In the wake of Marikana, ANC pushing a self-destruct button

As police raided the hostels of Lonmin miners it looked like the ANC had once again chosen force over discussion. It’s nothing new, but this specific raid will be what we remember as the beginning of the party’s decline. By GREG NICOLSON.

This weekend’s crackdown on the settlement of Nkaneng should come as no surprise. In the last few years, as service delivery protests have engulfed townships and informal settlements across the country, the ANC government has stood behind the state-sponsored violence and intervened only when absolutely necessary.

The tale feels like a cliché. Something triggers a store of long-held grievances and the community fortifies its thoroughfares with burning tyres. After the police arrive they eventually decide the protest cannot continue and attack the toyi-toying group. In their nyalas, the cops first teargas the community in a drive-by and then conduct a series of arbitrary arrests that follow a hail of rubber bullets.

The smell of teargas, stab of rubber bullets and the humiliation of violent raids further enrages the angry mob. The stakes are raised and the more violent and disaffected members of the community remain, seeking ever more destruction.

Between police and protestors lies a dark silence. The cops don’t care why people are on the streets, burning the little they have access to while government officials are too scared or don’t care enough to mediate promptly. When they finally arrive and offer the slightest semblance that they give a damn about the community’s concerns, the protest often subsides.

It seems obvious that a leader should immediately attempt to listen. But in the silence of a community on fire, before government officials are forced to react, lies a deafening reality of the disconnect between our most marginalised and their elected leaders, usually from the ANC.

These protests, similar in root cause to the ongoing Lonmin strike, regularly occur because of poverty, corruption and unmet expectations. People are tired of living without adequate shelter. They know it’s unfair they can’t access decent health services. They want electricity and water plumbed into their homes and they want an effective and transparent billing system. They are tired of the forced humiliation that latches onto poverty. Worst of all, they’re disheartened seeing their children grow up to live in exactly the same desperate conditions.

Law and order needs to prevail in Marikana and no more deaths can be added to the toll. But this weekend’s move by the police and army into Nkaneng is all too reminiscent of the response to service delivery protests over the years. All too often the ANC has let police shoot first before even asking why protests are occurring, let alone engaging in meaningful discussion (however long, risky or arduous it need be).

It’s symbolic of a larger problem. The ANC aims to “end Apartheid in all its forms” and “fight for social justice and eliminate the vast inequalities created by Apartheid”, but too many examples show that it’s no longer the party of the people. A litany of betrayals and failures stain the party’s successes (which primarily include a massive service delivery rollout and making a dent into transforming the system of racial exclusion) while its internal power plays and the venality of members erode the foundations established by some of the most inspiring leaders of the 20th century.

The ANC’s June policy conference proved the party knows what’s hurting South Africans – poverty, inequality, unemployment and the ills flowing from the combination. We’re sure its members also care deeply – who wouldn’t when the stories of many South Africans are tragedies?

But the party is too distant from those we expect it to represent. President Jacob Zuma’s insulting and incredulous comments about visiting a township and realising there are poor people struggling to survive is testament to the disconnect. ANC MP Rose Sonto confirmed this last week when he disagreed with opposition parties in the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources, saying, “We can’t go and talk to a crowd with suicidal tendencies.”

Dangerous, yes, but strikes and protests are messages sent when other avenues of communication fail. Instead of provoking miners with further police antagonism, the ANC needed to work with union leaders and mine management to increase engagement until leaders trusted them. Zuma has sent an inter-ministerial force, made a visit and established a judicial inquiry, but it’s not enough. ANC leaders aren’t giving Marikana the attention it deserves. Simply, they have failed to lead when the country was wailing, desperate and distraught, for leaders.

The problem the party faces, however, is that even if it had the resolve to provide leadership it’s so removed from disaffected communities it would have struggled to get a platform. The miners have been too hostile, and like many others across the country seem to believe the party has broken too many promises, its members too corrupt to trust.

Instead of proving them wrong, the party has distanced itself from the workers and failed to show it understands their concerns (at the same time it has lambasted the capitalist miners it has been so happy to accommodate all these years).

So in an attempt to control the situation the ANC offered the same response it has to service delivery protests: it sent in the police. That response is nothing new, but while the party hides, the Marikana massacre will go down in history as the moment everybody knew the ANC was no longer a party of the poor, no longer a party of the working class and no longer a party that could claim to represent the majority of South Africans.

The National Executive Committee has discussed Marikana at length, said Secretary General Gwede Mantashe. It’s looking at ways to address the causes of the disaster and may come up with creative solutions involving partnering with mining companies to improve the living conditions of workers.

One can only hope the party can, but one has to fear it has once again stoked unrest and it might be too late. The ANC may still be in power. It may still have the votes, but things change. They always do. And it’s moments like these the historians will remember.

Source: Daily Maverick

It's just a case of putting them in their place

Princess and the peeve

AS Vera was floating about at defence headquarters in Pretoria she came across a woman sobbing inconsolably. On closer inspection it turned out it was none other than Princess Nonceba Lindiwe Sisulu. People in the corridors were whispering that she had just been moved from the glamorous Defence Ministry to the gritty Public Service ministry. So she would now no longer be able to wear those sexy military uniforms to state events. She would no longer be saluted by generals and admirals. She would also no longer be in a position to refuse to answer questions for "security reasons". No longer will she be able to scream at the DA's David Maynier.

Aaagh shame, poor thing.

Wardrobe malfunction

Adding to the princess' misery is that she will now have to hang around Zwelinzima Vavi, Sadtu's Thobile Ntola, Nehawu's Fikile Majola and those guys from Solidarity. And instead of slapping striking soldiers with court-martials, she will have to accept memoranda from angry workers. Vera can't wait to see which fashion label she'll be wearing when she addresses workers from the back of a truck.

Blunt Blade cuts losses

Vera's favourite bourgeois communist put on his boxing gloves and went to Durban recently to put workers in their place. After angering the workers by chastising them for demanding that he leave his cushy government job and lose his flashy car, he then tried to charm them. He did many Phansi! slogans and got the enthusiastic Phansi! responses from the workers. But being a cabinet minister he could not bring himself to say Phansi !nge e-tolls Phansi!, prompting workers to shout him down.

The bourgeois communist, who had never been booed by unionists before, ended up in hospital recovering from the emotional breakdown. But as soon as he heard that some ANC leaders planned to take on President Jacob "I know what I'm doing" Zuma at the NEC meeting, he got out of his pyjamas and ran off to defend his paymaster.

Know where your bread is buttered...

Cop is being caught up

THE new top cop, Mangwashi Phiyega, started her career on a high note this week by feeding the media with nice sound-bites. Quizzed about her lack of policing experience, she simply said: "You do not need to be a drunkard to own a bottle store." She may as well have continued to say you do not need to be a drug addict to push drugs. Nice start, but Vera thinks she will need a lot of work to catch up to Bheki Cele, the master of great quotes.

Vera would like to share a little observation. When Maria Ramos arrived at Transnet in 2004, she and Phiyega were immediately at each others' throats. Phiyega jumped ship and went to Absa. Then Ramos left Transnet to head up Absa. Phiyega was forced to jump ship again to flee her nemesis. Based on this pattern, Vera predicts that Ramos' next job is minister of police.

Vera's Question of the Week: Will the new top cop be patrolling the streets of Hillbrow on New Year's eve?

Source: The Sowetan

Home affairs resumes Zim deportations

The moratorium on deporting illegal Zimbabweans has quietly been lifted by the department of home affairs, leading to an outcry from refugee rights groups. No deportations of Zimbabweans have taken place for almost two years while home affairs have been running the Zimbabwe documentation project (ZDP) to offer legal status to Zimbabweans living illegally in South Africa. Organisations working with migrants are angry that the department has not been open about a memo that was circulated among the police, army and refugee offices on September 27 explaining that deportations would resume.

The Mail & Guardian has a copy of the directive issued by director general of home affairs Mkuseli Apleni to the defence force, police offices and department of home affairs branches. The directive says "it aims to give clarity on Zimbabwean nationals who are not presently detected", and outlines the procedure that officers must follow when deporting immigrants. Home affairs spokesperson Ronnie Mamoepa would not answer questions about the directive but did issue a press release this week saying that illegal immigrants could not claim protection under South Africa's laws. "No country in the world will allow illegal immigration within its borders. This is international practice," he said. Mamoepa told the M&G that the government had shown goodwill in attempting to regularise the status of Zimbabweans in the country and had given them a window of opportunity to hand in their fraudulent documents in return for amnesty.

People Against Suffering, Suppression, Oppression and Poverty's (PASSOP) Braam Hanekom said the "deportations are in direct contradiction to the recent undertakings made by home affairs director general, Mr Apleni, to Parliament not to embark on deportations of Zimbabweans until the Zimbabwean documentation project has been completed, appeals reviewed and the minister has approved deportations."

But the ZDP project is not complete. According to a research report compiled by the African Centre for Migration Studies (ACMS), "as of October 4, 145 000 permits were dispatched of 275 762 that were received, though processing was still taking place".

Human Rights Watch estimates that there are 1.5-million Zimbabweans in the country, although fewer than 300 000 applied for legal paperwork during the amnesty period. ACMS senior researcher Roni Amit said the resumption of deportations was "going to create problems". She said refugee rights groups were angry because home affairs had not been transparent about resuming deportations and that media reports this week had included denials of such a directive.

Amit said police who arrested Zimbabweans and sent them to deportation centres generally did not verify whether the individuals were still waiting for permits. The directive instructs officers to check if "the suspect has a pending application" for legal status and to conduct an interview with the suspect. But Amit was not convinced by this, saying: "The verification system does not work." Amit said public health groups had not been given advance warning that deportations were about to start. ACMS researcher Jo Vearey said Zimbabweans on chronic medicine for tuberculosis or HIV/Aids needed to continue taking their medication after deportation or run the risk of developing resistance to the diseases or catching multidrug resistant TB.

"Detention facilities are the perfect space for onward transmission of TB, and this poses a health risk to police officers and public immigration officials."

Source: Mail & Guardian

Defence committee blinks first in standoff over report

Parliament’s rebellious defence committee succumbed to political pressure yesterday, agreeing to continue work on the Defence Amendment Bill despite not yet being supplied contentious reports by Defence Minister Lindiwe Sisulu.

Earlier this month the committee made history by becoming the first in the democratic era to issue an ultimatum to a minister and the Cabinet. The committee had ruled that it could not continue work on the bill until it had considered reports of the Interim National Defence Force Service Commission, which variously described conditions in the military as a ticking time bomb and a threat to state security. The committee also gave the Cabinet 30 days to make the reports available. Ms Sisulu had insisted she could not provide the reports until the Cabinet had considered them. The commission gave her the reports eight months ago. When the committee met yesterday its chairman, Mnyamezeli Booi, tabled a letter from National Assembly speaker Max Sisulu, which described the decision to suspend work on the bill as incorrect and criticised the committee’s belief that the reports would inform its work on the Defence Amendment Bill.

Democratic Alliance MP David Maynier said the committee should stand its ground and refuse to work on the bill until the reports are supplied. He accused Ms Sisulu of being bloody-minded about the reports and wondered why eight months had passed and they still had not been dealt with by the Cabinet. But he was left without support as the rest of the committee decided to resume work on the bill.

Freedom Front Plus MP Pieter Groenewald said he agreed with Mr Maynier’s criticism of the length of time it was taking for the Cabinet to process the bills, but it was the committee’s function to do what was in the best interests of the South African National Defence Force.

The bill will create a permanent service commission to consider conditions in the military and it is common cause that the commission is urgently needed. Other MPs couched their reversal in similar terms, saying it would be irresponsible to maintain their position on the bill because delays now would mean it could not be processed by Parliament until next year.

Mr Booi said: “As a committee we go along with the contents of the letter of the speaker and feel that we should continue with the bill. “We will restructure the programme of the committee to restart the process.”

Mr Maynier said it “may be a victory for the minister but it is a defeat for our constitutional democracy”.

Source: Business Day

Stand-off between Sisula and legislature

In an assertion of parliamentary power, the portfolio committee on defence and military veterans shelved deliberations on the defence amendment Bill until it is given two reports compiled by the interim national defence force service commission. Minister for Defence Lindiwe Sisulu has refused to provide the reports to Parliament until they are reviewed by Cabinet, in what has become a stand-off between her office and the legislature.

Committee chairperson Nyami Booi said that contrary to perceptions that this was intended as a political blow to Sisulu, the committee was simply acting in line with Parliament's power. He said the committee took the decision in light of a pronouncement on the matter by speaker Max Sisulu. The defence department however told the Mail & Guardian that it had understood the selfsame statement on the matter -- issued late last week -- as permitting the minister to submit the reports following a Cabinet review.

Booi had written to the speaker to seek guidance on the issue after Parliament received two legal opinions from its legal advisor, arguing that it was within its rights to compel the ministry to hand over the reports. Parliament's legal position was however disputed in an opinion provided to Sisulu and her department, which cited "executive privilege" as overriding Parliament’s power to compel Sisulu to provide the reports. In his statement on the matter, the speaker backed the powers of Parliament in holding the executive to account. "The role of Parliament in overseeing the executive is an important constitutional function and seeks to hold the executive to account," he said. "Parliament has no intention of relinquishing this right and responsibility, and further, has made its strengthening a priority." "For the sake of clarity, we emphasise that, in the performance of its oversight and legislative functions, Parliament has the power, provided by the Constitution, Rules and the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament Act, to summon any person to give evidence and to require any person or institution to produce documents," he said. The speaker did however indicate that he had received assurances from Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe and the minister that "the PC [portfolio committee] will receive the report after it has been processed by Cabinet", and that the Cabinet would process the reports "speedily".

Democratic Alliance MP David Maynier called the move a "major political blow" for the minister and said it would "go a long way to roll back the accountability crisis at the department of defence and to ensure that the defence department is properly accountable to Parliament". Booi however would not be drawn on the political implications of the decision. "This is not about individuals," he said. "We are simply following parliamentary procedures."

Siphiwe Dlamini, spokesperson for the department, said that it was surprised by the decision, as it had understood the speaker's determination to mean that the committee would continue with its work until the Cabinet had released the report. He said that this could severely delay the passage of the Bill, which, it was hoped, would be finalised by the end of the year. The ministry could immediately be reached for comment.

Source: Mail & Guardian

Defence Force loses rocket launchers, rifles and mortars

Defence Minister Lindiwe Sisulu on Monday revealed that six rocket launchers were among the weapons to have gone missing from the Defence Force over the last year.

Sisulu replied in writing to a parliamentary question from a Freedom Front Plus (FFP) MP who has called into question measures to secure weaponry in the military arsenal.

Sisulu said that 20 rifles and five nine millimetre rifles have also disappeared and an additional five mortars were reported missing last year.

Source: Eye Witness News

Sisulu digs in heels on defence reports

Defence Minister Lindiwe Sisulu is not budging in her battle with MPs, who she accuses of misunderstanding the rules of Cabinet and Parliament. Sisulu's acrimonious relationship with the National Assembly has been highlighted by her refusal to hand over to Parliament's defence committee documents of the Interim National Defence Force Service Commission until they have been endorsed by Cabinet.

MPs also accuse her of skipping committee meetings and refusing to give adequate responses to parliamentary questions. In the latest spat, seen as a key test of Parliament's ability to hold the executive to account, there have been calls for her to be summoned by the committee, and complaints have been forwarded to deputy president Kgalema Motlanthe, in his capacity as a leader of government business, and to parliamentary speaker Max Sisulu. The reports paint a grim picture of a defence force demoralised by poor salaries and working conditions.

Sisulu's spokesperson, Ndivhuwo Mabaya, said that under Cabinet rules, any report Cabinet commissioned should be presented to the executive before going to Parliament. "Cabinet does not take kindly to its reports being taken to Parliament before it can see them. We were not asked by the portfolio committee to initiate this report; it was commissioned by Cabinet." Mabaya said MPs did not seem to understand the relationship between the executive and Parliament. "If they want the minister not to follow Cabinet rules, they should write to the secretary of Cabinet and ask for her to be exempted from them." It was a sad situation that decisions agreed to in a meeting held last Thursday, including giving Sisulu time to work on the report and get Cabinet to endorse it, were now being changed in unrecognised forums, he said.

In April Sisulu failed for the third time to appear before Parliament's public spending watchdog, Scopa, to answer questions about her department's poor financial state. All other ministers attended the Scopa meeting. Sisulu said she had not attended because she was accompanying President Jacob Zuma on state visits to Britain and Uganda at the time. After a public spat with Scopa chairperson Themba Godi, Sisulu announced that she would boycott the committee until it apologised to her. She has not been invited to Scopa since, has not received an apology and a meeting to resolve the tension has not yet been convened.

Sisulu and the committee have used separate legal opinions to back their conflicting positions. Parliament's lawyer, Mukesh Vassen, argues that MPs can summon ministers to provide information and reports, though it should be a last resort. Sisulu's legal advisers have attacked Vassen's opinion as "way off the mark and absurd", as seeking to give ministers the status of witnesses. They argue that demanding an interim report on which the executive has not formulated an opinion could amount to "scrutinising and overseeing executive action" and that a document not endorsed by the executive is not "executive action" or policy.

Parliament is processing the Defence Amendment Bill, aimed at creating a permanent defence force service commission. MPs argue that they need to know the contents of the reports before they can process the proposed amendments. Sisulu, however, denies concealment, emphasising that the findings do not reflect on her term of office, but on that of her predecessor, Congress of the People president Mosiuoa Lekota. Said her spokesperson Mabaya: "Politically, we have got nothing to lose. We would be happy to lambast Lekota, but it is not our business. Our focus is to improve the lives of our soldiers." The defence committee will meet next week to discuss ways of proceeding, including the option of summoning Sisulu to appear before it.

Source: Mail & Guardian

Sisulu lid on reports ‘may spark conflict’

MORE conflict might arise over Defence Minister Lindiwe Sisulu ’s refusal to furnish interim reports on the state of the military, the Democratic Alliance (DA) said yesterday. This came as the chairman of Parliament’s portfolio committee on defence, Nyami Booi, called on Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe and Speaker Max Sisulu to intervene in the row between Ms Sisulu and MPs.

DA MP David Maynier said Ms Sisulu’s reluctance to allow MPs to view the reports could be proof of the “damning contents of the reports”. “The DA’s position is clear. The interim reports should be furnished to the portfolio committee. I think those reports contain damning information on the state of the military, particularly on issues of morale,” Mr Maynier said. He said it was strange that Ms Sisulu could refuse to release the reports, while she had already implemented their recommendations. “These interim reports have already resulted in action by government,” he said.

Ms Sisulu last week conceded that she had acted on interim findings of the commission, notably by adjusting the pay of lower ranks in the defence force. Mr Maynier also accused Ms Sisulu of “consistently refusing to be accountable to Parliament” and said she appeared intent on keeping the interim reports under wraps for good, as she had only undertaken to release the final version to the committee. Ms Sisulu continued to insist that she could not release interim reports because they were “work(s) in progress”. She said she was only obliged to release the final findings of the Interim National Defence Force Service Commission and, even then, only after its report had been endorsed by the Cabinet.

It was reported that Mr Booi forwarded legal opinion, indicating MPs had a right to view the reports, to Mr Motlanthe in his capacity as head of government business in Parliament and to the speaker. “It has been given to those offices,” Mr Booi said. However, yesterday the offices of Mr Motlanthe and Ms Sisulu said that they had not been formally approached to intervene in the impasse.

Interim findings by the commission were leaked to the Sunday Times and painted a damning picture of service conditions in the military. It warned that this undermined morale and potentially even national security.

Source: Business Day
Also see commentary by Pierre De Vos, in his article entitled "The Princess and the Moon"

CHURCHES WERE USED TO OPPRESS BLACKS, SAYS AMNESTY APPLICANT

Churches were used as instruments of oppression by the white minority, one of four men seeking amnesty for the 1993 St James Church massacre told the Truth Commission's amnesty committee on Wednesday.

Bassie Mkhumbuzi was a member of the Azanian People's Liberation Army unit that killed 11 people and wounded 58 others in a automatic rifle and handgrenade attack on the church's congregants in Cape Town on July 25, 1993. "Whites used churches to oppress blacks. They took our country using churches and bibles. We know and we have read from books they are the ones who have taken the land from us," Mkhumbuzi said. Truth Commission lawyer Robin Brink said Mkumbuzi and his comrades perpetrated a "mindless barbarity" on defenceless people praying in a house of worship. Was it a revenge attack?" he asked Mkhumbuzi. "No," Mkhumbuzi replied, "we just wanted our land to be brought back to us, not because we were revenging the actions of the church."

Mkhumbuzi, who was 17 years old at the time of the incident, said he had not been told beforehand by unit leader Sichumiso Nonxuba that a church was the target. Nevertheless, "I felt that whites were using churches to oppress blacks". There was confusion at the start of Wednesday's amnesty hearing in Cape Town when it emerged that one of the amnesty applicants - former Apla operations director Letlapa Mphahele - had failed to turn up. The whereabouts of Mphahlele were not known, lawyer Norman Arendse told the amnesty committee chaired by Judge Hassen Mall. Arendse said he represented Mphahlele's co-applicants Mkhumbuzi, Thobela Mlambisa and Gcinikhaya Makoma. Makoma was found guilty on 11 counts of murder and 58 counts of attempted murder in March 1995 and sentenced to 23 years' imprisonment.

Mkhumbuzi, a member of the SA National Defence Force, and Mlambisa are on trial facing similar charges relating to the attack. "We don't know where he (Mphahlele) is," Arendse said. "He has not given us any instructions. We can't understand and we don't have any reasons why he is not here. We ask that his application be withdrawn at this stage." Ian Bremridge, the lawyer for two of the victims opposing the amnesty applications, said Mphahlele's absence could be problematic as the other applicants intended testifying that he ordered the attack. The applications are being opposed by Dawie Ackermann, whose wife was killed, Lorenzo Smith and Ukranian sailor Dmitry Makogon, who lost both legs and an arm in the incident. Mkhumbuzi said while he sought forgiveness from the victims, "we could not stop what was happening at the time". "We were fighting for our country and for democracy. It was difficult at the time to stop such incidents. The purpose of Apla at that time was to fight until the land was brought back to its owners." Bremridge: "Do you thing the attack achieved anything?" Mkhumbusi: "Yes. Today We are in this country. We are living together. We are not fighting together."

On the day of the attack he had remained in the getaway vehicle while Nonxuba - who was killed in a car accident last Novemmber - and Makoma entered the church armed with R4 rifles and M26 handgrenades, which he had fetched earlier from Apla high command in Umtata. "I was told that I would be the security, Mlambisa the driver. Nonxuba and Makoma were going inside. After they came out of the building, I was to use the petrol bombs to throw them inside. "I heard a grenade and gunshots and then saw a red car stopping in front of us, apparently to block us. "I got out of the car and threw a petrol bomb at the car and Mlambisa shot at the car causing it to speed away." He said it was only later that night, while watching a television broadcast by CNN, that he saw for the first time what had happened inside the church. Mlambisa testified later that he was an Apla unit commissar based in Transkei when he was ordered to travel to Cape Town to take part in the operation. He only realised the target was a church when the team drove up to the target in Kenilworth, Cape Town. "I deeply regret the loss of lives and causing so many people to be injured," he said.

Source: South African Press Association

Commission of Inquiry Into Alleged Arms Transactions Between Armscor and One Eli Wazan and Other Related Matters

On Sunday 18 September 1994, the Afrikaans Sunday newspaper,Rapport, reported that `a massive arsenal' of South African weapons - tens of thousands of AK 47 rifles and millions of rounds of ammunition - had been shipped from Port Elizabeth to the `terror-contaminated' Middle East. The weapons emanated from the South African National Defence Force (SANDF). The supplier was the Armaments Corporation of South Africa (Armscor), operating as the sales arm of the SANDF. The report quoted allegations that the weapons were destined for the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), for use against Israel: the report's suggestion was that the new African National Congress-led government was seeking to bolster its old ally, the PLO. This was despite the official stand of Armscor that the arms shipment had occurred within government prescriptions, and that the export was in fact destined for the government of Lebanon.

Subsequent press reports revealed that the consignment had been headed for Yemen, but had been turned away at one of that country's ports. Armscor arranged for the return of the ship to South Africa, where its cargo was unloaded at Port Elizabeth and transferred to SANDF storage. (The ownership of the shipment, and related financial matters, are currently disputed in legal proceedings between various of the parties.)

Rapport's disclosure provoked a public storm in South Africa. World media attention focused on the activities of Armscor, and on South Africa's alleged role in supplying arms to dubious purchasers. The Minister of Defence, Mr J Modise, called on Armscor to furnish a report on the events. After receiving the report, and within twelve days of the original disclosure, he requested the Minister of Justice, Mr A M Omar, to appoint an independent commission to investigate the issue.

This Commission was the result.

Source: Polity

NATIONAL STRATEGIC INTELLIGENCE ACT 39 OF 1994

The purpose of the National Strategic Intelligence Act is to define the functions of members of the National Intelligence Structures; to establish a national Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee and to define its functions in respect of intelligence relating to the security of the Republic; and to provide for the appointment of a Co-ordinator for Intelligence as chairperson of the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee, and to define his or her functions; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

Functions relating to intelligence

(1) The functions of the National Intelligence Agency shall be:
(a) to gather, correlate, evaluate and analyse domestic intelligence, in order to -
(i) identify any threat or potential threat to the security of the Republic or its people;
(ii) supply intelligence regarding any such threat to the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee;
(b) to fulfil the national counter-intelligence responsibilities and for this purpose to conduct and coordinate counter-intelligence and to gather, correlate, evaluate, analyse and interpret information regarding counter-intelligence in order to:
(i) identify any threat or potential threat to the security of the Republic or its people;
(ii) inform the President of any such threat;
(iii) supply (where necessary) intelligence relating to any such threat to the South African Police Service for the purposes of investigating any offence or alleged offence; and
(iv) supply intelligence relating to any such threat to the Department of Home Affairs for the purposes of fulfilment of any immigration function; and
(v) supply intelligence relating to national strategic intelligence to the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee;
(c) to gather departmental intelligence at the request of any interested department of State, and, without delay to evaluate and transmit such intelligence and any other intelligence at the disposal of the Agency and which constitutes departmental intelligence, to the department concerned and to National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee.
(2) It shall, subject to section 3, be the functions of the Service -
(a) to gather, correlate, evaluate and analyse foreign intelligence, excluding foreign military intelligence, in order to -
(i) identify any threat or potential threat to the security of the Republic or its people;
(ii) supply intelligence relating to any such threat to the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee;
(b) to institute -
(i) counter-intelligence measures within the Service; and
(ii) in consultation with the Agency, counter-intelligence measures outside the Republic; and
(c) to gather departmental intelligence at the request of any interested department of State, and, without delay to evaluate and transmit such intelligence and any other intelligence at the disposal of the Service and which constitutes departmental intelligence, to the department concerned and to the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee.
(3) It shall be the function of the South African Police Service:
(a) to gather, correlate, evaluate, co-ordinate and use crime intelligence in support of the objects of the South African Police Service as contemplated in section 205(3) of the Constitution;
(b) to institute counter-intelligence measures within the South African Police Service;
(c) to supply crime intelligence relating to national strategic intelligence to the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee.
(4) The National Defence Force shall, subject to section 3 -
(a) gather, correlate, evaluate and use foreign military intelligence, and supply foreign military intelligence relating to national strategic intelligence to the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee, but the National Defence Force shall not gather intelligence of a non-military nature in a covert manner;
(b) gather, correlate, evaluate and use domestic military intelligence excluding covert collection and supply such intelligence to the National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee; and
(c) institute counter-intelligence measures within the National Defence Force.

Establishment of National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee ("Nicoc")

(1) There is hereby established a National Intelligence Co-ordinating Committee, which shall consist of -
(b) the Co-ordinator for Intelligence appointed under section 5 (1), who shall be the chairperson;
(c) the Director-General of the National Intelligence Agency;
(d) the Director-General of the South African Secret Service;
(e) the chief of the intelligence division of the National Defence Force; and
(f) the head of the intelligence division of the South African Police Service,
or the alternates of the persons mentioned in paragraphs (b) to (f), and such members of departments of State who are co-opted by Nicoc on a permanent or an ad hoc basis.
(2) The functions of Nicoc shall be -
(a) to co-ordinate the intelligence supplied by the members of the National Intelligence Structures to Nicoc and interpret such intelligence for use by the State and the Cabinet for the purposes of -
(i) the detection and identification of any threat or potential threat to the national security of the Republic;
(ii) the protection and promotion of the national interests of the Republic;
(b) for the purposes of the functions contemplated in paragraph (a) -
(i) to coordinate and prioritise intelligence activities within the National Intelligence Structures;
(ii) to prepare and interpret intelligence estimates;
(c) to produce and disseminate intelligence which may have an influence on any state policy with regard to matters referred to in paragraph (a) for consideration by the Cabinet;
(d) after consultation with the departments of the State entrusted with the maintenance of the security of the Republic, to coordinate the flow of national strategic intelligence between such departments;
(e) at the request of any Department of State, to coordinate the gathering of intelligence and without delay to evaluate and transmit such intelligence and any other intelligence at the disposal of the National Intelligence Structures and which constitutes departmental intelligence, to the department concerned; and
(f) to make recommendations to the Cabinet on intelligence priorities.
(3) The Agency shall provide logistical, technical and administrative support to Nicoc.

Source: SABINET