from Shabalala’s employment relationship with Ithala and the termination of that relationship”.

Shabalala said he told them to “go fly a kite”.

“Then came the ‘sweetened’ offer of the agreement that has now been leaked to you. My initial decision was still that I would see out the rest of my contract and retain my right to apply for a job for which I received an excellent performance review at the time of my last employment assessment.”

Asked why he had acceded and accepted the board’s offer, Shabalala said his back was against the wall and he gave an array of reasons for this. He said following the attachment and freezing of all his assets it became impossible to successfully run his businesses.

By last week, he said, the bank had frozen his personal account with his Ithala salary in and was preparing to foreclose on his entire business portfolio to recover monies owed by his RJ’s restaurant in Hillcrest that went under at the beginning of this year.

He said his children were being threatened with expulsion from school because of unpaid fees.

Shabalala said the Ithala offer that he had so disdainfully spurned happened to be exactly what his bank was demanding to hold off from auctioning all of his assets, including his home.

“I decided to accept the revised offer,” he said.

Ithala board chairman Mandla Gantsho said an amicable agreement had been reached with Shabalala. - Nathi Olifant

Source: IoL

Chief justice appointment to be delayed

President Jacob Zuma said he will delay the appointment of a new chief justice as "it was a crucial decision impacting on the lives of South Africans". Zuma was addressing high-level media owners at a summit in Irene, Pretoria, on Friday morning. He explained that delaying the appointment of the new chief justice would allow him to "give greater effect to the provisions of section 174(3) of the Constitution". He would also need more time for "meaningful consultation with leaders of political parties and the Judicial Service Commission".

Chief Justice Sandile Ncgobo steps down on the August 14 when his 12-year term as a constitutional court judge expires. The presidency had previously said a new chief justice would be appointed by August 15. Zuma assured South Africans that the delay "would not adversely affect the actions of the judiciary". Zuma slammed the media for "misrepresenting" his decision to extend Ngcobo's term, which last week was found to be unconstitutional. The media made out that a "crime had been committed" and the constitution "undermined" when he enacted Section 8(a) of the Judges Remuneration Act of 2001 to extend Ngcobo's term. Zuma defended his decision by arguing that he had granted the extension in terms of an existing law that was "passed by Parliament, unanimously, 10 years ago".

Zuma finally broke the government's silence on the Public Protector's report into the controversial police leases that were found to be improper and invalid. He welcomed Public Protector Thuli Madonsela's findings and said he had written today to Max Sisulu, the Speaker of Parliament to outline his response. Madonsela's report showed the actions of Public Works Minister Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde and National Police Commissioner Bheki Cele amounted to maladministration when the department of public works awarded businessman Roux Shabangu leases to house the South African Police Service (SAPS) in the Sanlam-Middestad building in Pretoria and the Transnet Towers in Durban. He used the opportunity to promise South Africans that the government was taking corruption seriously and was "making steady progress in taking forward this fight". Zuma said the Special Investigations Unit was investigating problems with the awarding of government tenders to the value of R10-billion and tender conflicts of interest worth R5-billion. "The SIU was also working closely to investigate procurement irregularities in 33 police stations worth R330-million".

Zuma emphasised that the government did respect media freedom saying "media, government and society had a responsibility to strive to develop free and independent media", adding that "diversity and transformation" in the media also needed to be promoted.

Source: Mail & Guardian

Telkom in violation of Consumer Act

Telecommunications group Telkom’s insistence on bundling its ADSL data service with a compulsory voice service could mean contravention of SA’s new Consumer Protection Act (CPA), the Internet Service Providers’ Association (ISPA) said on Monday.

ISPA general manager, Ant Brooks said that the CPA had clear prescriptions against bundling goods and services in a manner that forced consumers to enter into agreements or transactions they did not require as a condition of buying a certain product or service. ISPA said that the Act saw such practices as a limitation on the consumer’s right to choose suppliers for each service. According to the Act, compulsory bundling of services was forbidden unless the supplier could prove that it offered economic benefits and convenience to the consumer that outweighed the drawbacks of limiting choice.

According to the industry body, Telkom’s ADSL lines were not available in ‘naked’ DSL options, though one could purchase a voice service without DSL. ISPA said it believed that forcing a client to take a voice product and pay a rental fee for a voice line when he or she simply wanted a data line was a form of product bundling that was contrary to the CPA. Telkom would be hard pressed to prove that the bundling of a voice service and ADSL line offered economic benefits or convenience to the subscriber, as many subscribers either wanted the option of using an alternative voice service provider or did not want a voice service at all, said Brooks. "Many users regard the voice line rental fee as a ‘Telkom tax’. In many cases, the voice service is not wanted yet consumers are forced to pay for it if they want an ADSL line," said Brooks. "Telkom is constraining consumer choice with this practice."

Source: Business Day