The fight between Public Protector Thuli Madonsela and the security cluster is about much more than her provisional report into state expenditure at President Jacob Zuma’s private Nkandla homestead.
It signals the start of a new war between openness and accountability, on the one hand, and secrecy, cloaked in the garb of security, on the other. And it is clear that the Protection of State Information Bill – the so-called secrecy Bill – passed for the third time in the National Assembly this week, opens up a dangerous new front in that war.
Last Friday, Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa approached the Pretoria high court to interdict Madonsela from releasing the draft report, purportedly in a quest for more time.
In effect, though, he sought to block the release until the security cluster ministers were satisfied with the way she had accommodated their concerns about allegedly sensitive information.
What emerges starkly in the court papers is that the ministers believe any document that draws on classified information must itself be classified. In his founding affidavit, Mthethwa in effect threatened criminal sanction should Madonsela release an uncensored draft report to other “affected, implicated and interested parties” to obtain their responses.
Principle of secrecy
He warned: “Release of the provisional report to third parties … without prior authorisation of [the ministers] … is unlawful and carries … a criminal penalty.”
Mthethwa’s affidavit attached an earlier letter to Madonsela from Public Works Minister Thulas Nxesi, also on behalf of the defence, police and state security ministers.
Nxesi made the point explicitly: “As neither I, nor the ministers involved, have given the necessary permission to declassify the documentation relied upon by you in your provisional report, we deem it necessary to inform you that to release your provisional report without our authorisation would, in effect, result in … a contravention of section 4 of the National Key Points Act, 102 of 1980, and section 4 of the Protection of Information Act, 84 of 1982.”
Nowhere did Mthethwa refer to any specific contents of the draft report to justify the claim that the president’s security was at risk.
What really seems to be at stake is the principle of secrecy – and who gets to pronounce on it.
In her stinging reply, Madonsela said the ministers did not cite a “single fact” to illustrate how the president’s safety would be compromised by the disclosure of the draft report.
In his second affidavit, tabled on Thursday, Mthethwa sidestepped that challenge, claiming it was irrelevant to the request for more time.
In their reply, the ministers abandoned their interdict, citing the fact that Madonsela, in asking for the matter to be postponed until November 15, had in effect given them the extra time they asked for.
But it would be a mistake to see this as a final climb-down instead of a tactical retreat.
Further litigation to come?
In his second affidavit, Mthethwa foreshadows potential further litigation, stating: “It will be argued at an appropriate time, when the need arises, that the [public protector], not being an expert on matters of security, cannot be an arbiter on whether or not there exists a security breach from the contents of the provisional report … Should the respondent arrogate to herself that power to determine whether or not there is a breach of security arising from the contents of her provisional report, I am advised that she will in law be acting ultra vires her powers and the law.”
In short, ministers, not Madonsela, must decide whether the report breaches security.
Mthethwa adds: “The classified and top-secret information extracted by [the public protector] in her provisional report … is governed by the minimum information security standards, and it is those classified and top-secret documents and/or extracts that require the minister to authorise its further publication.”
Clearly, no authorisation has been granted. If Madonsela does not excise what they ask her to, there appears to be a real chance the security cluster will return to court.
The state security department itself accepts that apartheid-era laws the ministers rely on are probably unconstitutional, making the ministers’ attempt to exert their authority over Madonsela something of a reach.
That will change when the secrecy Bill is signed into law – which the president could do any day now.
Top secret
The new Act specifies that the state security minister will make regulations governing how chapter nine institutions – including the public protector and the auditor general – will be allowed to access and use classified information.
The push for a security curtain was echoed in the report of the Joint Standing Committee of Intelligence (JSCI), which released its Nkandla report on Thursday.
After the outcry over the expenditure – about R210-million – in November 2012, the public works minister appointed a government task team to investigate. Its report – classified as top secret – was delivered to Nxesi in January.
In June, the report was referred to the JSCI, which usually carries out oversight of the intelligence services.
An opinion from the parliamentary legal adviser recommended the JSCI restrict itself to matters to do with security oversight, redact sensitive information and then refer the report to the National Assembly.
The JSCI ignored this advice, endorsed the top-secret classification and even recommended that any new information uncovered should be referred back to the JSCI for consideration behind closed doors.
It notes: “Matters relating to the allocation of tenders … should be referred to the office of the auditor general for a full investigation … However, the JSCI believes that because of the classification aspects of the subject matter, the auditor general should report on this investigation to the JSCI.”
Of even more concern is how the JSCI parrots the ministers’ line in their interaction with Madonsela.
A sign of things to come
In a veiled reference to her, the JSCI notes: “Entities which have investigative powers … should not be inappropriately motivated … to launch into an investigation on a matter which has already been assigned to another entity. It is therefore recommended that the executive give urgent attention to this matter … so that unnecessary parallel investigations can be avoided.”
This was precisely the argument the ministers used to try to discourage Madonsela’s Nkandla investigation.
In a letter to Madonsela in April, the state attorney referred to her meeting with the ministers and noted: “The purpose … was to discuss with you our concerns regarding parallel investigations ...”
He said a draft proclamation for the Special Investigating Unit to take up the matter had already been sent to the president and a request for an Nkandla audit had been addressed to the auditor general. “Our clients, therefore, propose … that you hold your investigation in abeyance until the processes embarked upon have been completed.”
Madonsela said in her affidavit this week that the auditor general’s audit had not materialised, nor had the Special Investigating Unit yet been authorised to investigate.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Showing posts with label Public Protector. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Public Protector. Show all posts
Friday, November 15, 2013
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Protecting our public protector: We need to defend the space for Thuli Madonsela to work without fear or favour
Durban - The public protector is under siege from many quarters and has had little vocal support from citizens whose interests she is tasked to protect. We need to play our role in defending the space for her to work without fear or favour.
Our political environment reminds me of Machiavelli’s words that: “There is nothing more difficult, nothing more doubtful of success than to initiate new ways of things. For the reformer has enemies in all those who profit from the old ways, and only lukewarm support from those who would profit from the new way. This lukewarmness arising partly from fear of their adversaries, and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who do not actually believe in anything until they have had experience of it.”
Change agents like our public protector are up against a political culture that has still to grow into the promise of freedom embedded in our constitution. Holding those in public office accountable is only possible if citizens demand it and support organs of state responsible for protecting the public interest.
The biggest challenge facing chapter nine institutions such as the public protector is the tolerance by citizens of the confusion deliberately created by the ANC between the state, the government, the governing party and the president. When ministers in the security cluster invoke the risks to “state security”, that the release of the public protector’s report on the upgrades of President Jacob Zuma’s Nkandla residence would entail, are they focusing on the “state” or the person of the “president”?
The state represents the “commonwealth” that belongs to all citizens. How can this commonwealth’s security be put at risk by the exposure of improprieties in the procurement processes regarding the expenditure of a significant amount of taxpayers’ money in excess of R200 million? How does exposure of the suggested presence of a cattle kraal worth an estimated R1.2m jeopardise the security of our commonwealth as citizens?
It is the concealment of wrongdoing in public procurement processes that is putting our commonwealth at risk. In my travels across the country in villages, townships, universities, workplaces and corporate offices, my fellow citizens point to corruption as the biggest threat to our future as a society.
They identify corruption as the reason we have not come far enough and fast enough in living out our aspirations as a society in the past 20 years. Disclosure is like sunshine that disinfects hidden wrongdoing and eradicates corruption.
Young people who comprise the largest segment of our population can shape the country’s future in next year’s elections. Yet many are not sure that registering and voting will have any impact on their future. A big part of their misgiving comes from their perception that the state, government, ANC and president are an unmovable corrupt monolith that is destroying the country. This misgiving represents the biggest risk to our democracy.
The fearless work of the public protector’s office is essential to restoring the hope in young people that no one is above the law and that citizens’ rights matter and will be protected.
Moreover, there was a worrying phenomenon among poor communities this past weekend. In some areas, people refused to register or to allow registration to take place in their areas until their demands are met. They, too, do not distinguish between the IEC, a chapter nine institution, and the government.
We must stand up and defend the space for the key institutions of our democracy to operate without fear or favour. It is a question of “for whom the bell tolls” – it tolls for all of us. Today it is the public protector, tomorrow it is the judiciary, then it will be citizens without the protection of those key institutions. By then, it will be too late to stand up.
We have been through similar moments in our history and must not return there. When I was banned and banished to Tzaneen, my lawyer was told it was not in the state’s interests to disclose why I had been banished to that area.
Are we again ready to tolerate threats to our democracy in the name of “state security” as defined by those determined to secure their positions in power? Are we willing to protect abuse of power and resources in order to protect those in public office?
We can stop abuse of power by those who should be serving us who instead focus on serving themselves. We must not shy away from raising our voices in protection of the public protector so she can do her work to secure the public interest. We have seen how her report on the IEC chairwoman’s impropriety in procuring the lease of property for IEC offices has been attacked on procedural grounds. Are we to condone wrongdoing in this and many other matters through political procedural stonewalling? Where will these stonewalling tactics end?
We have seen enough signs of the president’s lack of capacity to take responsibility for executive action at too many levels: the Schabir Shaik case, his rape trial, Guptagate etc.
His performance in Parliament where he trivialised accountability for Guptagate into a joke about it not being realistic for him to know who is landing at our airports was an embarrassment. Waterkloof is an airforce base that we have afforded him and authorised other officials to use – to serve us. It is not to be used to curry favour with his friends.
We need a strong public protector to keep the executive branch of the state accountable to citizens. We have to protect the public protector so she can continue to protect the “commonwealth” from those invoking “state security” to put our democracy at risk. We dare not fail.
Mamphela Ramphele
Source: The Mercury
Our political environment reminds me of Machiavelli’s words that: “There is nothing more difficult, nothing more doubtful of success than to initiate new ways of things. For the reformer has enemies in all those who profit from the old ways, and only lukewarm support from those who would profit from the new way. This lukewarmness arising partly from fear of their adversaries, and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who do not actually believe in anything until they have had experience of it.”
Change agents like our public protector are up against a political culture that has still to grow into the promise of freedom embedded in our constitution. Holding those in public office accountable is only possible if citizens demand it and support organs of state responsible for protecting the public interest.
The biggest challenge facing chapter nine institutions such as the public protector is the tolerance by citizens of the confusion deliberately created by the ANC between the state, the government, the governing party and the president. When ministers in the security cluster invoke the risks to “state security”, that the release of the public protector’s report on the upgrades of President Jacob Zuma’s Nkandla residence would entail, are they focusing on the “state” or the person of the “president”?
The state represents the “commonwealth” that belongs to all citizens. How can this commonwealth’s security be put at risk by the exposure of improprieties in the procurement processes regarding the expenditure of a significant amount of taxpayers’ money in excess of R200 million? How does exposure of the suggested presence of a cattle kraal worth an estimated R1.2m jeopardise the security of our commonwealth as citizens?
It is the concealment of wrongdoing in public procurement processes that is putting our commonwealth at risk. In my travels across the country in villages, townships, universities, workplaces and corporate offices, my fellow citizens point to corruption as the biggest threat to our future as a society.
They identify corruption as the reason we have not come far enough and fast enough in living out our aspirations as a society in the past 20 years. Disclosure is like sunshine that disinfects hidden wrongdoing and eradicates corruption.
Young people who comprise the largest segment of our population can shape the country’s future in next year’s elections. Yet many are not sure that registering and voting will have any impact on their future. A big part of their misgiving comes from their perception that the state, government, ANC and president are an unmovable corrupt monolith that is destroying the country. This misgiving represents the biggest risk to our democracy.
The fearless work of the public protector’s office is essential to restoring the hope in young people that no one is above the law and that citizens’ rights matter and will be protected.
Moreover, there was a worrying phenomenon among poor communities this past weekend. In some areas, people refused to register or to allow registration to take place in their areas until their demands are met. They, too, do not distinguish between the IEC, a chapter nine institution, and the government.
We must stand up and defend the space for the key institutions of our democracy to operate without fear or favour. It is a question of “for whom the bell tolls” – it tolls for all of us. Today it is the public protector, tomorrow it is the judiciary, then it will be citizens without the protection of those key institutions. By then, it will be too late to stand up.
We have been through similar moments in our history and must not return there. When I was banned and banished to Tzaneen, my lawyer was told it was not in the state’s interests to disclose why I had been banished to that area.
Are we again ready to tolerate threats to our democracy in the name of “state security” as defined by those determined to secure their positions in power? Are we willing to protect abuse of power and resources in order to protect those in public office?
We can stop abuse of power by those who should be serving us who instead focus on serving themselves. We must not shy away from raising our voices in protection of the public protector so she can do her work to secure the public interest. We have seen how her report on the IEC chairwoman’s impropriety in procuring the lease of property for IEC offices has been attacked on procedural grounds. Are we to condone wrongdoing in this and many other matters through political procedural stonewalling? Where will these stonewalling tactics end?
We have seen enough signs of the president’s lack of capacity to take responsibility for executive action at too many levels: the Schabir Shaik case, his rape trial, Guptagate etc.
His performance in Parliament where he trivialised accountability for Guptagate into a joke about it not being realistic for him to know who is landing at our airports was an embarrassment. Waterkloof is an airforce base that we have afforded him and authorised other officials to use – to serve us. It is not to be used to curry favour with his friends.
We need a strong public protector to keep the executive branch of the state accountable to citizens. We have to protect the public protector so she can continue to protect the “commonwealth” from those invoking “state security” to put our democracy at risk. We dare not fail.
Mamphela Ramphele
Source: The Mercury
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Madonsela: Secrecy Bill will 'bedevil' investigations
Public protector Thuli Madonsela has pleaded with parliamentarians to rethink key aspects of the Protection of State Information Bill, saying it would "severely" affect her work. Madonsela told them on Wednesday that the Bill, as it stood, would shrink her powers and bedevil investigations into state wrongdoing. It would reduce her to the status of an ordinary citizen because it would oblige her to hand classified information to the police like anyone else.
Likewise, it would strip away the right she held to access classified information in the course of her duty, instead forcing her to go to court to obtain it like any other South African. "The public protector is directly affected by this Bill," she told the second day of public hearings in Parliament on the contentious draft law. We will not be toothless but we are going to function under more onerous circumstances."
She said the obligation clause 15 of the Bill created for those who received classified information to hand it to the police to avoid prosecution posed the risk of her being arrested while she was studying any of the secret documents delivered to her office almost daily. "Will I be affected? Yes, severely. At the moment I'm not chasing around trying to find out what documents came to my office and which police station do I rush to report it. I don't want to do that. Unfortunately, Parliament has elevated the police above chapter nine institutions. Why does this democracy trust a police station above chapter nine institutions?" she asked.
Madonsela said that at the moment she had the prerogative to scrutinise any information sent to her office to see how it should be handled, but this would become a perilous exercise if the Bill were passed. "What if I am arrested while I'm applying my mind?" she asked, adding: "Probably the same could happen to journalists."
Madonsela tactfully suggested that the Bill's impact on her office was one of a number of unintended consequences of the legislation but baulked when ANC MP Nosipho Ntwanambi asked why the person in her post should not be treated in the same manner as ordinary South Africans. "When a member of Parliament says you should be subject to the same rights and responsibilities as a person in the street, it scares me. My responsibility is to be some kind of buffer between the state and the citizen."
Madonsela said she did not believe the Bill should include a special exemption for her office but rather a chapter recognising the special status of all similar institutions, in the same manner that it enshrined the special powers of courts. "What I am asking Parliament to accept is that chapter nine institutions were created by you as an accountability mechanism, and you should give them the space to exercise that responsibility."
Madonsela called for the inclusion of a public interest defence in the Bill, rejecting State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele's oft-repeated argument that this would lead to the wholesale publication of state secrets. "Will it open the floodgates? No, I don't think so." She said such a defence would have to withstand an objective test on whether the public good derived from publication of a classified document outweighed the risk to the national security.
Like many other critics of the legislation, she said its definition of national security was too wide and it could pave the way for over-classification. Asked whether she was flatly declaring the Bill unconstitutional, Madonsela declined to answer but impressed on MPs that rethinking the Bill could spare them the potential embarrassment of having it declared invalid by the courts. "You have the power to prevent this matter being settled by a court of law," she said.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Likewise, it would strip away the right she held to access classified information in the course of her duty, instead forcing her to go to court to obtain it like any other South African. "The public protector is directly affected by this Bill," she told the second day of public hearings in Parliament on the contentious draft law. We will not be toothless but we are going to function under more onerous circumstances."
She said the obligation clause 15 of the Bill created for those who received classified information to hand it to the police to avoid prosecution posed the risk of her being arrested while she was studying any of the secret documents delivered to her office almost daily. "Will I be affected? Yes, severely. At the moment I'm not chasing around trying to find out what documents came to my office and which police station do I rush to report it. I don't want to do that. Unfortunately, Parliament has elevated the police above chapter nine institutions. Why does this democracy trust a police station above chapter nine institutions?" she asked.
Madonsela said that at the moment she had the prerogative to scrutinise any information sent to her office to see how it should be handled, but this would become a perilous exercise if the Bill were passed. "What if I am arrested while I'm applying my mind?" she asked, adding: "Probably the same could happen to journalists."
Madonsela tactfully suggested that the Bill's impact on her office was one of a number of unintended consequences of the legislation but baulked when ANC MP Nosipho Ntwanambi asked why the person in her post should not be treated in the same manner as ordinary South Africans. "When a member of Parliament says you should be subject to the same rights and responsibilities as a person in the street, it scares me. My responsibility is to be some kind of buffer between the state and the citizen."
Madonsela said she did not believe the Bill should include a special exemption for her office but rather a chapter recognising the special status of all similar institutions, in the same manner that it enshrined the special powers of courts. "What I am asking Parliament to accept is that chapter nine institutions were created by you as an accountability mechanism, and you should give them the space to exercise that responsibility."
Madonsela called for the inclusion of a public interest defence in the Bill, rejecting State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele's oft-repeated argument that this would lead to the wholesale publication of state secrets. "Will it open the floodgates? No, I don't think so." She said such a defence would have to withstand an objective test on whether the public good derived from publication of a classified document outweighed the risk to the national security.
Like many other critics of the legislation, she said its definition of national security was too wide and it could pave the way for over-classification. Asked whether she was flatly declaring the Bill unconstitutional, Madonsela declined to answer but impressed on MPs that rethinking the Bill could spare them the potential embarrassment of having it declared invalid by the courts. "You have the power to prevent this matter being settled by a court of law," she said.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Madonsela to investigate Motlanthe ‘bribe’ claim
PUBLIC Protector Thuli Madonsela will conduct a preliminary probe into a bribe scandal that may involve Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe ’s partner, Gugu Mtshali, the protector’s office said on Tuesday. "Following a request by the deputy president, the public protector has decided to conduct a preliminary investigation into the above allegations with a view to establishing whether anyone in the Presidency or the Department of Trade and Industry might have participated in unlawful conduct involving the use of state resources or power," it said.
The protector would be able to determine whether "there are merits in the allegations that state resources and authority were employed to improperly enrich or advantage anyone for unlawful purposes". According to a report in the Sunday Times, Ms Mtshali was implicated in soliciting a R104m "bribe" to obtain government support for a South African company trying to clinch a R2bn sanctions-busting deal with Iran. Had it gone ahead, the deal would have put South Africa in violation of a United Nations Security Council resolution of 2010 prohibiting member states from supplying military-related products to Iran.
In light of the seriousness of the allegations, Mr Motlanthe took the unprecedented step of asking Ms Madonsela to investigate. The public protector’s credibility has been enhanced by high-profile investigations that led to the dismissal of two ministers last year. Ms Mtshali, former De Beers executive Raisaka Masebelanga and others allegedly met representatives of a company called 360 Aviation to solicit the bribe. The deal allegedly involved supplying US-made Bell helicopters and spare parts to the National Iranian Oil Company via South Africa. The US prohibits the sale of military equipment to Iran. The MD of 360 Aviation, Barry Oberholzer, was quoted as saying: "We believe we were being asked for a bribe … in exchange for government support." The outcome of the preliminary investigation is expected by April 15.
Last week, it emerged that the National Conventional Arms Control Committee had launched its own investigation into the Iran arms sale. Justice and Constitutional Development Minister Jeff Radebe, in his role as control committee head, was briefing the joint standing committee on defence when he fielded a question from David Maynier, Democratic Alliance defence spokesman, about reports that a local company was involved in the sanctions busting. Vanessa du Toit, a director at the conventional arms inspectorate, replying to the question, said an investigation of the Sunday Times allegations had already begun. She said there were 38 cases on the go involving infringements of the arms-control laws.
Source: Mail & Guardian
The protector would be able to determine whether "there are merits in the allegations that state resources and authority were employed to improperly enrich or advantage anyone for unlawful purposes". According to a report in the Sunday Times, Ms Mtshali was implicated in soliciting a R104m "bribe" to obtain government support for a South African company trying to clinch a R2bn sanctions-busting deal with Iran. Had it gone ahead, the deal would have put South Africa in violation of a United Nations Security Council resolution of 2010 prohibiting member states from supplying military-related products to Iran.
In light of the seriousness of the allegations, Mr Motlanthe took the unprecedented step of asking Ms Madonsela to investigate. The public protector’s credibility has been enhanced by high-profile investigations that led to the dismissal of two ministers last year. Ms Mtshali, former De Beers executive Raisaka Masebelanga and others allegedly met representatives of a company called 360 Aviation to solicit the bribe. The deal allegedly involved supplying US-made Bell helicopters and spare parts to the National Iranian Oil Company via South Africa. The US prohibits the sale of military equipment to Iran. The MD of 360 Aviation, Barry Oberholzer, was quoted as saying: "We believe we were being asked for a bribe … in exchange for government support." The outcome of the preliminary investigation is expected by April 15.
Last week, it emerged that the National Conventional Arms Control Committee had launched its own investigation into the Iran arms sale. Justice and Constitutional Development Minister Jeff Radebe, in his role as control committee head, was briefing the joint standing committee on defence when he fielded a question from David Maynier, Democratic Alliance defence spokesman, about reports that a local company was involved in the sanctions busting. Vanessa du Toit, a director at the conventional arms inspectorate, replying to the question, said an investigation of the Sunday Times allegations had already begun. She said there were 38 cases on the go involving infringements of the arms-control laws.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
'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
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
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
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
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
Friday, August 5, 2011
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
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
Friday, July 15, 2011
Protector's challenge to the president
Thuli Madonsela has thrown down the gauntlet to President Jacob Zuma, demanding that he confront her awkward findings and recommendations on two police lease deals worth a total of R1.78-billion. On Thursday the public protector released the second of her devastating reports on the leases, calling on Zuma and his Cabinet to take action against Minister of Public Works Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde, national police commissioner Bheki Cele and senior officials.
Madonsela's latest report found that a lease agreement between the public works department and businessman Roux Shabangu, for a headquarters building for the provincial South African Police Service in Durban, is invalid. In her previous report, released in February, she made similar findings about another police lease in Pretoria, also between public works and Shabangu.
Zuma has delayed acting on the Pretoria report, sending Justice Minister Jeff Radebe to negotiate for action to be taken only after the release of the latest report. Now it is time for the president to show to his backbone on the issue. Will he accept the findings and act decisively, or will he delay again?
The political ramifications of both options are significant. Madonsela's recommendations are stronger now, as they are bolstered by new evidence, and the political atmosphere has become charged by the furore that followed last week's media leak of the protector's "imminent arrest".
But if Zuma acts on her recommendations there could be unpleasant political consequences -- particularly if his role in the Shabangu leases was not benign. It is still not clear, for example, why Zuma sacked former public works minister Geoff Doidge, who was investigating the Shabangu deals.
And it is suspicious that Mahlangu-Nkabinde, Doidge's replacement, promptly suspended director general Siviwe Dongwana -- who was also investigating the deals -- and pushed the Pretoria lease through against senior legal opinion and despite her department's decision to suspend the lease.
Commenting on such suspicions, Madonsela said: "We could not find evidence of criminality. We could not explain why people behaved the way they did. The conduct of the police and the public works department was quite strange in trying to move regardless of the circumstances. But I can't make findings on the basis of a hunch. Their behaviour was strange." She said: "I am not prescribing what should be done, but I expect the president to do the right thing."
The biggest problem Madonsela has handed to Zuma is Mahlangu-Nkabinde, who refused to answer certain questions during the public protector's investigation. Madonsela said Mahlangu-Nkabinde's behaviour was improper and unlawful and the minister had "failed to meet the requisite of statesmanship expected from her". She urged Zuma to consider taking action against Mahlangu-Nkabinde. The minister should, within 60 days, "report to the Cabinet on her actions in relation to the procurement of the leases … and her failure to fully co-operate with the public protector".
Zuma will then have to deal with the Cele problem -- or publicly duck it. The commissioner once provided muscle for Zuma's rise to the presidency and is now rumoured to be part of a faction aiming to unseat him. Madonsela found Cele to be guilty of improper and unlawful conduct and maladministration. "The minister of police [Nathi Mthethwa] should, with the assistance of the national treasury, take urgent steps to ensure that the appropriate action is instituted against all the relevant officials of the SAPS," Madonsela said. These included Cele.
She also recommended that Mahlangu-Nkabinde take action against her errant officials, with the assistance of the treasury and the public service department. And while these steps were followed, Madonsela recommended that the police review their needs analysis for the accommodation of their provincial offices and the family violence, child protection and sexual offences units in Durban, which were to be housed in Shabangu's building.
The public works department should then follow proper procedures to help the police find suitable, cost-effective accommodation, as they are mandated to do. "The department of public works and the SAPS must ensure that appropriate measures are implemented to prevent a recurrence of contraventions of the relevant procurement legislation and prescripts," she said.
In both Durban and Pretoria Madonsela found that the lease agreements were invalid because their procurement had not complied with constitutional requirements and other regulations. In both cases she said the police -- Cele in particular, although he denies this -- had identified the buildings before involving the public works department, which is what they should have done. Public works then chose, irregularly, to deviate from open tender procedures, negotiating directly with Shabangu and settling on higher than market-value leases, which compromised the police's stretched operations budget. Shabangu contacted police and public works officials "and is alleged to have put pressure on them in regard to the finalisation of the procurement process".
Madonsela emphasised that there was no evidence of criminality in her investigation of Shabangu's role. "The argument presented by the department of finance was that since we could not conclude that Roux Property Fund [Shabangu's company] had got the leases because of fraud or through other illegal processes, we could not use the law to red-card him," she said. Little has changed in the protector's report compared with the draft that was leaked before she received the responses of those implicated. Looking at those responses -- now dealt with in the final report -- it is easy to understand why.
Commissioner Cele was at pains to point out that he did not invent the SAPS's need for a new lease. "On the contrary, there was a need to either relocate to a new building or construct one long before I came into this department in August 2009," he told the protector.
One of the main aspects of the provisional report disputed by Cele is that it was he who identified the Transnet building as alternative accommodation for police in Durban. But Madonsela says two of his subordinates -- Generals Hlela and Terblanche -- confirmed, independently of each other, that Cele had indeed instructed them to procure the lease of the Transnet building. She also points to an information note signed by Cele, dated June 28 last year, that apparently confirmed that the Transnet building was identified for leasing.
Cele points a finger at public works as the department responsible for managing the procurement process correctly. "The DPW is solely responsible for the unlawful conclusion of the lease agreement," he says.
Mahlangu-Nkabinde's version is contradicted by almost every other player in the leasing saga. According to Madonsela's report, the minister explained a mysterious increase in floor space needed by police -- which ended up being exactly what was on offer at Shabangu's building -- as being added "to accommodate for non-assignable areas, such as partitions, passages, toilets and common areas". "This explanation of the minister is, however, not in line with the needs analysis that was resubmitted by the SAPS," the protector noted.
The minister claimed that Doidge and his director general, Siviwe Dongwana, did not brief her properly. She denies instructing Dongwana to inform Shabangu's bankers that the transaction was proceeding. She refused to answer questions from the public protector, she claimed, because the report on the Pretoria lease showed that Madonsela had already made up her mind.
Shabangu denied applying undue pressure on public works officials, including the director general, or improperly influencing them in the procurement process relating to the Pretoria and Durban leases. He further denied ever meeting the minister outside her office. Asked to explain how he became aware of the SAPS's need for alternative accommodation in Durban, Shabangu indicated that he was informed that the office lease of the provincial police was due to expire and was provided with a "needs analysis" indicating the extent of the required alternative accommodation. It was because he was aware of the extent of the need for alternative accommodation in Durban that his company decided to buy the Transnet building.
But Madonsela noted: "Shabangu's above explanation is inconsistent with the documentary evidence obtained during the investigation, in terms of which it was found that the first needs analysis, reflecting the extent of the SAPS's need for alternative accommodation, was only submitted to the DPW on 23 June 2010. "However, the sale agreement for the Transnet building was concluded with Shabangu on behalf of [Roux Shabangu] on 19 March 2010, three months earlier." Ten days after Independent Newspapers claimed Thuli Madonsela faced imminent arrest for fraud and corruption there is no clarity on who was pushing the "investigation" and who leaked it. As the public backlash mounted, Justice Minister Jeff Radebe and Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa claimed the public protector was not being investigated.
Radebe cleared Madonsela of wrongdoing relating to work her company did for the justice department while she was a full-time South African Law Reform Commission member. President Jacob Zuma rushed to send out a statement of support. The newspaper group then produced "irrefutable proof" of its claims — an "information note" showing only that police were given insight, presumably by someone in the justice department, into a justice department file containing a September 2009 state law opinion on Madonsela's business interests. Police also apparently gave details of departmental payments to her company.
But, significantly, the note was directed to the Hawks's commercial crime head, Hans Meiring, which suggests senior police interest. The matter is also understood to have been drawn to Hawks boss Anwa Dramat's attention. "High-level sources" then leaked the document to a journalist, couched in claims of "imminent arrest" on "fraud and corruption charges" -- which the document did not prove.
Was there ever a police probe of Madonsela? Who was behind it? Was Independent Newspapers manipulated? By whom and why? In seeking to deny that there had been an investigation Hawks spokesperson Macintosh Polela made much of an apparent error in the case number refered to in the information note. It was all an "unfortunate mix-up", he said. The case number refered to a totally separate case ergo the note did not prove Madonsela had been investigated.
In fact the case number proves nothing of the kind. Independent Newspapers originally wrote: "The police stumbled upon information on Madonsela while investigating a separate case registered at the Pretoria Central Police Station." But investigating officer James Hills wrote in the information note: "During the investigation of Pretoria-Central CAS 515/01/2008 at the department of justice and constitutional development, the following came to my attention." Clearly this case number is associated with the "separate case". It was never intended either by the Independent Group or by Hill to refer to the Madonsela probe.
Polela used this confusion to cover the fact that Cabinet had made it politically difficult for police to come clean on the investigation and the leak. He said: "There was a mix-up when someone read a file for that case. It appears there was a piece of paper which mentioned Madonsela, but I don't know what that piece of paper was about … As far as I know [the leak] is not being investigated from our side."
The previous week police headquarters said the South African Police Service would launch a full investigation into the circumstances that led to "media reports …that the public protector is about to be arrested" and would announce the outcome.
Why the arrest claim was leaked days before the release of Madonsela’s second SAPS lease report -- and why ministers then smothered the matter -- remain smouldering questions.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Madonsela's latest report found that a lease agreement between the public works department and businessman Roux Shabangu, for a headquarters building for the provincial South African Police Service in Durban, is invalid. In her previous report, released in February, she made similar findings about another police lease in Pretoria, also between public works and Shabangu.
Zuma has delayed acting on the Pretoria report, sending Justice Minister Jeff Radebe to negotiate for action to be taken only after the release of the latest report. Now it is time for the president to show to his backbone on the issue. Will he accept the findings and act decisively, or will he delay again?
The political ramifications of both options are significant. Madonsela's recommendations are stronger now, as they are bolstered by new evidence, and the political atmosphere has become charged by the furore that followed last week's media leak of the protector's "imminent arrest".
But if Zuma acts on her recommendations there could be unpleasant political consequences -- particularly if his role in the Shabangu leases was not benign. It is still not clear, for example, why Zuma sacked former public works minister Geoff Doidge, who was investigating the Shabangu deals.
And it is suspicious that Mahlangu-Nkabinde, Doidge's replacement, promptly suspended director general Siviwe Dongwana -- who was also investigating the deals -- and pushed the Pretoria lease through against senior legal opinion and despite her department's decision to suspend the lease.
Commenting on such suspicions, Madonsela said: "We could not find evidence of criminality. We could not explain why people behaved the way they did. The conduct of the police and the public works department was quite strange in trying to move regardless of the circumstances. But I can't make findings on the basis of a hunch. Their behaviour was strange." She said: "I am not prescribing what should be done, but I expect the president to do the right thing."
The biggest problem Madonsela has handed to Zuma is Mahlangu-Nkabinde, who refused to answer certain questions during the public protector's investigation. Madonsela said Mahlangu-Nkabinde's behaviour was improper and unlawful and the minister had "failed to meet the requisite of statesmanship expected from her". She urged Zuma to consider taking action against Mahlangu-Nkabinde. The minister should, within 60 days, "report to the Cabinet on her actions in relation to the procurement of the leases … and her failure to fully co-operate with the public protector".
Zuma will then have to deal with the Cele problem -- or publicly duck it. The commissioner once provided muscle for Zuma's rise to the presidency and is now rumoured to be part of a faction aiming to unseat him. Madonsela found Cele to be guilty of improper and unlawful conduct and maladministration. "The minister of police [Nathi Mthethwa] should, with the assistance of the national treasury, take urgent steps to ensure that the appropriate action is instituted against all the relevant officials of the SAPS," Madonsela said. These included Cele.
She also recommended that Mahlangu-Nkabinde take action against her errant officials, with the assistance of the treasury and the public service department. And while these steps were followed, Madonsela recommended that the police review their needs analysis for the accommodation of their provincial offices and the family violence, child protection and sexual offences units in Durban, which were to be housed in Shabangu's building.
The public works department should then follow proper procedures to help the police find suitable, cost-effective accommodation, as they are mandated to do. "The department of public works and the SAPS must ensure that appropriate measures are implemented to prevent a recurrence of contraventions of the relevant procurement legislation and prescripts," she said.
In both Durban and Pretoria Madonsela found that the lease agreements were invalid because their procurement had not complied with constitutional requirements and other regulations. In both cases she said the police -- Cele in particular, although he denies this -- had identified the buildings before involving the public works department, which is what they should have done. Public works then chose, irregularly, to deviate from open tender procedures, negotiating directly with Shabangu and settling on higher than market-value leases, which compromised the police's stretched operations budget. Shabangu contacted police and public works officials "and is alleged to have put pressure on them in regard to the finalisation of the procurement process".
Madonsela emphasised that there was no evidence of criminality in her investigation of Shabangu's role. "The argument presented by the department of finance was that since we could not conclude that Roux Property Fund [Shabangu's company] had got the leases because of fraud or through other illegal processes, we could not use the law to red-card him," she said. Little has changed in the protector's report compared with the draft that was leaked before she received the responses of those implicated. Looking at those responses -- now dealt with in the final report -- it is easy to understand why.
Commissioner Cele was at pains to point out that he did not invent the SAPS's need for a new lease. "On the contrary, there was a need to either relocate to a new building or construct one long before I came into this department in August 2009," he told the protector.
One of the main aspects of the provisional report disputed by Cele is that it was he who identified the Transnet building as alternative accommodation for police in Durban. But Madonsela says two of his subordinates -- Generals Hlela and Terblanche -- confirmed, independently of each other, that Cele had indeed instructed them to procure the lease of the Transnet building. She also points to an information note signed by Cele, dated June 28 last year, that apparently confirmed that the Transnet building was identified for leasing.
Cele points a finger at public works as the department responsible for managing the procurement process correctly. "The DPW is solely responsible for the unlawful conclusion of the lease agreement," he says.
Mahlangu-Nkabinde's version is contradicted by almost every other player in the leasing saga. According to Madonsela's report, the minister explained a mysterious increase in floor space needed by police -- which ended up being exactly what was on offer at Shabangu's building -- as being added "to accommodate for non-assignable areas, such as partitions, passages, toilets and common areas". "This explanation of the minister is, however, not in line with the needs analysis that was resubmitted by the SAPS," the protector noted.
The minister claimed that Doidge and his director general, Siviwe Dongwana, did not brief her properly. She denies instructing Dongwana to inform Shabangu's bankers that the transaction was proceeding. She refused to answer questions from the public protector, she claimed, because the report on the Pretoria lease showed that Madonsela had already made up her mind.
Shabangu denied applying undue pressure on public works officials, including the director general, or improperly influencing them in the procurement process relating to the Pretoria and Durban leases. He further denied ever meeting the minister outside her office. Asked to explain how he became aware of the SAPS's need for alternative accommodation in Durban, Shabangu indicated that he was informed that the office lease of the provincial police was due to expire and was provided with a "needs analysis" indicating the extent of the required alternative accommodation. It was because he was aware of the extent of the need for alternative accommodation in Durban that his company decided to buy the Transnet building.
But Madonsela noted: "Shabangu's above explanation is inconsistent with the documentary evidence obtained during the investigation, in terms of which it was found that the first needs analysis, reflecting the extent of the SAPS's need for alternative accommodation, was only submitted to the DPW on 23 June 2010. "However, the sale agreement for the Transnet building was concluded with Shabangu on behalf of [Roux Shabangu] on 19 March 2010, three months earlier." Ten days after Independent Newspapers claimed Thuli Madonsela faced imminent arrest for fraud and corruption there is no clarity on who was pushing the "investigation" and who leaked it. As the public backlash mounted, Justice Minister Jeff Radebe and Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa claimed the public protector was not being investigated.
Radebe cleared Madonsela of wrongdoing relating to work her company did for the justice department while she was a full-time South African Law Reform Commission member. President Jacob Zuma rushed to send out a statement of support. The newspaper group then produced "irrefutable proof" of its claims — an "information note" showing only that police were given insight, presumably by someone in the justice department, into a justice department file containing a September 2009 state law opinion on Madonsela's business interests. Police also apparently gave details of departmental payments to her company.
But, significantly, the note was directed to the Hawks's commercial crime head, Hans Meiring, which suggests senior police interest. The matter is also understood to have been drawn to Hawks boss Anwa Dramat's attention. "High-level sources" then leaked the document to a journalist, couched in claims of "imminent arrest" on "fraud and corruption charges" -- which the document did not prove.
Was there ever a police probe of Madonsela? Who was behind it? Was Independent Newspapers manipulated? By whom and why? In seeking to deny that there had been an investigation Hawks spokesperson Macintosh Polela made much of an apparent error in the case number refered to in the information note. It was all an "unfortunate mix-up", he said. The case number refered to a totally separate case ergo the note did not prove Madonsela had been investigated.
In fact the case number proves nothing of the kind. Independent Newspapers originally wrote: "The police stumbled upon information on Madonsela while investigating a separate case registered at the Pretoria Central Police Station." But investigating officer James Hills wrote in the information note: "During the investigation of Pretoria-Central CAS 515/01/2008 at the department of justice and constitutional development, the following came to my attention." Clearly this case number is associated with the "separate case". It was never intended either by the Independent Group or by Hill to refer to the Madonsela probe.
Polela used this confusion to cover the fact that Cabinet had made it politically difficult for police to come clean on the investigation and the leak. He said: "There was a mix-up when someone read a file for that case. It appears there was a piece of paper which mentioned Madonsela, but I don't know what that piece of paper was about … As far as I know [the leak] is not being investigated from our side."
The previous week police headquarters said the South African Police Service would launch a full investigation into the circumstances that led to "media reports …that the public protector is about to be arrested" and would announce the outcome.
Why the arrest claim was leaked days before the release of Madonsela’s second SAPS lease report -- and why ministers then smothered the matter -- remain smouldering questions.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Thuli Madonsela: A timeline
News reports about attacks on the Public Protector can be confusing. Why was she accused of fraud and who are her enemies? Use our timeline to make sense of the story.
October 2009
Advocate Thuli Madonsela is announced as South Africa's new Public Protector -- South Africa's third since 1994. She replaces Lawrence Mushwana, who had a dubious record in connection with the Oilgate scandal.
2 August 2010
Complaints are lodged by Paul Hoffman of the Institute for Accountability in Southern Africa and Pieter Groenewald of the Freedom Front Plus with the Public Protector in connection with a Sunday Times report alleging improper procurement in the leasing of office accommodation for the South African Police Services (SAPS) in the Sanlam Middestad building in Pretoria and the Transnet Building in Durban. These complaints originated from a newspaper article published on August 1 2010 alleging improper conduct and maladministration by police National Commissioner Bheki Cele and the Department of Public Works (DPW). The combined value of the leases amounts to over R1.7bn and is entered into between the South African Police Service and controversial property vendor Roux Shabangu.
August 3 2010
Madonsela requests Cele and officials at DPW to cease with implementation of the said leases until an investigation into the matter is completed. It is confirmed the investigation would be undertaken in conjunction with Willie Hofmeyr's Special Investigation Unit (SIU).
4 August 2010
Journalist Mzilikazi wa Afrika is arrested for allegedly being in possession of a fake letter of resignation from Mpumalanga Premier David Mabuza. His arrest is widely seen as an attempt at intimidation relating to the original report appearing in the Sunday Times. He is held in Nelspruit for several days -- even after his case is thrown out of court.
October 11 2010
Director general at DPW, Siviwe Dongwana, informs Cele a new procurement process for the leasing of accommodation for the SAPS headquarters in Pretoria and Durban will be affected after an internal enquiry and independent legal advice deems the lease acquisitions to be invalid.
October 25 2010
Madonsela issues a preliminary report on the investigation, confirming her support for the new procurement process initiation.
October 31 2010
Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde replaces the former minister of public works, Geoff Doidge, in a Cabinet reshuffle by President Jacob Zuma.
November 11 2010
Mahlangu-Nkabinde announces, upon obtaining legal advice from the Office of the State Attorney on the lease agreement with regards to the Middestad building, that the lease is enforceable.
December 8 2010
DPW announces the suspension of Dongwana on charges in relation to insubordination, dereliction of duty, failure to discharge official duties and bringing the department into disrepute.
February 22 2011
Madonsela releases an initial report into the matter entitled: Against the Rules -- with specific reference to the Sanlam Middestad building in Pretoria. The report lists a number of irregularities in the leasing process.
March 2 2011
The offices of the Public Protector are visited by members of the SAPS crime intelligence unit, allegedly regarding Madonsela's investigations into Cele. Police later deny it was a raid.
March 10 2011
Madonsela announces she will not revisit findings in her report, despite being asked to do so by Mahlangu-Nkabinde.
June 10 2011
Mahlangu-Nkabinde announces a moratorium on all DPW tenders to "root out corruption". The move is slammed by the media and opposition parties and labeled as political opportunism.
June 17 2011
Shabangu calls a press briefing in Pretoria to "set the record straight" and defends the leasing deals, accusing "white capitalists" of accusing him of shady deals because he is a successful black businessman.
June 18 2011
Dongwana tells the media he feared for his safety and that of his family as he felt he was pressured into approving two lease deals.
June 21 2011
Mahlangu-Nkabinde announces her intention to take the matter regarding the leases to court to pronounce legality.
July 6 2011
A shock report is published by the Star newspaper about Madonsela’s imminent arrest on charges of alleged corruption during her tenure many years before as commissioner at the South African Law Reform Commission.
July 6 2011
The Star report is published the same day as a scheduled press briefing by Madonsela about the police leases and other matters. The report is criticised as a political ploy related to Madonsela's investigations into the leases. The protector vows to continue in her investigations into the leases.
July 7 2011
Justice and Constitutional Development Minister Jeff Radebe throws his weight behind Madonsela, announcing that she did not break any laws when her company offered services to the justice department while she worked for the South Africa Law Reform Commission. Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa also announces that he has no knowledge of an imminent arrest, after consulting with Cele, and the Zuma makes his support clear as well.
July 11 2011
It is confirmed that the head of the SIU, Willie Hofmeyr, is being investigated by the Serious Economic Offences Unit for reportedly flouting supply-chain and procurement procedures in the awarding of a tender to refurbish SIU offices in Pretoria
July 14 2011
Madonsela releases a second report into the leasing scandal -- with specific reference to the Transnet building in Durban -- entitled: Against the rules too. The report finds serious fault with Mahlangu-Nkabinde and Cele during the acquisition and implementation of the leases and calls for serious remedial action. The pair are slammed for their lack of cooperation during the investigation.
July 15 to 17 2011
The weekend media announce the report as a watershed moment for Zuma, which will test his earlier support and possibly force him to take action.
July 18 2011
Cele announces a press briefing for July 19 to respond to findings by the Public Protector that his actions in connection with the two controversial building leases were unlawful, improper and constituted maladministration. The briefing is then postponed to July 21.
July 20 2011
Cele again cancels the press briefing, scheduled for the following day.
Source: Mail & Guardian
October 2009
Advocate Thuli Madonsela is announced as South Africa's new Public Protector -- South Africa's third since 1994. She replaces Lawrence Mushwana, who had a dubious record in connection with the Oilgate scandal.
M&G editor in chief Nic Dawes tells you everything you need to know about Public Protector Thuli Madonsela's report into police leasing deals. Will the president take action? What's next for Madonsela? Watch our video analysis and find out.
Complaints are lodged by Paul Hoffman of the Institute for Accountability in Southern Africa and Pieter Groenewald of the Freedom Front Plus with the Public Protector in connection with a Sunday Times report alleging improper procurement in the leasing of office accommodation for the South African Police Services (SAPS) in the Sanlam Middestad building in Pretoria and the Transnet Building in Durban. These complaints originated from a newspaper article published on August 1 2010 alleging improper conduct and maladministration by police National Commissioner Bheki Cele and the Department of Public Works (DPW). The combined value of the leases amounts to over R1.7bn and is entered into between the South African Police Service and controversial property vendor Roux Shabangu.
August 3 2010
Madonsela requests Cele and officials at DPW to cease with implementation of the said leases until an investigation into the matter is completed. It is confirmed the investigation would be undertaken in conjunction with Willie Hofmeyr's Special Investigation Unit (SIU).
4 August 2010
Journalist Mzilikazi wa Afrika is arrested for allegedly being in possession of a fake letter of resignation from Mpumalanga Premier David Mabuza. His arrest is widely seen as an attempt at intimidation relating to the original report appearing in the Sunday Times. He is held in Nelspruit for several days -- even after his case is thrown out of court.
October 11 2010
Director general at DPW, Siviwe Dongwana, informs Cele a new procurement process for the leasing of accommodation for the SAPS headquarters in Pretoria and Durban will be affected after an internal enquiry and independent legal advice deems the lease acquisitions to be invalid.
October 25 2010
Madonsela issues a preliminary report on the investigation, confirming her support for the new procurement process initiation.
October 31 2010
Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde replaces the former minister of public works, Geoff Doidge, in a Cabinet reshuffle by President Jacob Zuma.
November 11 2010
Mahlangu-Nkabinde announces, upon obtaining legal advice from the Office of the State Attorney on the lease agreement with regards to the Middestad building, that the lease is enforceable.
December 8 2010
DPW announces the suspension of Dongwana on charges in relation to insubordination, dereliction of duty, failure to discharge official duties and bringing the department into disrepute.
February 22 2011
Madonsela releases an initial report into the matter entitled: Against the Rules -- with specific reference to the Sanlam Middestad building in Pretoria. The report lists a number of irregularities in the leasing process.
March 2 2011
The offices of the Public Protector are visited by members of the SAPS crime intelligence unit, allegedly regarding Madonsela's investigations into Cele. Police later deny it was a raid.
March 10 2011
Madonsela announces she will not revisit findings in her report, despite being asked to do so by Mahlangu-Nkabinde.
June 10 2011
Mahlangu-Nkabinde announces a moratorium on all DPW tenders to "root out corruption". The move is slammed by the media and opposition parties and labeled as political opportunism.
June 17 2011
Shabangu calls a press briefing in Pretoria to "set the record straight" and defends the leasing deals, accusing "white capitalists" of accusing him of shady deals because he is a successful black businessman.
June 18 2011
Dongwana tells the media he feared for his safety and that of his family as he felt he was pressured into approving two lease deals.
June 21 2011
Mahlangu-Nkabinde announces her intention to take the matter regarding the leases to court to pronounce legality.
July 6 2011
A shock report is published by the Star newspaper about Madonsela’s imminent arrest on charges of alleged corruption during her tenure many years before as commissioner at the South African Law Reform Commission.
July 6 2011
The Star report is published the same day as a scheduled press briefing by Madonsela about the police leases and other matters. The report is criticised as a political ploy related to Madonsela's investigations into the leases. The protector vows to continue in her investigations into the leases.
July 7 2011
Justice and Constitutional Development Minister Jeff Radebe throws his weight behind Madonsela, announcing that she did not break any laws when her company offered services to the justice department while she worked for the South Africa Law Reform Commission. Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa also announces that he has no knowledge of an imminent arrest, after consulting with Cele, and the Zuma makes his support clear as well.
July 11 2011
It is confirmed that the head of the SIU, Willie Hofmeyr, is being investigated by the Serious Economic Offences Unit for reportedly flouting supply-chain and procurement procedures in the awarding of a tender to refurbish SIU offices in Pretoria
July 14 2011
Madonsela releases a second report into the leasing scandal -- with specific reference to the Transnet building in Durban -- entitled: Against the rules too. The report finds serious fault with Mahlangu-Nkabinde and Cele during the acquisition and implementation of the leases and calls for serious remedial action. The pair are slammed for their lack of cooperation during the investigation.
July 15 to 17 2011
The weekend media announce the report as a watershed moment for Zuma, which will test his earlier support and possibly force him to take action.
July 18 2011
Cele announces a press briefing for July 19 to respond to findings by the Public Protector that his actions in connection with the two controversial building leases were unlawful, improper and constituted maladministration. The briefing is then postponed to July 21.
July 20 2011
Cele again cancels the press briefing, scheduled for the following day.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Passivity over corruption imperils our constitution
Mamhela Ramphele: The level of corruption and mismanagement in public life reflect a dangerous tendency towards a culture of impunity.
The recent launch by the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (Casac), of a campaign for an independent anti-corruption agency, is an invitation to SA citizens to commit to halting this dangerous tendency. Appropriately, the campaign began the week before the celebration of Human Rights Day. A culture of impunity for those abusing power and profiting from corruption is the antithesis of conditions that promote human rights. Various commentators suggest that South Africa is only following the usual post-colonial trajectory of former liberators abusing their power to enrich themselves and those close to them.
There are unfortunately enough examples of corruption, nepotism and mismanagement of public resources to support this view. The auditor-general, the Independent Complaints Directorate of the SA Police and the launch of a civil service anti-corruption unit by the Department of Public Service and Administration, all point to ineffective mechanisms for the enforcement of accountability. But there is nothing inevitable about this slide into impunity. The independent mechanisms to promote integrity and strengthen our democracy are alive and well.
The public protector's recent fearless report about wrongdoing in the procurement of premises for police headquarters by the commissioner of police is a case in point. The Constitutional Court ruling that the Hawks were not independent enough - in terms of constitution requirements - to investigate wrongdoing without fear or favour to promote integrity in public service, is another.
The case for an independent anti-corruption agency is a strong one. The proposed agency would have a triple mandate: public education; enforcement and prevention. The success of this agency would depend on the level of accountability to both parliament and civil society; the independence of the directorate and board appointed through a transparent public participation process; and adequate resources to discharge its mandate.
The culture of impunity is made possible by passive, uninformed citizens who tend to regard corrupt practices as normal to the business of governance. This tolerance is based on their experiences under non-democratic rule, and a sense of loyalty to those in power. This loyalty is fuelled by disinformation by some of those in power, that reporting wrongdoing is a betrayal of those who sacrificed for our freedom. Citizens are also made to believe that wrongdoing is necessary to right the wrongs of the apartheid past.
Enforcement is also severely constrained by public officials placing loyalty to their comrades above defending the constitution. Take the case of Bosasa, the service provider of the Department of Correctional Services, which was investigated by the Special Investigating Unit. Taxpayers have every right to demand that the recommendations of the 2009 comprehensive report into the procurement of these services, be followed.
Our disengaged attitude as citizens and taxpayers promotes this culture of a lack of accountability, which fuels impunity. Prevention requires the promotion of a culture aligned to the values of our constitution, which insists on equality before the law, respect for human dignity and the progressive realisation of socioeconomic rights. These values are violated every day by public servants who abuse national resources which are supposed to address the basic needs of the poor. Even more disconcerting is the failure of political leaders and those in authority to establish cultures in every tier of government to promote our founding values.
Seen from all perspectives then, I come to the unfortunate conclusion that the culture of impunity is fuelled by the sense of entitlement of those in power, who seem to believe society owes them a debt of gratitude for the freedom we enjoy. This conclusion is supported by the series of public scandals for which no one has been held accountable.
First, the arms deal continues to fester, despite evidence that, at the very least, a judicial commission of inquiry needs to investigate this matter. Second, the Travelgate scandal saw those involved in defrauding the taxpayer simply being slapped on the wrist. The abuse of travel allowances occurred in a parliament in which MPs are well looked after in terms of salaries and benefits. Third, the open fronting by the ANC of black economic empowerment under the aegis of Chancellor House violates a central pillar of the constitution: equality under the law.
The ANC, at its landmark 2007 Polokwane conference, resolved to promote greater transparency in the funding of political parties. But the voices within the ANC supporting the unwinding of the deals involved, including the lucrative Hitachi deal to build a boiler at Eskom's Medupi Power Plant, have been silenced. No progress has been made - as was admitted by the chairman of the ANC Ethics Committee, Professor Ben Turok.
Fronting in businesses involving state-owned enterprises such as Eskom, gives the ruling party an unfair advantage over opposition parties. This is a serious threat to democracy. Opposition parties have little chance of competing with an incumbent party that has deep pockets courtesy of the South African taxpayer. Undermining political competition erodes the very foundations of our multiparty democracy. In addition, the participation of the governing party in fronting BEE deals undermines its capacity to regulate and hold other fronting entities and persons accountable.
Good governance is seriously undermined by the failure to demonstrate intolerance for corruption. It lays the foundations for impunity - and corruption in the private sector cannot be addressed adequately by a government which is compromised by being seen to be involved in questionable deals. Nor can the work of transforming the inherently corrupt apartheid culture be accomplished by a government which has been compromised.
South African citizens have a responsibility to acknowledge this elephant in the room and deal with it before it harms our democracy irreparably. Let us campaign for the independent anti-corruption agency - as proposed by the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution. It will give South Africans the platform from which to educate themselves, enforce the law and prevent corruption in their midst. We dare not fail future generations.
Source: Times Live
The recent launch by the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (Casac), of a campaign for an independent anti-corruption agency, is an invitation to SA citizens to commit to halting this dangerous tendency. Appropriately, the campaign began the week before the celebration of Human Rights Day. A culture of impunity for those abusing power and profiting from corruption is the antithesis of conditions that promote human rights. Various commentators suggest that South Africa is only following the usual post-colonial trajectory of former liberators abusing their power to enrich themselves and those close to them.
There are unfortunately enough examples of corruption, nepotism and mismanagement of public resources to support this view. The auditor-general, the Independent Complaints Directorate of the SA Police and the launch of a civil service anti-corruption unit by the Department of Public Service and Administration, all point to ineffective mechanisms for the enforcement of accountability. But there is nothing inevitable about this slide into impunity. The independent mechanisms to promote integrity and strengthen our democracy are alive and well.
The public protector's recent fearless report about wrongdoing in the procurement of premises for police headquarters by the commissioner of police is a case in point. The Constitutional Court ruling that the Hawks were not independent enough - in terms of constitution requirements - to investigate wrongdoing without fear or favour to promote integrity in public service, is another.
The case for an independent anti-corruption agency is a strong one. The proposed agency would have a triple mandate: public education; enforcement and prevention. The success of this agency would depend on the level of accountability to both parliament and civil society; the independence of the directorate and board appointed through a transparent public participation process; and adequate resources to discharge its mandate.
The culture of impunity is made possible by passive, uninformed citizens who tend to regard corrupt practices as normal to the business of governance. This tolerance is based on their experiences under non-democratic rule, and a sense of loyalty to those in power. This loyalty is fuelled by disinformation by some of those in power, that reporting wrongdoing is a betrayal of those who sacrificed for our freedom. Citizens are also made to believe that wrongdoing is necessary to right the wrongs of the apartheid past.
Enforcement is also severely constrained by public officials placing loyalty to their comrades above defending the constitution. Take the case of Bosasa, the service provider of the Department of Correctional Services, which was investigated by the Special Investigating Unit. Taxpayers have every right to demand that the recommendations of the 2009 comprehensive report into the procurement of these services, be followed.
Our disengaged attitude as citizens and taxpayers promotes this culture of a lack of accountability, which fuels impunity. Prevention requires the promotion of a culture aligned to the values of our constitution, which insists on equality before the law, respect for human dignity and the progressive realisation of socioeconomic rights. These values are violated every day by public servants who abuse national resources which are supposed to address the basic needs of the poor. Even more disconcerting is the failure of political leaders and those in authority to establish cultures in every tier of government to promote our founding values.
Seen from all perspectives then, I come to the unfortunate conclusion that the culture of impunity is fuelled by the sense of entitlement of those in power, who seem to believe society owes them a debt of gratitude for the freedom we enjoy. This conclusion is supported by the series of public scandals for which no one has been held accountable.
First, the arms deal continues to fester, despite evidence that, at the very least, a judicial commission of inquiry needs to investigate this matter. Second, the Travelgate scandal saw those involved in defrauding the taxpayer simply being slapped on the wrist. The abuse of travel allowances occurred in a parliament in which MPs are well looked after in terms of salaries and benefits. Third, the open fronting by the ANC of black economic empowerment under the aegis of Chancellor House violates a central pillar of the constitution: equality under the law.
The ANC, at its landmark 2007 Polokwane conference, resolved to promote greater transparency in the funding of political parties. But the voices within the ANC supporting the unwinding of the deals involved, including the lucrative Hitachi deal to build a boiler at Eskom's Medupi Power Plant, have been silenced. No progress has been made - as was admitted by the chairman of the ANC Ethics Committee, Professor Ben Turok.
Fronting in businesses involving state-owned enterprises such as Eskom, gives the ruling party an unfair advantage over opposition parties. This is a serious threat to democracy. Opposition parties have little chance of competing with an incumbent party that has deep pockets courtesy of the South African taxpayer. Undermining political competition erodes the very foundations of our multiparty democracy. In addition, the participation of the governing party in fronting BEE deals undermines its capacity to regulate and hold other fronting entities and persons accountable.
Good governance is seriously undermined by the failure to demonstrate intolerance for corruption. It lays the foundations for impunity - and corruption in the private sector cannot be addressed adequately by a government which is compromised by being seen to be involved in questionable deals. Nor can the work of transforming the inherently corrupt apartheid culture be accomplished by a government which has been compromised.
South African citizens have a responsibility to acknowledge this elephant in the room and deal with it before it harms our democracy irreparably. Let us campaign for the independent anti-corruption agency - as proposed by the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution. It will give South Africans the platform from which to educate themselves, enforce the law and prevent corruption in their midst. We dare not fail future generations.
Source: Times Live
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Can Cele stop SAPS rot?
A secret document intercepted by the SA police in London alerted National Police Commissioner General Bheki Cele to the imminent outsourcing of the entire police forensics unit. "There was a huge document of completely outsourcing the department", he told Parliament yesterday. "A whole department? if we didn't find the document there would be no police forensics."
Cele said the document was signed on his behalf. This was one of several bombshells dropped by Cele before the National Assembly's police committee, where he and other top officials were called to explain ongoing supply chain management problems at the SA Police Force (SAPS). It comes after the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) probe was instituted into the allegations of R4-billion in corrupt tenders in both the SAPS and in the Public Works Department, a Public Protector's probe into the media reports of a second R500-million police headquarters leased on a dodgy tender and the recent resignation of Cele's deputy, the divisional commissioner of supply management unit, Lieutenant-General Hamilton Hlela and two of his subordinates, Lieutenant-General Matthews Siwundla and his subordinate, Major-General Stephanus Terblanche.
Cele said the head of forensics has also since resigned, while his replacement had already fired five staff members. A range of corrupt activities are under the microscope. He told a story of extraordinary shenanigans in tender procedures and rampant outsourcing, which left the police virtually without internal capacity with several dodgy deals placed before him to sign in a hurry without due explanation, allegedly by Hlela, shortly after he took office a year ago. He said he was almost made to sign off on a R4bn private-public partnership deal to build a massive new headquarters in Pretoria, but refused. He also refused to sign a contract for the upgrade of his and Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa's offices, even though the police were renting the building. He later found out that the lease on the current headquarters had been extended for 10 years, without his knowledge. While Cele painted himself as innocent, he revealed a sordid picture of a disabled SAPS with management and command and control systems, supply chain management, special projects all but collapsed.
The general also indicated that this may be the tip of the iceberg. MPs called the situation "the highest form of mismanagement", "disgusting", "shocking" and "discouraging". Cele said that if Parliament was a court, he would have had "to plead guilty", stressing that one year in the saddle was not enough to clean up "the mess". He called in the SIU in November last year after another contract was discovered which had been signed without his approval - this time for the manufacture of shirts for the police force.
Hlela yesterday denied that he had put any dodgy contracts before Cele. For instance, he said that the contract for the new R4bn headquarters had been signed off on by Cele's predecessor, Jackie Selebi. "He threw it out", said Hlela. MPs were concerned that the SAPS was poised to sign an agreement with Public Works to hand over its maintenance role of police properties to the SAPS, while it had no capacity. The police had a R13bn backlog in its own maintenance responsibilities, while some police stations being built since 2001 are yet to be completed.
The commissioner admitted frankly that much of the SAPS capacity had dwindled because many of the services had been outsourced. "Even our small capacity is arrested", he said. "For example, we have 34 bricklayers in SAPS, but they are not allowed to lay a brick. The work is given to brokers. There is a very popular broker in the (supply chain) department, Midway Two. The cost escalations come from there. It is a mad situation. That is why we have no capacity."
Gary Kruser, the new acting deputy commissioner in the supply chain management division, said Midway Two had won a host of tenders from the department. "We have an example where the cleaning services is done by the same company which owns the mechanics, building services and the same people who've got the Tetra network tenders (a R1 billion contract for an upgrade of Eastern Cape digital two-way radio systems). The same shareholders? all from the same company," he said. "I don't know how someone can be so efficient that they get all the tenders? I think we also need to have regular intelligence integrity checks on people to ensure integrity in tenders? I think not enough to have regulatory processes."
Public Works Department officials also stressed that the SIU investigation was drawing to a close and would feed into the Public Protector's report on the lease of the new headquarters. It is understood that the report will be completed by the middle of the month.
Source: IoL
Cele said the document was signed on his behalf. This was one of several bombshells dropped by Cele before the National Assembly's police committee, where he and other top officials were called to explain ongoing supply chain management problems at the SA Police Force (SAPS). It comes after the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) probe was instituted into the allegations of R4-billion in corrupt tenders in both the SAPS and in the Public Works Department, a Public Protector's probe into the media reports of a second R500-million police headquarters leased on a dodgy tender and the recent resignation of Cele's deputy, the divisional commissioner of supply management unit, Lieutenant-General Hamilton Hlela and two of his subordinates, Lieutenant-General Matthews Siwundla and his subordinate, Major-General Stephanus Terblanche.
Cele said the head of forensics has also since resigned, while his replacement had already fired five staff members. A range of corrupt activities are under the microscope. He told a story of extraordinary shenanigans in tender procedures and rampant outsourcing, which left the police virtually without internal capacity with several dodgy deals placed before him to sign in a hurry without due explanation, allegedly by Hlela, shortly after he took office a year ago. He said he was almost made to sign off on a R4bn private-public partnership deal to build a massive new headquarters in Pretoria, but refused. He also refused to sign a contract for the upgrade of his and Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa's offices, even though the police were renting the building. He later found out that the lease on the current headquarters had been extended for 10 years, without his knowledge. While Cele painted himself as innocent, he revealed a sordid picture of a disabled SAPS with management and command and control systems, supply chain management, special projects all but collapsed.
The general also indicated that this may be the tip of the iceberg. MPs called the situation "the highest form of mismanagement", "disgusting", "shocking" and "discouraging". Cele said that if Parliament was a court, he would have had "to plead guilty", stressing that one year in the saddle was not enough to clean up "the mess". He called in the SIU in November last year after another contract was discovered which had been signed without his approval - this time for the manufacture of shirts for the police force.
Hlela yesterday denied that he had put any dodgy contracts before Cele. For instance, he said that the contract for the new R4bn headquarters had been signed off on by Cele's predecessor, Jackie Selebi. "He threw it out", said Hlela. MPs were concerned that the SAPS was poised to sign an agreement with Public Works to hand over its maintenance role of police properties to the SAPS, while it had no capacity. The police had a R13bn backlog in its own maintenance responsibilities, while some police stations being built since 2001 are yet to be completed.
The commissioner admitted frankly that much of the SAPS capacity had dwindled because many of the services had been outsourced. "Even our small capacity is arrested", he said. "For example, we have 34 bricklayers in SAPS, but they are not allowed to lay a brick. The work is given to brokers. There is a very popular broker in the (supply chain) department, Midway Two. The cost escalations come from there. It is a mad situation. That is why we have no capacity."
Gary Kruser, the new acting deputy commissioner in the supply chain management division, said Midway Two had won a host of tenders from the department. "We have an example where the cleaning services is done by the same company which owns the mechanics, building services and the same people who've got the Tetra network tenders (a R1 billion contract for an upgrade of Eastern Cape digital two-way radio systems). The same shareholders? all from the same company," he said. "I don't know how someone can be so efficient that they get all the tenders? I think we also need to have regular intelligence integrity checks on people to ensure integrity in tenders? I think not enough to have regulatory processes."
Public Works Department officials also stressed that the SIU investigation was drawing to a close and would feed into the Public Protector's report on the lease of the new headquarters. It is understood that the report will be completed by the middle of the month.
Source: IoL
Thursday, September 2, 2010
‘Cele doesn’t need new HQ’
Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa has said there is no need for the police to lease an 18-storey building to house its headquarters, despite National Commissioner General Bheki Cele having signed a needs assessment which said it was necessary. The controversial R500 million lease agreement for the building in central Pretoria has been put on ice, as has another for new police headquarters in Durban, due to probes by the Public Protector and the Special Investigating Unit (SIU).
Mthethwa – answering questions in the National Assembly yesterday – also would not link last week’s resignation of the deputy national police commissioner to a probe into tender procedures in the police. The statements followed persistent speculation that Sunday Times journalist Mzilikazi wa Afrika’s arrest a month ago was linked to his exposé, days earlier, of alleged irregularities in the rental deal for the Pretoria building.
Cele’s deputy, Lieutenant- General Hamilton Hlela, and two of his subordinates resigned shortly after President Jacob Zuma proclaimed an SIU investigation into supply chain management at the SAPS and its building services division. Asked by Cope MP Leonard Ramatlakane whether procurement policies and tender requirements had been complied with relating to the 18-storey Sanlam Middestad building in Pretoria, the minister replied: “This is the responsibility of the Public Works Department. The SAPS identifies its accommodation needs by means assessment.” Pressed by Freedom Front Plus MP Pieter Groenewald about the need for a second headquarters for police, Mthethwa said: “There is no need for such an 18-storey building.”
However, Mthethwa later said the need for a bigger headquarters had been raised with MPs last year, along with the possibility of having one built. Asked for clarification, the minister’s parliamentary officer, Siyazi Tyatyam, said the Public Works Department had since been asked to look at alternatives, but that had been put on ice until the SIU investigation had been completed.
Groenewald said he was surprised the minister stated was no need for the building. “Why does public works then go and hire one based on a needs assessment of the police, when the minister says they don’t need a building that size? That is a very interesting response,” he said.
Public Protector Thuli Madonsela had indicated her preliminary report would be ready by the middle of this month, Groenewald said.
Source: IoL
Mthethwa – answering questions in the National Assembly yesterday – also would not link last week’s resignation of the deputy national police commissioner to a probe into tender procedures in the police. The statements followed persistent speculation that Sunday Times journalist Mzilikazi wa Afrika’s arrest a month ago was linked to his exposé, days earlier, of alleged irregularities in the rental deal for the Pretoria building.
Cele’s deputy, Lieutenant- General Hamilton Hlela, and two of his subordinates resigned shortly after President Jacob Zuma proclaimed an SIU investigation into supply chain management at the SAPS and its building services division. Asked by Cope MP Leonard Ramatlakane whether procurement policies and tender requirements had been complied with relating to the 18-storey Sanlam Middestad building in Pretoria, the minister replied: “This is the responsibility of the Public Works Department. The SAPS identifies its accommodation needs by means assessment.” Pressed by Freedom Front Plus MP Pieter Groenewald about the need for a second headquarters for police, Mthethwa said: “There is no need for such an 18-storey building.”
However, Mthethwa later said the need for a bigger headquarters had been raised with MPs last year, along with the possibility of having one built. Asked for clarification, the minister’s parliamentary officer, Siyazi Tyatyam, said the Public Works Department had since been asked to look at alternatives, but that had been put on ice until the SIU investigation had been completed.
Groenewald said he was surprised the minister stated was no need for the building. “Why does public works then go and hire one based on a needs assessment of the police, when the minister says they don’t need a building that size? That is a very interesting response,” he said.
Public Protector Thuli Madonsela had indicated her preliminary report would be ready by the middle of this month, Groenewald said.
Source: IoL
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Zuma under fire over Oilgate scandal
President Jacob Zuma was again accused by the opposition on Wednesday of covering up the involvement of senior ANC officials in a scandal that saw companies pay bribes to the regime of Saddam Hussein to secure contracts under the United Nations Food-for-Oil Programme. Zuma said in reply to a parliamentary question that he would not extend the lifespan of the Donen Commission, which probed the role of South African companies in the so-called Oilgate scandal, nor would he release its findings.
He said local companies which allegedly paid illicit surcharges to the Iraqi regime could not be prosecuted under South African law, and therefore the final recommendations of the commission "will be academic because no individual or companies will be held criminally liable". "I have been advised that in terms of our domestic law these nationals cannot be prosecuted."
The Donen Commission's report was handed to then president Thabo Mbeki four years ago and detailed the alleged knowledge senior officials had of shady oil deals with Iraq. The Sunday Times reported last year that the commission had fingered Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe and Human Settlements Minister Tokyo Sexwale. It said the commission found that Motlanthe, who was ANC secretary general at the time, was privy to "material information" relating to businessman Sandi Majali's deals with the former Iraqi regime. The newspaper reported that the commission also cast doubt on a submission by Sexwale that he did not know that Imvume Management, of which he was co-director, had paid money to the Iraqi government.
Zuma said that instead of extending the probe, he would ask the justice minister and the South African Law Reform Commission to review the Donen Commission's report, along with the international Independent Inquiry Committee that probed the abuse of the programme, and consider changing the law. He said that before he considered releasing the findings of the commission, "the adverse findings made against certain subjects" should be presented to them first to allow them to comment.
In 2005, the Independent Inquiry Committee found that Iraq received $1.8 billion in illicit surcharges and kickbacks and that the UN had failed to properly oversee the programme. More than 200 companies were involved in these illicit payments, severely undermining the aims of the programme, which allowed Iraq to sell oil in order to buy food and medicines for its citizens. The Donen Commission was then tasked with probing the truth of UN allegations against Imvume and a number of companies including Glaxo Wellcome SA, Montega Trading and Omni Oil.
The probe was also referred to Public Protector Lawrence Mushwana after it was alleged that PetroSA, through Imvume Management, funnelled R11 million of public money to the ANC before the 2004 election. Mushwana said the transaction was between the ANC and Imvume - which were private entities.
Democratic Alliance parliamentary leader Athol Trollip said Zuma's reasons for not releasing the report were "spurious". "The alleged involvement of top ANC officials... means that the truth about yet another instance of power abuse and gross misconduct by the ANC government will, in all likelihood, be hidden indefinitely from public scrutiny."
Trollip said the commission had been set up in the public interest, but by refusing to release its findings "the president has deemed the interests of those implicated in the report to be more important than the interests of the public. "This is absurd. It seems to have evaded the president, and more worryingly the state legal advisors he consulted, in constructing this reply, that a commission of investigation and a criminal investigation are two completely separate forms of inquiry. That the commission will lead to no criminal charges against subjects found to be guilty of misconduct, bears no relevance to whether the commission should be allowed to conduct an investigation."
Source: IoL
He said local companies which allegedly paid illicit surcharges to the Iraqi regime could not be prosecuted under South African law, and therefore the final recommendations of the commission "will be academic because no individual or companies will be held criminally liable". "I have been advised that in terms of our domestic law these nationals cannot be prosecuted."
The Donen Commission's report was handed to then president Thabo Mbeki four years ago and detailed the alleged knowledge senior officials had of shady oil deals with Iraq. The Sunday Times reported last year that the commission had fingered Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe and Human Settlements Minister Tokyo Sexwale. It said the commission found that Motlanthe, who was ANC secretary general at the time, was privy to "material information" relating to businessman Sandi Majali's deals with the former Iraqi regime. The newspaper reported that the commission also cast doubt on a submission by Sexwale that he did not know that Imvume Management, of which he was co-director, had paid money to the Iraqi government.
Zuma said that instead of extending the probe, he would ask the justice minister and the South African Law Reform Commission to review the Donen Commission's report, along with the international Independent Inquiry Committee that probed the abuse of the programme, and consider changing the law. He said that before he considered releasing the findings of the commission, "the adverse findings made against certain subjects" should be presented to them first to allow them to comment.
In 2005, the Independent Inquiry Committee found that Iraq received $1.8 billion in illicit surcharges and kickbacks and that the UN had failed to properly oversee the programme. More than 200 companies were involved in these illicit payments, severely undermining the aims of the programme, which allowed Iraq to sell oil in order to buy food and medicines for its citizens. The Donen Commission was then tasked with probing the truth of UN allegations against Imvume and a number of companies including Glaxo Wellcome SA, Montega Trading and Omni Oil.
The probe was also referred to Public Protector Lawrence Mushwana after it was alleged that PetroSA, through Imvume Management, funnelled R11 million of public money to the ANC before the 2004 election. Mushwana said the transaction was between the ANC and Imvume - which were private entities.
Democratic Alliance parliamentary leader Athol Trollip said Zuma's reasons for not releasing the report were "spurious". "The alleged involvement of top ANC officials... means that the truth about yet another instance of power abuse and gross misconduct by the ANC government will, in all likelihood, be hidden indefinitely from public scrutiny."
Trollip said the commission had been set up in the public interest, but by refusing to release its findings "the president has deemed the interests of those implicated in the report to be more important than the interests of the public. "This is absurd. It seems to have evaded the president, and more worryingly the state legal advisors he consulted, in constructing this reply, that a commission of investigation and a criminal investigation are two completely separate forms of inquiry. That the commission will lead to no criminal charges against subjects found to be guilty of misconduct, bears no relevance to whether the commission should be allowed to conduct an investigation."
Source: IoL
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Cele's dodgy R500m deal likely to face two probes
A R500-million deal to move police top brass to a building owned by a politically connected billionaire - without a public tender process - is likely to face two probes. The Public Protector's office this week confirmed it was investigating the lease, while the corruption-busting Special Investigating Unit has launched one of its "biggest ever" probes into irregular government leases worth billions of rands.
The deal - exposed by the Sunday Times last week - will involve moving police headquarters to a building owned by Roux Shabangu at a cost to taxpayers of over R500-million, without following normal tender procedures; it is expected to form part of the SIU probe. The SIU would neither confirm nor deny this, saying it was probing possible irregularities in "numerous leases negotiated by DPW (the Department of Public Works) ... some of which involve significant amounts". The SIU is an elite unit that fights corruption through forensic investigations and follows up with litigation to retrieve public funds.
Both Shabangu and police chief General Bheki Cele, who signed off on the proposed financial terms of the deal, sent threatening letters to the Sunday Times this week in an apparent bid to gag the newspaper from publishing further details of the dodgy deal - which has raised eyebrows not only due to the lack of a tender, but also because the SAPS signed a 10-year lease with Shabangu while it still has a 10-year lease on its existing head office, Wachthuis. The SIU said the investigation into government leases was sparked by a request from the minister of public works, Geoff Doidge, to look into "serious concerns he had regarding procurement processes in the department", a spokesman said on Friday. "The Department of Public Works investigation will be one of the biggest ever launched by the SIU," the spokesman said.
This week Public Protector Thuli Madonsela launched an investigation into the SAPS lease, responding to a complaint lodged by the Institute for Accountability in Southern Africa. "I hope to be in a position to issue my report at the beginning of September," she said in a letter sent to the institute on Tuesday.
Shabangu was not involved in any "underhanded dealings" in clinching the deal, his lawyer, Natalie Visagie, said on Friday. "My client had no interaction or contact with Cele at all. The allegation that Cele signed the lease is completely false. "The building was sold to my client and it was a condition of the sale that my client would obtain SAPS as a lessee."
Although Shabangu initially denied his political connections, his lawyer said that "President (Jacob) Zuma is a friend of long standing of my client", but insisted "to the best of my client's knowledge, Zuma did not bring to bear any political influence (on awarding the lease)". Cele, meanwhile, has insisted that the Department of Public Works had exonerated him of any wrongdoing by pointing out that the lease did not need to go out to tender because it was a negotiated contract. He also said it was "misleading" and "incorrect" to say he had clinched the deal with Shabangu. Cele said he simply signed a "needs assessment" because the SAPS headquarters "was not big enough for it to carry out its administrative functions". "With that his role as the accounting officer of the SAPS ended," his office said. "The Department of Public Works then took over the process."
But documents in the Sunday Times's possession show that on June 1 Cele signed off on the proposed financial terms of the lease. The documents, while not the final lease issued, consist of an offer document headed "Agreement of Lease" containing Shabangu's detailed proposed rentals, and a document signed off by Cele entitled "Actual cost calculations: leasing of properties to accommodate government departments", largely reflecting the same numbers.
This week neither public works nor the SAPS could adequately explain why the R500-million deal did not go out to public tender - as required by Treasury rules. The rules require all government contracts over R500000 to go through a competitive bid process. If a service is needed really urgently, departments are allowed to negotiate directly with a contractor. But only if they've given good reasons, which must be as a result of unforeseen circumstances, including "a catastrophic event".
A government official familiar with tender compliance rules, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said contracts were typically negotiated directly only after an open bidding process had failed to produce a suitable candidate. Accommodation crunches caused by bad planning would result in short-term emergency solutions - not 10-year leases, he said. "On what basis is the relocation of an entire building urgent? You don't have to move 500 people quickly. Where is the case for urgency?"
Attempts to get answers from public works proved fruitless. "I don't want to talk to the Sunday Times ever again," shouted spokesman Lucky Nchalibane, referring all queries to special projects deputy director-general Mandla Mabuza. But Mabuza failed to explain why the department decided not to follow normal tender procedures.
This week Cele's office also refused to supply reasons why the move was deemed so urgent it warranted dispensing with normal tender processes, or documents to support his claims, including the needs assessment he claimed was the last document he signed. "After an appropriate apology, retraction and correction are published, we will consider whether to make available to you the information that has been requested," said a Major-General Julius Molefe. "In the circumstances you leave General Cele with no option but to seek proper redress through other means provided by the law."
Visagie also threatened to hold the Sunday Times liable for any damages suffered by Shabangu, if another deal he was planning to clinch with the SAPS - for renting a building in Durban - fell through because of negative publicity.
Source: Times Live
The deal - exposed by the Sunday Times last week - will involve moving police headquarters to a building owned by Roux Shabangu at a cost to taxpayers of over R500-million, without following normal tender procedures; it is expected to form part of the SIU probe. The SIU would neither confirm nor deny this, saying it was probing possible irregularities in "numerous leases negotiated by DPW (the Department of Public Works) ... some of which involve significant amounts". The SIU is an elite unit that fights corruption through forensic investigations and follows up with litigation to retrieve public funds.
Both Shabangu and police chief General Bheki Cele, who signed off on the proposed financial terms of the deal, sent threatening letters to the Sunday Times this week in an apparent bid to gag the newspaper from publishing further details of the dodgy deal - which has raised eyebrows not only due to the lack of a tender, but also because the SAPS signed a 10-year lease with Shabangu while it still has a 10-year lease on its existing head office, Wachthuis. The SIU said the investigation into government leases was sparked by a request from the minister of public works, Geoff Doidge, to look into "serious concerns he had regarding procurement processes in the department", a spokesman said on Friday. "The Department of Public Works investigation will be one of the biggest ever launched by the SIU," the spokesman said.
This week Public Protector Thuli Madonsela launched an investigation into the SAPS lease, responding to a complaint lodged by the Institute for Accountability in Southern Africa. "I hope to be in a position to issue my report at the beginning of September," she said in a letter sent to the institute on Tuesday.
Shabangu was not involved in any "underhanded dealings" in clinching the deal, his lawyer, Natalie Visagie, said on Friday. "My client had no interaction or contact with Cele at all. The allegation that Cele signed the lease is completely false. "The building was sold to my client and it was a condition of the sale that my client would obtain SAPS as a lessee."
Although Shabangu initially denied his political connections, his lawyer said that "President (Jacob) Zuma is a friend of long standing of my client", but insisted "to the best of my client's knowledge, Zuma did not bring to bear any political influence (on awarding the lease)". Cele, meanwhile, has insisted that the Department of Public Works had exonerated him of any wrongdoing by pointing out that the lease did not need to go out to tender because it was a negotiated contract. He also said it was "misleading" and "incorrect" to say he had clinched the deal with Shabangu. Cele said he simply signed a "needs assessment" because the SAPS headquarters "was not big enough for it to carry out its administrative functions". "With that his role as the accounting officer of the SAPS ended," his office said. "The Department of Public Works then took over the process."
But documents in the Sunday Times's possession show that on June 1 Cele signed off on the proposed financial terms of the lease. The documents, while not the final lease issued, consist of an offer document headed "Agreement of Lease" containing Shabangu's detailed proposed rentals, and a document signed off by Cele entitled "Actual cost calculations: leasing of properties to accommodate government departments", largely reflecting the same numbers.
This week neither public works nor the SAPS could adequately explain why the R500-million deal did not go out to public tender - as required by Treasury rules. The rules require all government contracts over R500000 to go through a competitive bid process. If a service is needed really urgently, departments are allowed to negotiate directly with a contractor. But only if they've given good reasons, which must be as a result of unforeseen circumstances, including "a catastrophic event".
A government official familiar with tender compliance rules, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said contracts were typically negotiated directly only after an open bidding process had failed to produce a suitable candidate. Accommodation crunches caused by bad planning would result in short-term emergency solutions - not 10-year leases, he said. "On what basis is the relocation of an entire building urgent? You don't have to move 500 people quickly. Where is the case for urgency?"
Attempts to get answers from public works proved fruitless. "I don't want to talk to the Sunday Times ever again," shouted spokesman Lucky Nchalibane, referring all queries to special projects deputy director-general Mandla Mabuza. But Mabuza failed to explain why the department decided not to follow normal tender procedures.
This week Cele's office also refused to supply reasons why the move was deemed so urgent it warranted dispensing with normal tender processes, or documents to support his claims, including the needs assessment he claimed was the last document he signed. "After an appropriate apology, retraction and correction are published, we will consider whether to make available to you the information that has been requested," said a Major-General Julius Molefe. "In the circumstances you leave General Cele with no option but to seek proper redress through other means provided by the law."
Visagie also threatened to hold the Sunday Times liable for any damages suffered by Shabangu, if another deal he was planning to clinch with the SAPS - for renting a building in Durban - fell through because of negative publicity.
Source: Times Live
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Public Protector to probe Malema tenders
The Public Protector is to probe tenders awarded to the company SGL Engineering Projects, on whose board ANC Youth League president Julius Malema apparently serves as a director. The tenders include a R2,1-million sewerage upgrade, R39,3-million sewerage reticulation project, and a R27,9-million street paving and
drainage contract, Kgalalelo Masibi, a spokesperson for the Office of the Public Protector, said on Friday . Also under investigation were a R28-million tender for several municipal infrastructure projects and a R2-billion roads tender, she said.
The investigation followed complaints by AfriForum Youth and the Congress of the People. "The Public Protector can only investigate the conduct of public authorities," said Masibi. "The investigation will focus on whether any conduct in the award or management of the contracts in question was improper," she said.
Public Protector advocate Thuli Madonsela earlier said her office had received a number of complaints about alleged tender irregularities in various municipalities across Limpopo. "I have assembled a team to undertake this task. I have also initiated talks with the Auditor General with a view to conduct a joint investigation," she said.
In an interview with the Mail & Guardian this week, Malema was asked if he thought it was fair to ask how he had accumulated his wealth at such a young age. Malema replied: "It's very fair. But write facts. What the media did [showed] it was never interested in the facts. I am not rich. I do not have millions as reported." He said that all his houses had bonds and were financed by banks. "I've never got any lucrative tender from anybody, including the company called SGL. "I live on handouts most of the time. If I don't have food to eat, I can call Cassel Mathale [premier of Limpopo] and say: "Chief, can you help me? I've got nothing here." I can call Thaba Mufamadi, I can call Pule Mabe [ANCYL treasurer general] or Mbalula. They all do the same with me. That's how we have come to relate to each other."
Source: Mail & Guardian
drainage contract, Kgalalelo Masibi, a spokesperson for the Office of the Public Protector, said on Friday . Also under investigation were a R28-million tender for several municipal infrastructure projects and a R2-billion roads tender, she said.
The investigation followed complaints by AfriForum Youth and the Congress of the People. "The Public Protector can only investigate the conduct of public authorities," said Masibi. "The investigation will focus on whether any conduct in the award or management of the contracts in question was improper," she said.
Public Protector advocate Thuli Madonsela earlier said her office had received a number of complaints about alleged tender irregularities in various municipalities across Limpopo. "I have assembled a team to undertake this task. I have also initiated talks with the Auditor General with a view to conduct a joint investigation," she said.
In an interview with the Mail & Guardian this week, Malema was asked if he thought it was fair to ask how he had accumulated his wealth at such a young age. Malema replied: "It's very fair. But write facts. What the media did [showed] it was never interested in the facts. I am not rich. I do not have millions as reported." He said that all his houses had bonds and were financed by banks. "I've never got any lucrative tender from anybody, including the company called SGL. "I live on handouts most of the time. If I don't have food to eat, I can call Cassel Mathale [premier of Limpopo] and say: "Chief, can you help me? I've got nothing here." I can call Thaba Mufamadi, I can call Pule Mabe [ANCYL treasurer general] or Mbalula. They all do the same with me. That's how we have come to relate to each other."
Source: Mail & Guardian
Friday, March 26, 2010
Cosatu welcomes Public Protector finding on Moosa
The Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) on Friday expressed concern after the Public Protector found that former Eskom chairperson Valli Moosa acted improperly when the utility awarded a contract for the Medupi power station to the Hitachi consortium.
Former Public Protector Lawrence Mushwana found that Moosa failed to manage a conflict of interest arising from the 25% stake of African National Congress (ANC) investment company Chancellor House in Hitachi Power Africa. This stake means that the ruling party stands to make up to R5,8-billion out of the contract. "Cosatu welcomes the report and congratulates Comrade Lawrence Mushwana for exposing the fact that the ANC stood to benefit by up to R5,8-billion," it said.
Mushwana found that Moosa, a member of the ANC's national executive committee, failed to declare the conflict of interest and failed to recuse himself from the board's deliberations. These failings could have resulted "in the reasonable perception that Mr Moosa was biased in respect of the ... award", Mushwana said in his report tabled in Parliament on Thursday. He recommended that Public Enterprises Minister Barbara Hogan consider introducing legislation to regulate the way business is conducted between government entities and political parties.
Cosatu backed his call and said his finding was so disturbing that Eskom's 25% tariff increases over the next three years should be reviewed. "There is now a serious question mark against whether there were vested interests involved in supporting the increases." Mushwana said Moosa's improper conduct did not affect the validity of the deal, which has been criticised by the political opposition.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Former Public Protector Lawrence Mushwana found that Moosa failed to manage a conflict of interest arising from the 25% stake of African National Congress (ANC) investment company Chancellor House in Hitachi Power Africa. This stake means that the ruling party stands to make up to R5,8-billion out of the contract. "Cosatu welcomes the report and congratulates Comrade Lawrence Mushwana for exposing the fact that the ANC stood to benefit by up to R5,8-billion," it said.
Mushwana found that Moosa, a member of the ANC's national executive committee, failed to declare the conflict of interest and failed to recuse himself from the board's deliberations. These failings could have resulted "in the reasonable perception that Mr Moosa was biased in respect of the ... award", Mushwana said in his report tabled in Parliament on Thursday. He recommended that Public Enterprises Minister Barbara Hogan consider introducing legislation to regulate the way business is conducted between government entities and political parties.
Cosatu backed his call and said his finding was so disturbing that Eskom's 25% tariff increases over the next three years should be reviewed. "There is now a serious question mark against whether there were vested interests involved in supporting the increases." Mushwana said Moosa's improper conduct did not affect the validity of the deal, which has been criticised by the political opposition.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Resume of Thuli Madonsela
Ms. Thulisile (Thuli) Nomkhosi Madonsela is a human rights lawyer, equality expert, constitutional analyst and policy specialist who holds a BA Law (UNISWA, 1987) and LLB (Wits, 1990). In 1994, she was awarded a Harvard Scholarship to pursue an LLM degree but forfeited the opportunity in favour of her constitution drafting work. In addition to partial LLM studies at the University of Pretoria and the University of the Witwatersrand, her post graduate and vocational training has included Constitutional Analysis and Litigation, Human Rights, Legal Drafting, Equality and Non-discrimination (focusing on race, gender, disability, social context awareness and diversity management), Strategic Planning, Scenario Planning, Project Management, Leadership and Management Development, Governance and Adult Education. She is also a professionally trained mediator, arbitrator, negotiator, trainer and assessor.
Ms. Madonsela is a full-time Commissioner in the South African Law Reform Commission (SALRC). She left the public service at the rank of Deputy Director General in 2003 to start and manage the Waweth Law and Policy Research Agency while serving as the Executive Chairperson of the Centre for Reconciliation and Equality Studies (CRES). Her work as Full-time Commissioner involves supervising the entire programme of the SA Law Reform Commission, liaison with stakeholders and serving as Project Leader for several projects.
Her key current projects include Project 25(Updating and Constitutional Alignment of all SA Statutes), Review of the Interpretation Act and Adult Prostitution. Her relationship with the SALRC dates back to her membership of the Project Committee on Harmonisation of Indigenous Law in the early nineties.
Ms. Madonsela was one of the11 Technical Experts appointed to assist the Constitutional Assembly in drafting South Africa’s new Constitution (1994-5). She was also a member of a Task Team that prepared constitutional inputs for the Gauteng Province of the ANC. She presented the final document at the ANC Gauteng Constitutional Conference in March 1995.
She served on the Task Team that drafted the Local Government Transition Act (1993-4) and the one that drafted the Employment Equity Act and Green Paper on Employment Equity. (1995-7). She is co-architect of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act(Equality Act) and also project managed the drafting process, including taking the Act through Parliament. She contributed to the early version of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act and to the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act (1998), the stillborn Customary Law of Succession Amendment Bill (1998). She prepared a legal opinion that unlocked the passing of the Repeal of the Black Administration Act (2006). She has participated in the drafting of several regulations and Codes of Good Practice under the Employment Equity Act and regulations under the Equality Act. As a Member of a Judicial Transformation Task Team she contributed to the early draft of the Judicial Service Amendment Act, 2008, the Judicial Education Institute Act, 2008 and negotiations with the leadership of the judiciary on these and related matters.
She is the co-architect and coordinated the drafting of Justice Vision 2000, the first comprehensive strategic plan for transforming the justice system and state legal services (1997). She initially led the drafting of the Victim’s Charter (until 2001) and authored the preamble to the final draft. She is one of the core drafters of the Legal Services Charter (2005-7) the National Plan of Action on Human Rights (1998) and National Declaration on Racism (2000). She coordinated a departmental Batho Pele Process that culminated in a Draft Customer Service Charter She served in Task Teams that drafted the National Gender Policy Framework, the Gender Policy Statement of the Department of Justice and the initial Employment Equity Policy of the Department of Justice. In recent years she has coordinated and participated in the drafting of Integrated Human Resources Policies, Gender Policies and Strategies for various government departments and organizations.
She has represented the country in and participated as a drafter and negotiator in various international forums, including the Beijing + 5 Conference (New York 2000), Beijing+10 Conference (New York 2005) and World Conference against Racism & Related Intolerances (WCAR, Geneva and Durban 2001). She was a member of the Substance and Preparatory Committees on WCAR and participated in the drafting of the outcomes document. She co-drafted and chaired the session of SADC Ministers of Justice and Women Affairs that adopted the SADC Addendum on the Prevention and Eradication of Violence against Women and Children (1998). She recently served in AU processes that drafted the AU Gender Policy. She has been a core drafter of various international Country Reports, including the Convention on the elimination of All Forms of Racial discrimination (CERD), Convention on the elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), Convention of the Rights of The Child, Copenhagen Declaration on Social Integration, African Charter on Human and People’s Rights and the SADC Declaration on Gender and Development.
She was a member of an EU Team that evaluated the impact of apartheid human rights funding and needs of the new democracy (1995), a UN Team that conducted a Human Rights Needs Assessment in 14 SADC countries (2002) and another that prepared a Common Country Assessment Report for South Africa (2006). She co-led a Justice delegation (MPs, Judicial Officers and Management) on a study tour on best practices in the administration of justice covering the USA, Jamaica, Chile, Bolivia and Brazil (1996).) She accompanied the Minister of Justice on a similar study to several states in Germany (1998) and co-led a study tour on equality and antidiscrimination law and the judiciary to Australia (2001)
A prolific writer and author, Thuli Madonsela conceptualized, co-drafted and directed the drafting of a Bench Book for Equality Courts, a Resource book for Equality Court Clerks (2002) and a Legal Advice Handbook on Family Law and Related Matters. She has authored a number of books, book-chapters, articles, papers, ministerial speeches and reports. She also provides legal advice and capacity building on various aspects of the law and policy focusing on justice and public sector transformation.
A former Chief Director: Transformation and Equity and Deputy Executive Director of the Planning Unit in the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, Thuli Madonsela was a member of the inaugural Commission on Employment Equity (1999-2004). She chaired the Equality Legislation Implementation Team which coordinated the implementation of the Equality Act until 2001, when she became Project Manager for the Equality Legislation Education Unit for judicial education. Until recently, she was a member of the Legal Services Charter Steering Committee, a member of the Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action Board of the Department of Defence and a Member of the Justice Ministerial Task Team on the Transformation of the Judiciary. She also served as Chairperson of the SA Labour Development Trust, a project of COSATU, NACTU and FEDUSA (1999-2003), a Board Member of SERVCON Housing Solutions and a Member of the Black Empowerment Advisory Board of the Department of Public Works. She is a member of the National Forum against Racism, the South African Human Rights Commission Section 5 Committee on Equality and has been a member of various transformation task teams. A founder member and member of the Interim National Executive of the South African Women Lawyers (SAWLA), she now serves in the Gauteng Chapter Executive and was instrumental in the formation of the International Association of Women Judges (IAWJ).
In early 2009, Ms. Madonsela lead a task team of the Office of the Status of Women in the Presidency to prepare a discussion document for the incoming Cabinet on the Proposed Women’s Ministry. SAWID takes great pleasure in nominating Ms. Madonsela for the position of Public Protector, convinced that her immense experience and knowledge will uniquely qualify her for the role of South African Public Protector.
Source: ANC
Ms. Madonsela is a full-time Commissioner in the South African Law Reform Commission (SALRC). She left the public service at the rank of Deputy Director General in 2003 to start and manage the Waweth Law and Policy Research Agency while serving as the Executive Chairperson of the Centre for Reconciliation and Equality Studies (CRES). Her work as Full-time Commissioner involves supervising the entire programme of the SA Law Reform Commission, liaison with stakeholders and serving as Project Leader for several projects.
Her key current projects include Project 25(Updating and Constitutional Alignment of all SA Statutes), Review of the Interpretation Act and Adult Prostitution. Her relationship with the SALRC dates back to her membership of the Project Committee on Harmonisation of Indigenous Law in the early nineties.
Ms. Madonsela was one of the11 Technical Experts appointed to assist the Constitutional Assembly in drafting South Africa’s new Constitution (1994-5). She was also a member of a Task Team that prepared constitutional inputs for the Gauteng Province of the ANC. She presented the final document at the ANC Gauteng Constitutional Conference in March 1995.
She served on the Task Team that drafted the Local Government Transition Act (1993-4) and the one that drafted the Employment Equity Act and Green Paper on Employment Equity. (1995-7). She is co-architect of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act(Equality Act) and also project managed the drafting process, including taking the Act through Parliament. She contributed to the early version of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act and to the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act (1998), the stillborn Customary Law of Succession Amendment Bill (1998). She prepared a legal opinion that unlocked the passing of the Repeal of the Black Administration Act (2006). She has participated in the drafting of several regulations and Codes of Good Practice under the Employment Equity Act and regulations under the Equality Act. As a Member of a Judicial Transformation Task Team she contributed to the early draft of the Judicial Service Amendment Act, 2008, the Judicial Education Institute Act, 2008 and negotiations with the leadership of the judiciary on these and related matters.
She is the co-architect and coordinated the drafting of Justice Vision 2000, the first comprehensive strategic plan for transforming the justice system and state legal services (1997). She initially led the drafting of the Victim’s Charter (until 2001) and authored the preamble to the final draft. She is one of the core drafters of the Legal Services Charter (2005-7) the National Plan of Action on Human Rights (1998) and National Declaration on Racism (2000). She coordinated a departmental Batho Pele Process that culminated in a Draft Customer Service Charter She served in Task Teams that drafted the National Gender Policy Framework, the Gender Policy Statement of the Department of Justice and the initial Employment Equity Policy of the Department of Justice. In recent years she has coordinated and participated in the drafting of Integrated Human Resources Policies, Gender Policies and Strategies for various government departments and organizations.
She has represented the country in and participated as a drafter and negotiator in various international forums, including the Beijing + 5 Conference (New York 2000), Beijing+10 Conference (New York 2005) and World Conference against Racism & Related Intolerances (WCAR, Geneva and Durban 2001). She was a member of the Substance and Preparatory Committees on WCAR and participated in the drafting of the outcomes document. She co-drafted and chaired the session of SADC Ministers of Justice and Women Affairs that adopted the SADC Addendum on the Prevention and Eradication of Violence against Women and Children (1998). She recently served in AU processes that drafted the AU Gender Policy. She has been a core drafter of various international Country Reports, including the Convention on the elimination of All Forms of Racial discrimination (CERD), Convention on the elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), Convention of the Rights of The Child, Copenhagen Declaration on Social Integration, African Charter on Human and People’s Rights and the SADC Declaration on Gender and Development.
She was a member of an EU Team that evaluated the impact of apartheid human rights funding and needs of the new democracy (1995), a UN Team that conducted a Human Rights Needs Assessment in 14 SADC countries (2002) and another that prepared a Common Country Assessment Report for South Africa (2006). She co-led a Justice delegation (MPs, Judicial Officers and Management) on a study tour on best practices in the administration of justice covering the USA, Jamaica, Chile, Bolivia and Brazil (1996).) She accompanied the Minister of Justice on a similar study to several states in Germany (1998) and co-led a study tour on equality and antidiscrimination law and the judiciary to Australia (2001)
A prolific writer and author, Thuli Madonsela conceptualized, co-drafted and directed the drafting of a Bench Book for Equality Courts, a Resource book for Equality Court Clerks (2002) and a Legal Advice Handbook on Family Law and Related Matters. She has authored a number of books, book-chapters, articles, papers, ministerial speeches and reports. She also provides legal advice and capacity building on various aspects of the law and policy focusing on justice and public sector transformation.
A former Chief Director: Transformation and Equity and Deputy Executive Director of the Planning Unit in the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, Thuli Madonsela was a member of the inaugural Commission on Employment Equity (1999-2004). She chaired the Equality Legislation Implementation Team which coordinated the implementation of the Equality Act until 2001, when she became Project Manager for the Equality Legislation Education Unit for judicial education. Until recently, she was a member of the Legal Services Charter Steering Committee, a member of the Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action Board of the Department of Defence and a Member of the Justice Ministerial Task Team on the Transformation of the Judiciary. She also served as Chairperson of the SA Labour Development Trust, a project of COSATU, NACTU and FEDUSA (1999-2003), a Board Member of SERVCON Housing Solutions and a Member of the Black Empowerment Advisory Board of the Department of Public Works. She is a member of the National Forum against Racism, the South African Human Rights Commission Section 5 Committee on Equality and has been a member of various transformation task teams. A founder member and member of the Interim National Executive of the South African Women Lawyers (SAWLA), she now serves in the Gauteng Chapter Executive and was instrumental in the formation of the International Association of Women Judges (IAWJ).
In early 2009, Ms. Madonsela lead a task team of the Office of the Status of Women in the Presidency to prepare a discussion document for the incoming Cabinet on the Proposed Women’s Ministry. SAWID takes great pleasure in nominating Ms. Madonsela for the position of Public Protector, convinced that her immense experience and knowledge will uniquely qualify her for the role of South African Public Protector.
Source: ANC
Monday, August 3, 2009
Protector mulls challenge to Oilgate ruling
Public Protector Lawrence Mushwana is considering appealing against a high court judgement setting aside his 2005 report on the so-called "Oilgate" scandal, his office said on Monday.
"The Public Protector is currently considering legal advice regarding a possible appeal against the setting aside of the report by the high court and will take a decision in this regard in due course," a spokesperson for his office said in a statement.
The scandal involved the alleged irregular payment of R15-million by PetroSA to Imvume Management, which had claimed it needed bridging finance to pay oil-supply company Glencore for a shipment of oil four days from harbour. However, Imvume failed to pay Glencore, and PetroSA had to pay another R15-million directly to Glencore. Part of the first payment -- R11-million -- was allegedly used for the ANC's 2004 election campaign. In his report, Mushwana found no evidence of wrongdoing in the scandal. He determined that the ANC and Imvume were not public entities and therefore did not perform public functions and as such were not part of government.
"We look forward to a more thorough investigation of the Oilgate saga by the Public Protector, and to the prospect of genuine accountability for the abuse of public money for party political purposes uncovered by our reporting," The high court ruling said.
Source: Mail & Guardian
"The Public Protector is currently considering legal advice regarding a possible appeal against the setting aside of the report by the high court and will take a decision in this regard in due course," a spokesperson for his office said in a statement.
The scandal involved the alleged irregular payment of R15-million by PetroSA to Imvume Management, which had claimed it needed bridging finance to pay oil-supply company Glencore for a shipment of oil four days from harbour. However, Imvume failed to pay Glencore, and PetroSA had to pay another R15-million directly to Glencore. Part of the first payment -- R11-million -- was allegedly used for the ANC's 2004 election campaign. In his report, Mushwana found no evidence of wrongdoing in the scandal. He determined that the ANC and Imvume were not public entities and therefore did not perform public functions and as such were not part of government.
"We look forward to a more thorough investigation of the Oilgate saga by the Public Protector, and to the prospect of genuine accountability for the abuse of public money for party political purposes uncovered by our reporting," The high court ruling said.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Thursday, August 21, 2003
New arms-deal claim as Fakie defends report
As Auditor-General Shauket Fakie defended the final report of the arms deal investigation before Parliament on Wednesday, a new allegation emerged of irregularities in the awarding of sub-contracts.
Briefing the standing committee on public accounts (Scopa), the AG maintained that media claims of omissions and "doctoring" in the final report were unfounded, and impugned the dignity of his office.
He, again, called on the watchdog committee to protect the integrity of his office.
Fakie said the draft and final reports on the probe into the multi-billion rand deal differed only in style and format, and that the executive did not, in any way, influence the content of the report.
"I want to state categorically that due process was followed and that no changes were made to the report based on pressure from the president or the executive," he said.
The deal was investigated by the AG, the Public Protector and the Directorate of Public Prosecutions, who found no evidence of unlawful conduct by the state.
Scopa chairman Francois Beukman said the committee would evaluate the AG's responses, as well as a legal opinion received regarding the media allegations, before presenting a resolution to the House.
The legal opinion, commissioned by Beukman, found that claims that the final report was doctored were not unsubstantiated.
Source: Polity.org
Briefing the standing committee on public accounts (Scopa), the AG maintained that media claims of omissions and "doctoring" in the final report were unfounded, and impugned the dignity of his office.
He, again, called on the watchdog committee to protect the integrity of his office.
Fakie said the draft and final reports on the probe into the multi-billion rand deal differed only in style and format, and that the executive did not, in any way, influence the content of the report.
"I want to state categorically that due process was followed and that no changes were made to the report based on pressure from the president or the executive," he said.
The deal was investigated by the AG, the Public Protector and the Directorate of Public Prosecutions, who found no evidence of unlawful conduct by the state.
Scopa chairman Francois Beukman said the committee would evaluate the AG's responses, as well as a legal opinion received regarding the media allegations, before presenting a resolution to the House.
The legal opinion, commissioned by Beukman, found that claims that the final report was doctored were not unsubstantiated.
Source: Polity.org
Wednesday, August 21, 2002
Opposition hails Nthai's withdrawal
Opposition parties on Wednesday welcomed former Northern Province MEC Seth Nthai's decision to withdraw his nomination to succeed Public Protector Selby Baqwa, while the ANC warned that unwarranted attacks on individuals seeking public office would make the country poorer. Nthai was nominated by the ANC's secretary-general, Kgalema Motlanthe. "It's a pity he's withdrawn. He's an advocate and a well-learned man with reputable credentials," ANC national spokesperson Smuts Ngonyama said. The ANC leadership had not asked Nthai to withdraw in the light of the controversy surrounding his nomination. Ngonyama criticised what he said was "unnecessary and undue pressure" as well as "attacks for no apparent reason" on individuals who were nominated for public posts. "We don't have many good people. We have a number of challenges and we have to be very careful in the manner we treat those who are prepared to make sacrifices for our country. "Our country will actually fall short of high quality brains when a good person is attacked and his integrity questioned... It is not good for our country. We need to protect those who want to make sacrifices," Ngonyama said.
This did not mean negative issues could not be raised, but this should be done in a responsible manner. In his reaction, the DA's Hendrik Schmidt said sound minds had prevailed. "Advocate Nthai's decision to step down is a victory for democracy." A nomination from the ANC secretary general amounted to a directive from the party's leadership. "This creates a serious conflict of interests for the members of the committee appointed to independently assess candidates for such positions," he said. It was inappropriate to nominate former party politicians to institutions that required independence.
The Public Protector was such an institution and should be subject only to the constitution and the law, Schmidt said. "It must be impartial, exercise its powers and perform its functions without fear, favour or prejudice. This was echoed by the UDM's Jakes Maseka who praised Nthai for the "honesty he now has for the country".
Nthai's withdrawal came a day after newspaper reports questioned whether he was the right man for the job as he was allegedly embroiled in several controversies during his tenure as MEC. Nthai, a Pretoria-based advocate, was the first to be interviewed by Parliament's ad hoc committee on the appointment of a public protector on Wednesday. Less than three minutes in the hot chair and in reply to a friendly warning from committee chairman Johannes Mahlangu (ANC) that he would face "very difficult questions", Nthai announced his withdrawal.
Mahlangu said: "You are aware this is a very key position. The public protector is a person who has to protect the public..." Nthai replied: "I have been reflecting on my nomination and I have come to the conclusion that I will serve the country better if I am left where I am and therefore I am withdrawing my nomination." The committee accepted his withdrawal and asked for it to be formalised in writing.
Nthai told reporters that newspaper reports had not influenced his withdrawal as he had taken the decision at the weekend. "I have taken this decision on my own, taking into consideration my personal circumstances, as well as what I am doing at the moment." He also denied there had been pressure from within the ANC for him to withdraw. "I had wide-ranging consultations... I consulted my colleagues and some members of the judiciary and on the advice that I got from a wide range of people, I decided I should not make myself available."
Source: IoL
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)