The creation of a new defence force was an essential step in South Africa’s negotiated settlement. The integration of previously antagonistic forces was made more difficult by the differences in training, resources and political affiliations.
The planning for the changes ended in April 1994 when a common institutional culture and camaraderie within the organisation had been created and a manageable and goal-oriented planning framework agreed upon. A second, absorption phase, then commenced, which saw MK, APLA and the TBVC forces being absorbed into structures which, though new, were mainly those of the SADF.
The real shift occurred in March 1998 when a report submitted by the Chief of the National Defence Force brought about his own resignation. Power then shifted away from the conservative axis to more constitutionally inclined officers who supported the democratic transition and the military restructuring.
Source: Institute for Security Studies
Wednesday, September 25, 2002
Monday, September 9, 2002
Indalo Yethu
Indalo Yethu is a legacy project, an independent trust of the South African Government’s Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. It functions as an endorsement brand promoting greening and eco-friendly practices as a way of life. Its origins lie in the World Summit on Sustainable Development held in South Africa in 2002.
The primary objective of Indalo Yethu is to reinforce the notion of environmental conscious living within the context of the country’s economic and social development programmes whose interventions will be reinforced by an extensive mass communications campaign as well as outreach programmes. Indalo Yethu wants to draw attention to responsible environmental living as this is a crucial ingredient in South Africa’s drive to realise its stated objectives of a better life for all, ensuring that benefits derived can be enjoyed by present and future generations. This will be achieved by programmes built on a two pronged approach:
Endorsement Program: Developing an Endorsement Brand that will link and become an umbrella for environmentally responsible or focussed programmes and projects that links economic growth and social development. This will include developing and implementing a public awareness and mass media campaign that will bring about this awareness. Every endorsed project will get the “butterfly” stamp of approval, making its environmentally friendly foundations evident for all to see.
Education and Awareness: Promoting and encouraging responsible environmental activities through institutional support for focussed actions, programmes and projects.
Source: http://www.indaloyethu.co.za
You can find information on the origion of the Indalo here.
The primary objective of Indalo Yethu is to reinforce the notion of environmental conscious living within the context of the country’s economic and social development programmes whose interventions will be reinforced by an extensive mass communications campaign as well as outreach programmes. Indalo Yethu wants to draw attention to responsible environmental living as this is a crucial ingredient in South Africa’s drive to realise its stated objectives of a better life for all, ensuring that benefits derived can be enjoyed by present and future generations. This will be achieved by programmes built on a two pronged approach:
Endorsement Program: Developing an Endorsement Brand that will link and become an umbrella for environmentally responsible or focussed programmes and projects that links economic growth and social development. This will include developing and implementing a public awareness and mass media campaign that will bring about this awareness. Every endorsed project will get the “butterfly” stamp of approval, making its environmentally friendly foundations evident for all to see.
Education and Awareness: Promoting and encouraging responsible environmental activities through institutional support for focussed actions, programmes and projects.
Source: http://www.indaloyethu.co.za
You can find information on the origion of the Indalo here.
Tuesday, August 27, 2002
World Development Forum Begins With a Rebuke
Tens of thousands of officials, environmentalists and advocates for the poor converged on this old mining city today to devise an ambitious blueprint to promote development while protecting natural resources. Participants from all over the world flocked to the United Nations' World Summit on Sustainable Development in flowing African robes, Indian saris and pinstriped suits. They celebrated the spirit of global solidarity and vowed to hammer out a plan to protect rain forests, to clean polluted air and to help millions of people escape from poverty.
More than 100 presidents and prime ministers, including most European leaders, will attend this summit meeting to show their commitment to their new pledges. But many here are expressing doubts about the developed nations' sincerity and are especially critical of the fact that President Bush, the leader of the world's biggest economy and its largest polluter, has decided not to attend. American officials here today said they were committed to the meeting's agenda and would soon announce investments of more than $970 million in projects to provide access clean water to Africa and other developing nations. They said they want to focus on offering concrete support for specific projects instead of getting mired in debates about the targets and time frames for foreign aid that the developing nations are seeking. But as participants gathered in the gleaming convention center here, nearly everyone was haunted by the failures of the past.
Ten years ago, the world's leaders left the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro with an ambitious agenda that is mostly remembered by the participants here as a string of broken promises and squandered opportunities. In his opening speech today, President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa said pointedly that the world had stood by and allowed environmental degradation and deepening poverty to threaten the future of the Earth. Mr. Mbeki said leaders had failed to muster the political will to reduce poverty and to protect natural resources despite the promises made in Rio de Janeiro. He urged officials to develop a plan during this 10-day meeting to rescue a world increasingly characterized by dying lakes, retreating forests, global warming and desperately poor people. ''Poverty, underdevelopment, inequality within and among countries, together with the worsening global ecological crisis, sum up the dark shadow under which most of the world lives,'' Mr. Mbeki said in his speech. ''It is no secret that the global community has, as yet, not demonstrated the will to implement the decisions it has freely adopted. We need to take stock of the inertia of the past decade and agree on very clear and practical measures that will help us to deal decisively with all the challenges that we face,'' he added. ''This is the central task of this summit.''
The officials here applauded his words. But as the day wore on and negotiators huddled in the ballrooms, it was clear that coming up with a strong plan would be very difficult. No new treaties will be signed here. Instead, negotiators are focusing on the link between poverty and environmental degradation and on how to spur growth in poor countries while protecting the environment. But there are deep disagreements between rich and poor nations about how to achieve those goals. Poor countries say they need to improve their economies before they will be in a position to protect their natural resources. They want wealthy nations to provide aid to developing countries equal to 0.7 percent of the wealthy nations' gross national products. They also want the wealthy nations to reduce or eliminate tariffs on agricultural goods from poor countries and, by 2015, to reduce by half the number of people who lack access to sanitation.
Officials from the United States and the European Union have refused to make commitments for time frames to eliminate agricultural subsidies, which protect their farmers from foreign competition. ''We do not see Johannesburg as a place to have these negotiations,'' said Catherine Day of the European Union at a news conference today. The European Union is willing to discuss setting targets for increasing foreign assistance to the poor and for converting to renewable energy sources, but the United States opposes such measures ''I think goals are important, but they're only lofty rhetoric without the commitment of resources,'' said John F. Turner, the assistant secretary of state for oceans and international environmental and scientific affairs. ''The opportunity here is for partners to start committing resources in these critical areas to reduce poverty and ensure a more sustainable future,'' Mr. Turner said. ''That's what we ought to be focused on.'' But officials from developing nations said the wealthy countries were being inflexible. ''What's in there for us?'' asked one official, who supports specific targets for foreign aid. ''We're not advancing at all.'' Nearly 25 percent of the summit meeting's action plan remained contested today. As diplomats scrambled for consensus, some officials warned that the meeting might produce little more than reaffirmations of old promises.
Environmentalists and advocates for the poor are already vowing to march through the streets by the thousands on Saturday to ensure that the link between poverty and environmental decay remains high on the agenda. Much of their anger is directed at President Bush. Last year, President Bush upset many leaders when he rejected a treaty negotiated in Kyoto, Japan, which set targets for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. Marcel Furtado, a Brazilian representative of the advocacy group Greenpeace, said both developing and developed countries were to blame for the failure of pledges made in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Mr. Furtado said many delegates had learned from the failures of the past. He said they resented the United States and the European Union, to some extent, for blocking efforts to infuse this meeting's action plan with new and concrete commitments. ''We have a job to do, which is to deliver change,'' he said. ''It looks like the real issues are not making it into the document.''
Klaus Toepfer, the executive director of the United Nations Environment Program, urged negotiators to strive for consensus, no matter how difficult the negotiations become. No one, he said, can afford to give up. ''The eyes of the world are upon us here waiting for signs that we are able to bridge our differences,'' he said. ''The time has come to translate our political commitment into action.''
Source: New York Times
More than 100 presidents and prime ministers, including most European leaders, will attend this summit meeting to show their commitment to their new pledges. But many here are expressing doubts about the developed nations' sincerity and are especially critical of the fact that President Bush, the leader of the world's biggest economy and its largest polluter, has decided not to attend. American officials here today said they were committed to the meeting's agenda and would soon announce investments of more than $970 million in projects to provide access clean water to Africa and other developing nations. They said they want to focus on offering concrete support for specific projects instead of getting mired in debates about the targets and time frames for foreign aid that the developing nations are seeking. But as participants gathered in the gleaming convention center here, nearly everyone was haunted by the failures of the past.
Ten years ago, the world's leaders left the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro with an ambitious agenda that is mostly remembered by the participants here as a string of broken promises and squandered opportunities. In his opening speech today, President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa said pointedly that the world had stood by and allowed environmental degradation and deepening poverty to threaten the future of the Earth. Mr. Mbeki said leaders had failed to muster the political will to reduce poverty and to protect natural resources despite the promises made in Rio de Janeiro. He urged officials to develop a plan during this 10-day meeting to rescue a world increasingly characterized by dying lakes, retreating forests, global warming and desperately poor people. ''Poverty, underdevelopment, inequality within and among countries, together with the worsening global ecological crisis, sum up the dark shadow under which most of the world lives,'' Mr. Mbeki said in his speech. ''It is no secret that the global community has, as yet, not demonstrated the will to implement the decisions it has freely adopted. We need to take stock of the inertia of the past decade and agree on very clear and practical measures that will help us to deal decisively with all the challenges that we face,'' he added. ''This is the central task of this summit.''
The officials here applauded his words. But as the day wore on and negotiators huddled in the ballrooms, it was clear that coming up with a strong plan would be very difficult. No new treaties will be signed here. Instead, negotiators are focusing on the link between poverty and environmental degradation and on how to spur growth in poor countries while protecting the environment. But there are deep disagreements between rich and poor nations about how to achieve those goals. Poor countries say they need to improve their economies before they will be in a position to protect their natural resources. They want wealthy nations to provide aid to developing countries equal to 0.7 percent of the wealthy nations' gross national products. They also want the wealthy nations to reduce or eliminate tariffs on agricultural goods from poor countries and, by 2015, to reduce by half the number of people who lack access to sanitation.
Officials from the United States and the European Union have refused to make commitments for time frames to eliminate agricultural subsidies, which protect their farmers from foreign competition. ''We do not see Johannesburg as a place to have these negotiations,'' said Catherine Day of the European Union at a news conference today. The European Union is willing to discuss setting targets for increasing foreign assistance to the poor and for converting to renewable energy sources, but the United States opposes such measures ''I think goals are important, but they're only lofty rhetoric without the commitment of resources,'' said John F. Turner, the assistant secretary of state for oceans and international environmental and scientific affairs. ''The opportunity here is for partners to start committing resources in these critical areas to reduce poverty and ensure a more sustainable future,'' Mr. Turner said. ''That's what we ought to be focused on.'' But officials from developing nations said the wealthy countries were being inflexible. ''What's in there for us?'' asked one official, who supports specific targets for foreign aid. ''We're not advancing at all.'' Nearly 25 percent of the summit meeting's action plan remained contested today. As diplomats scrambled for consensus, some officials warned that the meeting might produce little more than reaffirmations of old promises.
Environmentalists and advocates for the poor are already vowing to march through the streets by the thousands on Saturday to ensure that the link between poverty and environmental decay remains high on the agenda. Much of their anger is directed at President Bush. Last year, President Bush upset many leaders when he rejected a treaty negotiated in Kyoto, Japan, which set targets for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. Marcel Furtado, a Brazilian representative of the advocacy group Greenpeace, said both developing and developed countries were to blame for the failure of pledges made in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Mr. Furtado said many delegates had learned from the failures of the past. He said they resented the United States and the European Union, to some extent, for blocking efforts to infuse this meeting's action plan with new and concrete commitments. ''We have a job to do, which is to deliver change,'' he said. ''It looks like the real issues are not making it into the document.''
Klaus Toepfer, the executive director of the United Nations Environment Program, urged negotiators to strive for consensus, no matter how difficult the negotiations become. No one, he said, can afford to give up. ''The eyes of the world are upon us here waiting for signs that we are able to bridge our differences,'' he said. ''The time has come to translate our political commitment into action.''
Source: New York Times
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
Friday, August 16, 2002
South Africa: ANC stalls on anti-retroviral AIDS drugs
The African National Congress government is continuing its campaign to deny anti-retroviral drugs to the South African population.
A recent court ruling ordered the government to make the drug Nevirapine available to pregnant women and their babies, but now the Medicines Control Council (MCC) is attempting to halt its use.
Source: World Socialist Web
A recent court ruling ordered the government to make the drug Nevirapine available to pregnant women and their babies, but now the Medicines Control Council (MCC) is attempting to halt its use.
Source: World Socialist Web
Tuesday, August 6, 2002
Eight appear over R10m investment scam
Edgy investors paced around the courtroom in Kempton Park, Johannesburg shortly before the eight men arrested for allegedly running an investment scam were to appear in court. The eight are Daniel van der Merwe, 60; his son Daniel van der Merwe, 31; Daan van Jaarsveld, 46; Timothy Mills, 37; Tswelopele Zondo, 50; Kevin Trytsman, 43; Johannes Wessels, 37, and Jack Knight, 52.
They face charges of fraud, theft and of contravening the Companies Act. They allegedly defrauded 91 people of a total of R10,1-million through a scam which ran from 1999 to 2000. Investors could buy a truck from the company by depositing R70 000, with the truck being used to transport coal from mines. Investors were promised R23 000 monthly returns on investments.
The case was postponed until Wednesday for the men to make formal applications for bail. They were remanded in custody. A handful of investors were joined by agents from the Scorpions Unit as they waited for the men to appear in court.
Source: IoL
They face charges of fraud, theft and of contravening the Companies Act. They allegedly defrauded 91 people of a total of R10,1-million through a scam which ran from 1999 to 2000. Investors could buy a truck from the company by depositing R70 000, with the truck being used to transport coal from mines. Investors were promised R23 000 monthly returns on investments.
The case was postponed until Wednesday for the men to make formal applications for bail. They were remanded in custody. A handful of investors were joined by agents from the Scorpions Unit as they waited for the men to appear in court.
Source: IoL
Wednesday, July 31, 2002
Rwanda and Congo Sign Accord to End War
The war for control of Congo appeared to edge a step closer to an end today, with the signing of an accord between two rivals, Presidents Joseph Kabila of Democratic Republic of the Congo and Paul Kagame of Rwanda. Meeting here in the South African capital, where the pact was drafted last week, the leaders shook hands, exchanged a few words and smiled almost shyly as a standing-room-only audience of diplomats, journalists and cabinet ministers looked on.
The war, which began almost four years ago, has ravaged Congo, killing more than 2.5 million people, many of them combatants but many more civilians who died of starvation or disease, cut off from food and medicine. The conflict has roiled much of Africa, sowing instability in already unstable places like Burundi and Angola. ''Without peace in this region, we couldn't talk about peace on continent generally,'' Thabo Mbeki, South Africa's president, said at the signing ceremony today. ''This matter is very crucial.''
The agreement signed today calls for Rwanda to withdraw its soldiers, who number in the tens of thousands, from a large part of eastern Congo controlled by Rwanda and its Congolese rebel allies since the war broke out in 1998. The Congolese government, which sits in Kinshasa in the west, agreed to disarm thousands of Hutu militiamen from Rwanda who fled across the border into Congo after perpetrating mass killings in 1994 that killed hundreds of thousands of Tutsi and moderate Hutu. ''No more blood must run,'' President Kabila said in his remarks before signing the agreement. Keeping that pledge will require swift, decisive steps, said François Grignon, the Central Africa director for the International Crisis Group, a research organization. It will also require trust and candor, Dr. Grignon said in a telephone interview from Nairobi. ''We need to see good will, and we have not seen good will yet.'' Even then, success is uncertain.
Disarming Rwandan militias and repatriating them to a country where they fear reprisals is bound to be difficult. Easing Zimbabwe out of Congo is another challenge. Zimbabwe has thousands of soldiers involved, some of them in lucrative business deals that they may be reluctant to abandon. Asked about the assorted obstacles, a senior South African official at the ceremony said, ''We have to start somewhere.'' South Africa knows that its fellow African nations to the north -- many now pocked by war and famine -- are ground for its economic might and political influence to grow. With the newly established African Union, President Mbeki has taken a leading role in the effort to create political stability, and the last few months have given him a great deal more hope than he might have had even a year ago.
Sudan, locked in civil war for nearly 20 years, is in the early stages of talks, although sporadic fighting persists. Angola, at war for most of the last three decades, is even farther along, after the death of the rebel leader Jonas Savimbi in February left his weary forces little choice but surrender. The war in Congo, the vast country known for decades as Zaire, has its origins in the toppling of the long-ruling dictator Mobuto Sese Seko in 1997. The coup's leader, Laurent Kabila, was initially backed by Rwanda and Uganda, but they soon fell out with him over his harboring of Hutu militiamen complicit in the Rwanda genocide.
In 1998, Rwanda and Uganda invaded eastern Congo and began backing rebels operating in the region, hoping to oust the man they had helped install barely a year before. Congo's army was outmatched by Rwanda's, but Angola, Chad, Namibia and Zimbabwe came to Mr. Kabila's rescue, deploying thousands of soldiers. A peace agreement made in 1999 never took hold and fighting persisted, killing combatants by the thousands and civilians by the tens of thousands, mostly from disease and starvation. After Laurent Kabila was killed in January 2001, his son Joseph was installed as president. Although early signs were encouraging, the war persisted, defying one peace effort after another.
A turning point came earlier this year in Sun City, South Africa, during weeks of talks among hundreds of Congolese political and civic leaders delegated to lay the groundwork for the country's postwar future. After months of futility, negotiations seemed at the precipice of failure, but a last-minute initiative spearheaded by President Mbeki renewed hope of an agreement. One of the two principal rebel groups, the Movement for the Liberation of Congo, backed by Uganda and based in the country's north, ultimately reached a power-sharing agreement with the Kabila government. Not so the other leading rebel group, the Congolese Rally for Democracy-Goma, based in the east and backed by Rwanda. It held out, and the talks ended without a comprehensive agreement. Pressure on Rwanda from crucial allies like South Africa and the United States began to build.
Rwanda knew its options were up, and Congo, whose official name is the Democratic Republic of Congo, knew its chance was at hand, Dr. Grignon said. ''I think the pressure on Rwanda and the D.R.C. was so strong that they had to act,'' he said.
Source: New York Times
The war, which began almost four years ago, has ravaged Congo, killing more than 2.5 million people, many of them combatants but many more civilians who died of starvation or disease, cut off from food and medicine. The conflict has roiled much of Africa, sowing instability in already unstable places like Burundi and Angola. ''Without peace in this region, we couldn't talk about peace on continent generally,'' Thabo Mbeki, South Africa's president, said at the signing ceremony today. ''This matter is very crucial.''
The agreement signed today calls for Rwanda to withdraw its soldiers, who number in the tens of thousands, from a large part of eastern Congo controlled by Rwanda and its Congolese rebel allies since the war broke out in 1998. The Congolese government, which sits in Kinshasa in the west, agreed to disarm thousands of Hutu militiamen from Rwanda who fled across the border into Congo after perpetrating mass killings in 1994 that killed hundreds of thousands of Tutsi and moderate Hutu. ''No more blood must run,'' President Kabila said in his remarks before signing the agreement. Keeping that pledge will require swift, decisive steps, said François Grignon, the Central Africa director for the International Crisis Group, a research organization. It will also require trust and candor, Dr. Grignon said in a telephone interview from Nairobi. ''We need to see good will, and we have not seen good will yet.'' Even then, success is uncertain.
Disarming Rwandan militias and repatriating them to a country where they fear reprisals is bound to be difficult. Easing Zimbabwe out of Congo is another challenge. Zimbabwe has thousands of soldiers involved, some of them in lucrative business deals that they may be reluctant to abandon. Asked about the assorted obstacles, a senior South African official at the ceremony said, ''We have to start somewhere.'' South Africa knows that its fellow African nations to the north -- many now pocked by war and famine -- are ground for its economic might and political influence to grow. With the newly established African Union, President Mbeki has taken a leading role in the effort to create political stability, and the last few months have given him a great deal more hope than he might have had even a year ago.
Sudan, locked in civil war for nearly 20 years, is in the early stages of talks, although sporadic fighting persists. Angola, at war for most of the last three decades, is even farther along, after the death of the rebel leader Jonas Savimbi in February left his weary forces little choice but surrender. The war in Congo, the vast country known for decades as Zaire, has its origins in the toppling of the long-ruling dictator Mobuto Sese Seko in 1997. The coup's leader, Laurent Kabila, was initially backed by Rwanda and Uganda, but they soon fell out with him over his harboring of Hutu militiamen complicit in the Rwanda genocide.
In 1998, Rwanda and Uganda invaded eastern Congo and began backing rebels operating in the region, hoping to oust the man they had helped install barely a year before. Congo's army was outmatched by Rwanda's, but Angola, Chad, Namibia and Zimbabwe came to Mr. Kabila's rescue, deploying thousands of soldiers. A peace agreement made in 1999 never took hold and fighting persisted, killing combatants by the thousands and civilians by the tens of thousands, mostly from disease and starvation. After Laurent Kabila was killed in January 2001, his son Joseph was installed as president. Although early signs were encouraging, the war persisted, defying one peace effort after another.
A turning point came earlier this year in Sun City, South Africa, during weeks of talks among hundreds of Congolese political and civic leaders delegated to lay the groundwork for the country's postwar future. After months of futility, negotiations seemed at the precipice of failure, but a last-minute initiative spearheaded by President Mbeki renewed hope of an agreement. One of the two principal rebel groups, the Movement for the Liberation of Congo, backed by Uganda and based in the country's north, ultimately reached a power-sharing agreement with the Kabila government. Not so the other leading rebel group, the Congolese Rally for Democracy-Goma, based in the east and backed by Rwanda. It held out, and the talks ended without a comprehensive agreement. Pressure on Rwanda from crucial allies like South Africa and the United States began to build.
Rwanda knew its options were up, and Congo, whose official name is the Democratic Republic of Congo, knew its chance was at hand, Dr. Grignon said. ''I think the pressure on Rwanda and the D.R.C. was so strong that they had to act,'' he said.
Source: New York Times
Tuesday, July 16, 2002
'Kill the boer' comes back to haunt ANC
The Freedom Front (FF) on Sunday vowed to a lay a complaint with the South African Human Rights Commission against the African National Congress after incidents of alleged hate speech at the funeral of ANC MP Peter Mokaba on Saturday.
FF leader Pieter Mulder said in a statement if his party received no joy from the commission, then it would consider other legal options. Mulder accused the ANC's leadership of double standards when it came to condemning racism. He said while the crowd attending Mokaba's funeral on Saturday in Pietersburg chanted the slogan "Kill the farmer, kill the boer", a KwaZulu-Natal farmer and his wife were murdered.
Mulder said it was the responsibility of political leaders to educate their followers and to discipline them if their conduct promoted hate speech and racism. He said no funeral of a farmer had even been politicised. "What will be the reaction of ANC leaders if farmers start chanting 'Kill the Xhosas, Kill the black man' during the funerals of the Dent couple?" he asked.
If the SAHRC failed to condemn the slogan as hate speech, the Freedom Front would follow a legal path to get clarity on the issue. Mulder said the constitution was clear on its definition of hate speech. Clarity on what constituted hate speech was needed in view of the song by Mbongeni Ngema urging "valiant, strong, black men" to stand up to Indians, as well as Saturday's repetition of the "Kill the farmer, kill the boer" slogan. "It does not help that leaders talk about reconciliation, but do the opposite," said Mulder.
Source: IoL
FF leader Pieter Mulder said in a statement if his party received no joy from the commission, then it would consider other legal options. Mulder accused the ANC's leadership of double standards when it came to condemning racism. He said while the crowd attending Mokaba's funeral on Saturday in Pietersburg chanted the slogan "Kill the farmer, kill the boer", a KwaZulu-Natal farmer and his wife were murdered.
Mulder said it was the responsibility of political leaders to educate their followers and to discipline them if their conduct promoted hate speech and racism. He said no funeral of a farmer had even been politicised. "What will be the reaction of ANC leaders if farmers start chanting 'Kill the Xhosas, Kill the black man' during the funerals of the Dent couple?" he asked.
If the SAHRC failed to condemn the slogan as hate speech, the Freedom Front would follow a legal path to get clarity on the issue. Mulder said the constitution was clear on its definition of hate speech. Clarity on what constituted hate speech was needed in view of the song by Mbongeni Ngema urging "valiant, strong, black men" to stand up to Indians, as well as Saturday's repetition of the "Kill the farmer, kill the boer" slogan. "It does not help that leaders talk about reconciliation, but do the opposite," said Mulder.
Source: IoL
Saturday, July 13, 2002
Percy Yutar, 90, Prosecutor Of Mandela in South Africa
Percy Yutar, the South African prosecutor who in 1964 won convictions and lifetime prison terms for Nelson Mandela and other African National Congress leaders for crimes against the white minority-ruled state, died July 13. He was 90.
In 1995, Mr. Mandela, released from prison and elected president of South Africa's new democratic government, invited Mr. Yutar for lunch at the presidential mansion. Mr. Mandela, also a lawyer, said that he was trying to demonstrate the full reconciliation that his country so badly needed. The pair chatted for an hour, ''like old lawyers tend to do,'' as Mr. Mandela later put it. After the lunch, Mr. Yutar, who once accused Mr. Mandela of being a Communist stooge plotting a bloody revolution, pronounced the president ''a saintly man.''
According to many South African historians and writers, Mr. Yutar's vigorous persecution of blacks in the 1960's was linked to his Jewish background. Glenn Frankel, the author of ''Rivonia's Children: Three Families and the Cost of Conscience in White South Africa,'' said that Mr. Yutar saw the trial as a patriotic opportunity, especially because some of Mr. Mandela's co-defendants were Jews. ''Who better to prosecute Jewish traitors than a loyal Jew?'' Mr. Frankel wrote, describing Mr. Yutar's thinking. ''Who better than he to put things right and prove that not all Jews were radicals hell-bent upon overthrowing the government?''
Mr. Yutar, one of eight children in a family of Lithuanian immigrants, was born in Cape Town on July 29, 1911. As a young man, his left hand was caught in an electric mincing machine when he was working in his father's butcher shop, leaving his hand badly mangled. He attended the University of Cape Town on a scholarship and was awarded a doctorate in law. Jews, however, were not welcome in the higher echelons of South Africa's civil service, and Mr. Yutar settled for a job tracing defaulting telephone subscribers for the postal service. Still he persisted in his legal career and slowly moved up the ladder to junior law clerk and junior prosecutor. Eventually, he became deputy attorney general for the Transvaal Province and gained a reputation as an especially ambitious and energetic prosecutor.
The trial of Mr. Mandela came after a 1963 government raid on the secret headquarters of the A.N.C. in Rivonia, north of Johannesburg. The trial became known as the Rivonia trial, and Mr. Yutar was the appointed prosecutor. Early in the case, Mr. Yutar had to decide whether to charge the defendants with treason or sabotage. He opted for sabotage, a charge widely believed to be easier to prove, but the trial nonetheless centered on seditious crimes against the state.
Mr. Yutar portrayed the defendants as Communist-inspired terrorists who were planning to overthrow the government with the help of foreign countries. He also argued that they did not represent the overwhelming majority of South Africa's blacks. ''Although they represented scarcely 1 percent of the Bantu population, they took it upon themselves to tell the world that the Africans in South Africa are suppressed, oppressed and depressed,'' Mr. Yutar said at the trial.
In Mr. Mandela's autobiography, ''Long Walk to Freedom'' (1995, Little, Brown & Co.), he described Mr. Yutar as a ''small, bald, dapper fellow whose voice squeaked when he became angry or emotional. ''He had a flair for the dramatic and for high-flown if imprecise language.'' After the conviction on the sabotage charge, the judge in the case, Quartus de Wet, said the crime was ''in essence high treason,'' but decided against imposing the death penalty. The defendants were sentenced to life in prison and sent to the notorious Robben Island.
With the successful prosecution, Mr. Yutar's career soared. He was named attorney general, first of the Orange Free State and later of the Transvaal. He was the first Jew to serve as attorney general in South Africa. He retired from government service in 1976. As white minority rule crumbled and Mr. Mandela was released from prison, Mr. Yutar tried to rehabilitate his image. He even argued that he had actually been Mr. Mandela's savior by pursuing the sabotage charge rather than the charge of high treason, which certainly would have led to the death penalty.
After the lunch in 1995 with Mr. Mandela, Mr. Yutar told the press: ''When I was assigned this prosecution, I was urged to charge the accused with treason. I exercised my discretion and charged them only with sabotage because, at the back of my mind I felt, they do not deserve the death penalty.'' Asked about his vigorous prosecution of the case, he said, ''I just did my duty.''
Mr. Yutar remained active in Jewish groups all his life. For more than a decade, he was the president of Johannesburg's largest Orthodox synagogue. He is survived by his wife, Cecilia, and a son, David.
Source: New York Times
In 1995, Mr. Mandela, released from prison and elected president of South Africa's new democratic government, invited Mr. Yutar for lunch at the presidential mansion. Mr. Mandela, also a lawyer, said that he was trying to demonstrate the full reconciliation that his country so badly needed. The pair chatted for an hour, ''like old lawyers tend to do,'' as Mr. Mandela later put it. After the lunch, Mr. Yutar, who once accused Mr. Mandela of being a Communist stooge plotting a bloody revolution, pronounced the president ''a saintly man.''
According to many South African historians and writers, Mr. Yutar's vigorous persecution of blacks in the 1960's was linked to his Jewish background. Glenn Frankel, the author of ''Rivonia's Children: Three Families and the Cost of Conscience in White South Africa,'' said that Mr. Yutar saw the trial as a patriotic opportunity, especially because some of Mr. Mandela's co-defendants were Jews. ''Who better to prosecute Jewish traitors than a loyal Jew?'' Mr. Frankel wrote, describing Mr. Yutar's thinking. ''Who better than he to put things right and prove that not all Jews were radicals hell-bent upon overthrowing the government?''
Mr. Yutar, one of eight children in a family of Lithuanian immigrants, was born in Cape Town on July 29, 1911. As a young man, his left hand was caught in an electric mincing machine when he was working in his father's butcher shop, leaving his hand badly mangled. He attended the University of Cape Town on a scholarship and was awarded a doctorate in law. Jews, however, were not welcome in the higher echelons of South Africa's civil service, and Mr. Yutar settled for a job tracing defaulting telephone subscribers for the postal service. Still he persisted in his legal career and slowly moved up the ladder to junior law clerk and junior prosecutor. Eventually, he became deputy attorney general for the Transvaal Province and gained a reputation as an especially ambitious and energetic prosecutor.
The trial of Mr. Mandela came after a 1963 government raid on the secret headquarters of the A.N.C. in Rivonia, north of Johannesburg. The trial became known as the Rivonia trial, and Mr. Yutar was the appointed prosecutor. Early in the case, Mr. Yutar had to decide whether to charge the defendants with treason or sabotage. He opted for sabotage, a charge widely believed to be easier to prove, but the trial nonetheless centered on seditious crimes against the state.
Mr. Yutar portrayed the defendants as Communist-inspired terrorists who were planning to overthrow the government with the help of foreign countries. He also argued that they did not represent the overwhelming majority of South Africa's blacks. ''Although they represented scarcely 1 percent of the Bantu population, they took it upon themselves to tell the world that the Africans in South Africa are suppressed, oppressed and depressed,'' Mr. Yutar said at the trial.
In Mr. Mandela's autobiography, ''Long Walk to Freedom'' (1995, Little, Brown & Co.), he described Mr. Yutar as a ''small, bald, dapper fellow whose voice squeaked when he became angry or emotional. ''He had a flair for the dramatic and for high-flown if imprecise language.'' After the conviction on the sabotage charge, the judge in the case, Quartus de Wet, said the crime was ''in essence high treason,'' but decided against imposing the death penalty. The defendants were sentenced to life in prison and sent to the notorious Robben Island.
With the successful prosecution, Mr. Yutar's career soared. He was named attorney general, first of the Orange Free State and later of the Transvaal. He was the first Jew to serve as attorney general in South Africa. He retired from government service in 1976. As white minority rule crumbled and Mr. Mandela was released from prison, Mr. Yutar tried to rehabilitate his image. He even argued that he had actually been Mr. Mandela's savior by pursuing the sabotage charge rather than the charge of high treason, which certainly would have led to the death penalty.
After the lunch in 1995 with Mr. Mandela, Mr. Yutar told the press: ''When I was assigned this prosecution, I was urged to charge the accused with treason. I exercised my discretion and charged them only with sabotage because, at the back of my mind I felt, they do not deserve the death penalty.'' Asked about his vigorous prosecution of the case, he said, ''I just did my duty.''
Mr. Yutar remained active in Jewish groups all his life. For more than a decade, he was the president of Johannesburg's largest Orthodox synagogue. He is survived by his wife, Cecilia, and a son, David.
Source: New York Times
Thursday, June 27, 2002
G8 Africa Action Plan
Together, we have an unprecedented opportunity to make progress on our common goals of eradicating extreme poverty and achieving sustainable development. The new round of multilateral trade negotiations begun at Doha, the Monterrey meeting on financing for development, this G8 Summit at Kananaskis and the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, are key milestones in this process.
NEPAD recognizes that the prime responsibility for Africa's future lies with Africa itself. We will continue to support African efforts to encourage public engagement in the NEPAD and we will continue to consult with our African partners on how we can best assist their own efforts. G8 governments are committed to mobilize and energize global action, marshal resources and expertise, and provide impetus in support of the NEPAD's objectives. As G8 partners, we will undertake mutually reinforcing actions to help Africa accelerate growth and make lasting gains against poverty. Our Action Plan focuses on a limited number of priority areas where, collectively and individually, we can add value.
The African peer-review process is an innovative and potentially decisive element in the attainment of the objectives of the NEPAD. We welcome the adoption on June 11 by the NEPAD Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee of the Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance and the African Peer Review Mechanism. The peer-review process will inform our considerations of eligibility for enhanced partnerships. We will each make our own assessments in making these partnership decisions. While we will focus particular attention on enhanced-partnership countries, we will also work with countries that do not yet meet the standards of NEPAD but which are clearly committed to and working towards its implementation. We will not work with governments which disregard the interests and dignity of their people.
However, as a matter of strong principle, our commitment to respond to situations of humanitarian need remains universal and is independent of particular regimes. So, too, is our commitment to addressing the core issues of human dignity and development. The Development Goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration are an important component of this engagement.
Source: G8 Summit, Kananaskis, 27 June 2002
NEPAD recognizes that the prime responsibility for Africa's future lies with Africa itself. We will continue to support African efforts to encourage public engagement in the NEPAD and we will continue to consult with our African partners on how we can best assist their own efforts. G8 governments are committed to mobilize and energize global action, marshal resources and expertise, and provide impetus in support of the NEPAD's objectives. As G8 partners, we will undertake mutually reinforcing actions to help Africa accelerate growth and make lasting gains against poverty. Our Action Plan focuses on a limited number of priority areas where, collectively and individually, we can add value.
The African peer-review process is an innovative and potentially decisive element in the attainment of the objectives of the NEPAD. We welcome the adoption on June 11 by the NEPAD Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee of the Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance and the African Peer Review Mechanism. The peer-review process will inform our considerations of eligibility for enhanced partnerships. We will each make our own assessments in making these partnership decisions. While we will focus particular attention on enhanced-partnership countries, we will also work with countries that do not yet meet the standards of NEPAD but which are clearly committed to and working towards its implementation. We will not work with governments which disregard the interests and dignity of their people.
However, as a matter of strong principle, our commitment to respond to situations of humanitarian need remains universal and is independent of particular regimes. So, too, is our commitment to addressing the core issues of human dignity and development. The Development Goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration are an important component of this engagement.
Source: G8 Summit, Kananaskis, 27 June 2002
Thursday, June 20, 2002
Sexual Violence Against Women and Girls in Eastern Congo
Forces on all sides in the Congo conflict have committed war crimes against women and girls, Human Rights Watch said in a new 114-page report. The report documents the frequent and sometimes systematic use of rape and other forms of sexual violence in the Rwandan-occupied areas of eastern Congo. The report, which is based on numerous interviews with victims, witnesses, and officials, details crimes of sexual violence committed by soldiers of the Rwandan army and its Congolese ally, the Rassemblement congolais pour la démocratie (RCD), as well as armed groups opposed to them – Congolese Mai Mai rebels, and Burundian and Rwandan armed groups. These combatants raped women and girls during military operations to punish the local civilian population for allegedly supporting the “enemy.” In other cases, Mai Mai rebels and other armed groups abducted women and girls and forced them to provide sexual services and domestic labor, sometimes for periods of more than a year.
Source: Human Rights Watch
Source: Human Rights Watch
Farmers hail Mbeki's 'kill the boer' stance
Orgainised agriculture has welcomed President Thabo Mbeki's public rejection of hate speech such as the controversial slogan, Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer which was chanted at the funeral of African National Congress MP Peter Mokaba. The president of Agri SA, Japie Grobler conveyed his appreciation to President Mbeki for the "clear leadership" he demonstrated in parliament in reaction to objections from farm leaders to the hate speech at Mokaba's funeral as well as ongoing farm murders.
"This gives a strong new dimension to the debate on farm safety and on the rights, value and dignity of farmers," he said.
"The acid test remains whether the necessary mandates and disciplining will ensue so that society can be rid of cancers such as Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer, as well as the lawlessness within which we are living," said Grobler.
He said it was necessary that rural communities "do some soul searching" regarding their own attitudes and choice of words in order to promote unity which is needed to restore a respect for life, property and law and order in the country.
Source: IoL
"This gives a strong new dimension to the debate on farm safety and on the rights, value and dignity of farmers," he said.
"The acid test remains whether the necessary mandates and disciplining will ensue so that society can be rid of cancers such as Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer, as well as the lawlessness within which we are living," said Grobler.
He said it was necessary that rural communities "do some soul searching" regarding their own attitudes and choice of words in order to promote unity which is needed to restore a respect for life, property and law and order in the country.
Source: IoL
Wednesday, June 19, 2002
Mbeki speaks out against 'kill boer' slogan
No one had the right to call for the killing of farmers or Boers, nor the right to threaten violence to advance their particular goals, President Thabo Mbeki told the National Assembly on Wednesday. "Those farmers and Boers are as much South African and African as I am, entitled to the same rights and privileges that are enjoyed by any other South African," he said in reply to debate on his budget vote.
Mbeki's comments followed the recent controversy surrounding the chanting of the "Kill the Farmer, Kill the Boer" slogan at ANC MP Peter Mokaba's funeral, and calls for the government to distance itself from this form of hate speech. Mbeki said nobody anywhere in South Africa had a right to call for the killing of any South African, whatever the race, ethnic origin, gender or health condition of the intended victim. Mbeki said he was proud that many farmers instead of isolating themselves were lending a hand to create a better life for all by being "proudly African".
The president - who has consistently ignored the leader of the Opposition, Tony Leon - again snubbed him by not replying to any of Leon's concerns raised during the budget vote debate on Wednesday. However, Mbeki did wish NNP leader Marthinus van Schalkwyk well in his new responsibiity as Western Cape premier.
Source: IoL
Mbeki's comments followed the recent controversy surrounding the chanting of the "Kill the Farmer, Kill the Boer" slogan at ANC MP Peter Mokaba's funeral, and calls for the government to distance itself from this form of hate speech. Mbeki said nobody anywhere in South Africa had a right to call for the killing of any South African, whatever the race, ethnic origin, gender or health condition of the intended victim. Mbeki said he was proud that many farmers instead of isolating themselves were lending a hand to create a better life for all by being "proudly African".
The president - who has consistently ignored the leader of the Opposition, Tony Leon - again snubbed him by not replying to any of Leon's concerns raised during the budget vote debate on Wednesday. However, Mbeki did wish NNP leader Marthinus van Schalkwyk well in his new responsibiity as Western Cape premier.
Source: IoL
Tuesday, June 18, 2002
Masetlha joins president's men
Home affairs director-general Billy Masetlha will be redeployed to the presidency when his contract expires in two days, says President Thabo Mbeki. Masetlha, a former director-general of the South African secret service, "will reinforce our work in the areas covering security and the criminal justice system".
Mbeki made the announcement when he opened debate on the presidency's budget vote. He said the presidency had to discharge its functions of leadership, oversight, management, co-ordination, mediation of conflicting policy and monitoring delivery. "Like the presidential review commission, the government is of the view that the presidency requires more capacity to carry out these task effectively," he said.
Mbeki re-deployed Masetlha as home affairs director-general in December 1999. Masetlha's contract was controversially extended by a year, despite protests from Home Affairs Minister Mangosuthu Buthelezi, citing an irretrievable breakdown of relations with his director-general. Relations between the two men deteriorated even further, especially about the immigration bill and a litany of other complaints, including Masetlha's alleged insubordination.
Buthelezi has previously warned that the department could face legal action, as well as thousands in unauthorised expenditure, because Masetlha did not have a valid contract. Last week, he told parliament: "Just this morning, I have been advised that he (Masetlha) established 153 posts and filled many of them without my knowledge or approval, which makes the entire operation and related incurred expenditure unauthorised."
Source: Mail & Guardian
Mbeki made the announcement when he opened debate on the presidency's budget vote. He said the presidency had to discharge its functions of leadership, oversight, management, co-ordination, mediation of conflicting policy and monitoring delivery. "Like the presidential review commission, the government is of the view that the presidency requires more capacity to carry out these task effectively," he said.
Mbeki re-deployed Masetlha as home affairs director-general in December 1999. Masetlha's contract was controversially extended by a year, despite protests from Home Affairs Minister Mangosuthu Buthelezi, citing an irretrievable breakdown of relations with his director-general. Relations between the two men deteriorated even further, especially about the immigration bill and a litany of other complaints, including Masetlha's alleged insubordination.
Buthelezi has previously warned that the department could face legal action, as well as thousands in unauthorised expenditure, because Masetlha did not have a valid contract. Last week, he told parliament: "Just this morning, I have been advised that he (Masetlha) established 153 posts and filled many of them without my knowledge or approval, which makes the entire operation and related incurred expenditure unauthorised."
Source: Mail & Guardian
Monday, June 17, 2002
Parties unite against Mokaba 'hate speech'
Three political parties have expressed concern and outrage about the use of the slogan "Kill the Boer, kill the farmer" at the funeral of African National Congress MP Peter Mokaba. The Afrikaner Eenheidsbeweging (AEB) added its voice on Sunday night to the Democratic Alliance (DA) and the Freedom Front (FF), objecting to the use of the slogan and condemning it as hate speech.
AEB leader Cassie Aucamp said his party would refer the use of the slogan to the SA Human Rights Commission (SAHRC). He said the slogan, which was made popular by Mokaba, had previously been referred to the commission for a decision on whether it was hate speech or not. At the time the commission found that it was not hate speech if seen against the political background of that era. Aucamp said the commission would have to answer the question if the slogan, seen in the current political context, was still not hate speech. He said what worried him even more was the fact that President Thabo Mbeki had been present at the funeral where the slogan was chanted and apparently did nothing to stop it. He said the AEB would also raise the subject in parliament during Mbeki's budget vote this week.
The FF also vowed to a lay a complaint with the SAHRC against the ANC. FF leader Pieter Mulder accused the ANC's leadership of double standards when it came to condemning racism.
In his reaction, DA leader Tony Leon sharply criticised the government's failure to react. Leon said farmers were being murdered at a terrible rate - last year alone more than 900 farms were attacked and 140 farmers murdered - and the government had done nothing to stop it.
Source: IoL
AEB leader Cassie Aucamp said his party would refer the use of the slogan to the SA Human Rights Commission (SAHRC). He said the slogan, which was made popular by Mokaba, had previously been referred to the commission for a decision on whether it was hate speech or not. At the time the commission found that it was not hate speech if seen against the political background of that era. Aucamp said the commission would have to answer the question if the slogan, seen in the current political context, was still not hate speech. He said what worried him even more was the fact that President Thabo Mbeki had been present at the funeral where the slogan was chanted and apparently did nothing to stop it. He said the AEB would also raise the subject in parliament during Mbeki's budget vote this week.
The FF also vowed to a lay a complaint with the SAHRC against the ANC. FF leader Pieter Mulder accused the ANC's leadership of double standards when it came to condemning racism.
In his reaction, DA leader Tony Leon sharply criticised the government's failure to react. Leon said farmers were being murdered at a terrible rate - last year alone more than 900 farms were attacked and 140 farmers murdered - and the government had done nothing to stop it.
Source: IoL
US Supreme Court packed with millionaires
Recently released figures document the fact that the US Supreme Court, an unelected body that rules on issues affecting the lives of millions of Americans, is comprised of representatives of the wealthiest layers of society.
According to financial disclosure reports for 2001, five of the nine Supreme Court justices are millionaires, and the other four are not far behind. These reports actually underestimate the wealth of the justices, since they exclude primary residences. Were the homes of the justices included in the financial reports, it is likely that all nine would top one million dollars in net worth.
The justices, who are appointed to life-time positions by the US president, subject to confirmation by the Senate, are all richer than the vast majority of Americans. Figures on their wealth were released May 31 and reported by the Associated Press.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the wealthiest, worth between $7.7 million and $33.7 million, excluding her home in Washington and some other holdings. She also has retirement accounts worth at least $4 million. Ginsburg has ranked as the richest justice in past years as well.
Stephen Breyer comes in second, reporting a net worth of between $4.2 million and $15.2 million. This estimate does not include Breyer’s home in the posh Georgetown neighborhood in the nation’s capital, although he did list rental property in the West Indies and real estate holdings in Massachusetts and New Hampshire.
Sandra Day O’Connor is worth $2.8 million to $6.4 million. She holds a long list of telecommunications and medical stocks and, like the other justices, often recuses herself from cases that might impact her portfolio. O’Connor is reportedly the most frequently absent for such conflicts of interest.
John Paul Stevens and David Souter are also millionaires, with Stevens worth $1.3 million to $2.7 million, and Souter worth $1 million to 5.1 million.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist is worth somewhere between $510,000 and $1.2 million, not counting his home. Antonin Scalia has a reported net worth of $500,000 to $1.3 million.
Only Clarence Thomas and Anthony M. Kennedy came in well below $1 million—at least on paper. Thomas reported holdings of between $150,000 and $410,000, not counting his home in suburban northern Virginia. Kennedy reported cash holdings and life insurance worth $45,005 to $180,000. He has reportedly divested major assets over the past several years.
From the standpoint of compensation, all of the justices are in the top 5 percent of US households. The chief justice takes home $192,000 annually, and the other justices make $184,000.
Supreme Court justices, like other high-level government employees, are required to account publicly for income beyond their salaries, and disclose stock or other holdings that could potentially influence their performance on the job. But the reports on the justices’ holdings are vague, listed only in general categories, such as those worth up to $15,000 or those worth between $1 million and $5 million. While the justices are required to report these holdings, they are under no obligation to divest them.
The justices are also required to list non-paid, out-of-town speaking engagements at law schools and other law-related functions. While they receive no monetary compensation, their hosts foot the bill for travel expenses, hotel accommodation, food and other perks.
The Supreme Court in recent years has consistently handed down decisions in favor of corporations and against the rights of workers and the poor. These have included—among many others—a June 1998 ruling attacking funding for legal assistance for the poor and a March 2001 ruling upholding a court order for the Allied Pilots Association to pay $45.5 million in compensatory damages to American Airlines for refusing to halt a sickout. In February of this year, the Court issued a ruling that effectively lifted limitations on the drive by giant corporations to monopolize broadcasting and cable television.
Of a piece with its rulings in favor of corporations and against workers’ rights, this same high court has routinely handed down decisions attacking democratic rights. These have included rulings upholding the execution of the mentally ill and juveniles, and rulings curtailing the rights of criminal defendants—weakening Miranda rights and allowing for expanded powers of search and seizure by police agencies.
In its most infamous decision, the right-wing majority on the Court voted 5-4 in December 2000 to halt the Florida vote recount and install George W. Bush as president.
Source: World Socialist Web Site
According to financial disclosure reports for 2001, five of the nine Supreme Court justices are millionaires, and the other four are not far behind. These reports actually underestimate the wealth of the justices, since they exclude primary residences. Were the homes of the justices included in the financial reports, it is likely that all nine would top one million dollars in net worth.
The justices, who are appointed to life-time positions by the US president, subject to confirmation by the Senate, are all richer than the vast majority of Americans. Figures on their wealth were released May 31 and reported by the Associated Press.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the wealthiest, worth between $7.7 million and $33.7 million, excluding her home in Washington and some other holdings. She also has retirement accounts worth at least $4 million. Ginsburg has ranked as the richest justice in past years as well.
Stephen Breyer comes in second, reporting a net worth of between $4.2 million and $15.2 million. This estimate does not include Breyer’s home in the posh Georgetown neighborhood in the nation’s capital, although he did list rental property in the West Indies and real estate holdings in Massachusetts and New Hampshire.
Sandra Day O’Connor is worth $2.8 million to $6.4 million. She holds a long list of telecommunications and medical stocks and, like the other justices, often recuses herself from cases that might impact her portfolio. O’Connor is reportedly the most frequently absent for such conflicts of interest.
John Paul Stevens and David Souter are also millionaires, with Stevens worth $1.3 million to $2.7 million, and Souter worth $1 million to 5.1 million.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist is worth somewhere between $510,000 and $1.2 million, not counting his home. Antonin Scalia has a reported net worth of $500,000 to $1.3 million.
Only Clarence Thomas and Anthony M. Kennedy came in well below $1 million—at least on paper. Thomas reported holdings of between $150,000 and $410,000, not counting his home in suburban northern Virginia. Kennedy reported cash holdings and life insurance worth $45,005 to $180,000. He has reportedly divested major assets over the past several years.
From the standpoint of compensation, all of the justices are in the top 5 percent of US households. The chief justice takes home $192,000 annually, and the other justices make $184,000.
Supreme Court justices, like other high-level government employees, are required to account publicly for income beyond their salaries, and disclose stock or other holdings that could potentially influence their performance on the job. But the reports on the justices’ holdings are vague, listed only in general categories, such as those worth up to $15,000 or those worth between $1 million and $5 million. While the justices are required to report these holdings, they are under no obligation to divest them.
The justices are also required to list non-paid, out-of-town speaking engagements at law schools and other law-related functions. While they receive no monetary compensation, their hosts foot the bill for travel expenses, hotel accommodation, food and other perks.
The Supreme Court in recent years has consistently handed down decisions in favor of corporations and against the rights of workers and the poor. These have included—among many others—a June 1998 ruling attacking funding for legal assistance for the poor and a March 2001 ruling upholding a court order for the Allied Pilots Association to pay $45.5 million in compensatory damages to American Airlines for refusing to halt a sickout. In February of this year, the Court issued a ruling that effectively lifted limitations on the drive by giant corporations to monopolize broadcasting and cable television.
Of a piece with its rulings in favor of corporations and against workers’ rights, this same high court has routinely handed down decisions attacking democratic rights. These have included rulings upholding the execution of the mentally ill and juveniles, and rulings curtailing the rights of criminal defendants—weakening Miranda rights and allowing for expanded powers of search and seizure by police agencies.
In its most infamous decision, the right-wing majority on the Court voted 5-4 in December 2000 to halt the Florida vote recount and install George W. Bush as president.
Source: World Socialist Web Site
Monday, June 10, 2002
Aids dissident Peter Mokaba dies
Fiery senior African National Congress leader Peter Mokaba, who held controversial views on Aids, died at his home in Johannesburg on Sunday. ANC officials were not prepared to go on record on Sunday night and party spokesperson Smuts Ngonyama was not available for comment. "We want to express shock at the death of a young leader and we would like to express our condolences to the family," said Pan Africanist Congress leader Stanley Mogoba.
Mokaba will always be associated with controversy. "We believe he still had much to offer the country. I believe it is a loss to the country as well as to the Northern Province."
South African Communist Party spokesperson Mazibuko Jara also expressed shock. "We share our grief and pain with the family, the ANC and his friends," he said. "We will release a full statement after we have received a report from the ANC."
Mokaba was recently asked to desist from making public statements about Aids, as were scientists serving on President Thabo Mbeki's Aids advisory panel who held dissident views. Mokaba, an MP, denied that he was a dissident. He fell ill in 1999 and was given long leave from parliament. He fiercely rejected rumours at the time that he had Aids. When he attended the ANC national general council meeting in June 2000, he had noticeably lost weight. Turning his attention to the Aids debate, he made numerous statements emphasising that the virus had not been isolated and that antiretroviral drugs were toxic. He claimed the Americans and the French were fighting for markets to which they could sell antiretrovirals because they had struck an agreement in the 1980s that, if the virus was discovered by scientists, they would share the benefits of sales of drugs. He said in a recent interview that Aids drugs had no benefits beyond profits for firms. "I have fought apartheid and we won," he said. "We will fight this battle (against pharmaceutical companies), too. We can't allow ourselves to be turned into guinea pigs for these companies to play with our lives."
Mokaba hit out at Malegapuru Makgoba, head of the Medical Research Council, because he maintained that HIV caused Aids. Mokaba described him as a "low-grade politician" who was being used by anti-government forces. Despite his controversial views about the disease, Mokaba believed that the government was on the right course with its response to the pandemic. Mokaba had his strongest political support in Northern Province, the region in which he was born.
In March 1987, he founded the South African Youth Congress, Sayco, and was elected president at its launch. After the unbanning of the ANC, Sayco dissolved and the ANC Youth League was established. Mokaba served as ANC Youth League president from December 1991 to January 1994.
Mokaba will always be associated with controversy - and the phrase "Kill the boer, kill the farmer", which he coined when he was the youth league's president. He used the phrase when he addressed a commemorative rally for slain SACP leader Chris Hani at Khayelitsha near Cape Town on April 17 1993. At the time of his death, he was an ANC MP, a member of the ANC national executive committee and the chief electioneering strategist of the ruling party.
Source: IoL
Mokaba will always be associated with controversy. "We believe he still had much to offer the country. I believe it is a loss to the country as well as to the Northern Province."
South African Communist Party spokesperson Mazibuko Jara also expressed shock. "We share our grief and pain with the family, the ANC and his friends," he said. "We will release a full statement after we have received a report from the ANC."
Mokaba was recently asked to desist from making public statements about Aids, as were scientists serving on President Thabo Mbeki's Aids advisory panel who held dissident views. Mokaba, an MP, denied that he was a dissident. He fell ill in 1999 and was given long leave from parliament. He fiercely rejected rumours at the time that he had Aids. When he attended the ANC national general council meeting in June 2000, he had noticeably lost weight. Turning his attention to the Aids debate, he made numerous statements emphasising that the virus had not been isolated and that antiretroviral drugs were toxic. He claimed the Americans and the French were fighting for markets to which they could sell antiretrovirals because they had struck an agreement in the 1980s that, if the virus was discovered by scientists, they would share the benefits of sales of drugs. He said in a recent interview that Aids drugs had no benefits beyond profits for firms. "I have fought apartheid and we won," he said. "We will fight this battle (against pharmaceutical companies), too. We can't allow ourselves to be turned into guinea pigs for these companies to play with our lives."
Mokaba hit out at Malegapuru Makgoba, head of the Medical Research Council, because he maintained that HIV caused Aids. Mokaba described him as a "low-grade politician" who was being used by anti-government forces. Despite his controversial views about the disease, Mokaba believed that the government was on the right course with its response to the pandemic. Mokaba had his strongest political support in Northern Province, the region in which he was born.
In March 1987, he founded the South African Youth Congress, Sayco, and was elected president at its launch. After the unbanning of the ANC, Sayco dissolved and the ANC Youth League was established. Mokaba served as ANC Youth League president from December 1991 to January 1994.
Mokaba will always be associated with controversy - and the phrase "Kill the boer, kill the farmer", which he coined when he was the youth league's president. He used the phrase when he addressed a commemorative rally for slain SACP leader Chris Hani at Khayelitsha near Cape Town on April 17 1993. At the time of his death, he was an ANC MP, a member of the ANC national executive committee and the chief electioneering strategist of the ruling party.
Source: IoL
Saturday, June 8, 2002
Amnesty says US leads in human rights violations following September 11
The Amnesty International (AI) Report 2002 covers the period from January to December 2001, with a particular focus on the world situation following the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States.
The foreword to the report, written by Irene Khan, secretary general of Amnesty, together with most of the introduction, addresses the attitude of governments towards human rights since the launching of the so-called war against terrorism by US President Bush.
Under the heading “Countering the backlash,” Kahn notes that human rights activists now face an uphill battle: “As the ‘war against terrorism’ dominated world news, governments increasingly portrayed human rights as an obstacle to security, and human rights activists as romantic idealists at best, ‘defenders of terrorists’ at worst.”
Leading into this passage she quotes a revealing comment by an unnamed government official: “‘Your role collapsed with the collapse of the Twin Towers in New York.’ This blunt statement to AI delegates by a senior government official captured the challenge faced by the human rights movement following the events of 11 September 2001.” Amnesty was unable to source the above quotation as Kahn is presently away, but promised to do so as soon as possible. There is no reason to doubt its veracity, however, given that one attack after another on democratic rights has been mounted in the name of combating terrorism.
US human rights violations
Kahn explains, “the readiness of governments to trade human rights in the interest of security is nothing new,” but the difference today is that this is not done by “autocratic regimes but established democracies in the name of public security.” Heading the list of culprits is the US itself, with Britain also earning dishonourable mention.
The summary introducing the section on the US paints a picture far removed from that presented by Bush in his recent State of the Union address, when he insisted, “America will always stand firm for the non-negotiable demands of human dignity” and that these include “the rule of law” and “equal justice.”
AI writes that more than 1,200 people, mainly foreign nationals were detained during investigations into the September 11 attacks. Though public information on these detentions remains scant, it is clear that some were held incommunicado. The report speaks of “Muslim detainees suffering physical or verbal abuse from guards or other inmates while held in local jails and of cruel conditions of confinement, including prolonged solitary confinement, inadequate exercise and the wearing of shackles during non-contact visits.”
In late November last year, the Attorney General revealed that 104 people had been charged with various criminal offences, “many of them minor and one directly related to 11 September, of whom half remain in custody. Another 548 unidentified individuals were held on immigration charges,” the AI report states.
Alongside anti-terrorist legislation that severely curtails human rights and civil liberties, “AI has called for inquiries into several incidents involving the killing of civilians by US and allied forces during military action in Afghanistan and into the killing of hundreds of prisoners in Qala-i-Jhangi fort following an uprising.”
The report continues, “An as yet unknown number of Afghan civilians were killed or injured or had their homes or property destroyed during the US-led coalition bombing which began on 7 October and continued for the rest of the year. AI raised concerns with the US authorities about specific attacks in which civilians were killed and civilian objects were destroyed, urged that investigations be conducted into possible violation of international humanitarian law and called for a moratorium on the use of cluster-weapons. In November, AI called on the USA, the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan (United Front) and the United Kingdom to conduct an inquiry into the deaths of hundreds of Taleban prisoners and others at Qala-i-Jhangi fort, after an uprising by some Taleban captives was put down by bombing by US warplanes and United front artillery.”
Both the US and British governments denied AI’s request for an investigation into what happened at the Qala-i-Jhangi fort.
The stance of the Bush administration finds its reflection throughout the globe. Indeed the AI report makes clear that the launch of the US war on terrorism has had a major destabilising effect on world politics. It is broken down into regional sections including the Americas, Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, Europe, and Africa. Whatever the region, the assessment notes increased militarism and the systematic abuse of human rights. Khan says in the foreword, “A number of governments jumped on the ‘anti-terrorist’ bandwagon to stifle political dissent.”
Explaining that governments, “rushed through laws formulating new crimes, banning organisations and freezing their assets, curbing civil liberties and reducing the safeguards against human rights violations,” Kahn adds, “Regrettably, a number of these laws used definitions of ‘terrorism’ which were dangerously broad and vague.”
It is indicative that Britain, America’s main ally in the war on terrorism, is also singled out for particular criticism. The section dealing with Britain includes Northern Ireland and a substantial part of the report is given over to the record of human rights violations there. As with America, however, the September 11 attacks have been seized upon to introduce sweeping new legislation that severely curtails democratic rights and civil liberties.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair sought to strengthen Britain’s ties with the US by providing crucial political support to Bush’s war drive. As with Bush, the climate of hysteria produced after the terrorist attacks provided a useful cloak behind which to make inroads into democratic rights and civil liberties within Britain.
The report explains, “In the United Kingdom (UK), the government passed ‘emergency’ legislation which provided for detention of foreign nationals without charge or trial, thereby creating a shadow criminal justice system without the essential safeguards of the formal system. Legislation was passed in the USA allowing for indefinite detention on national security grounds of non-US nationals facing deportation,” Kahn writes.
“The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 was passed in December after less than a month of parliamentary and public scrutiny. The UK derogated from Article 5(t) of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 9 of the ICCPR [International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights] in order to allow for indefinite administrative detention. Under the Act, the Secretary of State may order such detention, without charge or trial and without recourse to judicial review, of any non-UK national deemed a ‘suspected international terrorist and national security risk’ on the basis of reasonable suspicion. The evidence would not be subject to public scrutiny or effective challenge. Among other measures, the Act also denies asylum-seekers labelled as ‘terrorist’ the right to have the merits of their claim individually assessed. In December, eight people were detained under the new legislation.” the report says.
In a separate press briefing on anti-terrorism legislation internationally, AI says of the European Union, “The European Commission prepared a proposal for a set of ‘terrorism’ offences that all member states should prohibit. In Amnesty International’s view, some of the proposed offences were excessively broad or too vague and could criminalise peaceful activities. The Commission also proposed an EU arrest warrant and surrender procedures between member states. Aspects of this would infringe human rights guarantees, e.g. not to be extradited to a jurisdiction where the person might face an unfair trial. New measures might prevent people from seeking asylum on the basis that they may be involved in ‘acts of terrorism’ without fully considering their claims in fair and satisfactory procedures.”
Kahn goes on to cite many other examples of countries that have imposed repressive and undemocratic legislation, concluding, “the aftermath of 11 September saw a resurgence in the powers of the military. More and more civilians were detained by the military and tried by military courts. Military forces, as well as unaccountable security and intelligence services, were increasingly involved in public security functions and in intelligence operations targeted at the civilian population.”
The “hypocrisy and selectivity of governments,” while not new, “became even clearer in the drive to build an alliance in the ‘war against terrorism’. Governments remained silent on abuses committed by those they counted or sought as allies. The same governments that denounced the human rights abuse of women by the Taleban government of Afghanistan remained silent about the plight of women in Saudi Arabia. Those who condemned human rights violations in Iraq did not protest against human rights violations by Russian troops in Chechnya, or by the authorities in Uzbekistan against Muslims who peacefully practise their faith outside state controls.”
The AI report draws particular attention to the impact of the war on terrorism upon immigrants and asylum seekers. Kahn states that the “tendency... to portray foreigners, particularly refugees and asylum-seekers, as ‘terrorists’” has led to “a refuelling of the fires of racism... People were attacked in the USA, Canada, western Europe, parts of Asia and Africa, not for what they did but for who they were, simply for being a Muslim or Arab or Asian, or even for looking like a Muslim, Arab or Asian.”
Source: World Socialist Web Site
The foreword to the report, written by Irene Khan, secretary general of Amnesty, together with most of the introduction, addresses the attitude of governments towards human rights since the launching of the so-called war against terrorism by US President Bush.
Under the heading “Countering the backlash,” Kahn notes that human rights activists now face an uphill battle: “As the ‘war against terrorism’ dominated world news, governments increasingly portrayed human rights as an obstacle to security, and human rights activists as romantic idealists at best, ‘defenders of terrorists’ at worst.”
Leading into this passage she quotes a revealing comment by an unnamed government official: “‘Your role collapsed with the collapse of the Twin Towers in New York.’ This blunt statement to AI delegates by a senior government official captured the challenge faced by the human rights movement following the events of 11 September 2001.” Amnesty was unable to source the above quotation as Kahn is presently away, but promised to do so as soon as possible. There is no reason to doubt its veracity, however, given that one attack after another on democratic rights has been mounted in the name of combating terrorism.
US human rights violations
Kahn explains, “the readiness of governments to trade human rights in the interest of security is nothing new,” but the difference today is that this is not done by “autocratic regimes but established democracies in the name of public security.” Heading the list of culprits is the US itself, with Britain also earning dishonourable mention.
The summary introducing the section on the US paints a picture far removed from that presented by Bush in his recent State of the Union address, when he insisted, “America will always stand firm for the non-negotiable demands of human dignity” and that these include “the rule of law” and “equal justice.”
AI writes that more than 1,200 people, mainly foreign nationals were detained during investigations into the September 11 attacks. Though public information on these detentions remains scant, it is clear that some were held incommunicado. The report speaks of “Muslim detainees suffering physical or verbal abuse from guards or other inmates while held in local jails and of cruel conditions of confinement, including prolonged solitary confinement, inadequate exercise and the wearing of shackles during non-contact visits.”
In late November last year, the Attorney General revealed that 104 people had been charged with various criminal offences, “many of them minor and one directly related to 11 September, of whom half remain in custody. Another 548 unidentified individuals were held on immigration charges,” the AI report states.
Alongside anti-terrorist legislation that severely curtails human rights and civil liberties, “AI has called for inquiries into several incidents involving the killing of civilians by US and allied forces during military action in Afghanistan and into the killing of hundreds of prisoners in Qala-i-Jhangi fort following an uprising.”
The report continues, “An as yet unknown number of Afghan civilians were killed or injured or had their homes or property destroyed during the US-led coalition bombing which began on 7 October and continued for the rest of the year. AI raised concerns with the US authorities about specific attacks in which civilians were killed and civilian objects were destroyed, urged that investigations be conducted into possible violation of international humanitarian law and called for a moratorium on the use of cluster-weapons. In November, AI called on the USA, the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan (United Front) and the United Kingdom to conduct an inquiry into the deaths of hundreds of Taleban prisoners and others at Qala-i-Jhangi fort, after an uprising by some Taleban captives was put down by bombing by US warplanes and United front artillery.”
Both the US and British governments denied AI’s request for an investigation into what happened at the Qala-i-Jhangi fort.
The stance of the Bush administration finds its reflection throughout the globe. Indeed the AI report makes clear that the launch of the US war on terrorism has had a major destabilising effect on world politics. It is broken down into regional sections including the Americas, Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, Europe, and Africa. Whatever the region, the assessment notes increased militarism and the systematic abuse of human rights. Khan says in the foreword, “A number of governments jumped on the ‘anti-terrorist’ bandwagon to stifle political dissent.”
Explaining that governments, “rushed through laws formulating new crimes, banning organisations and freezing their assets, curbing civil liberties and reducing the safeguards against human rights violations,” Kahn adds, “Regrettably, a number of these laws used definitions of ‘terrorism’ which were dangerously broad and vague.”
It is indicative that Britain, America’s main ally in the war on terrorism, is also singled out for particular criticism. The section dealing with Britain includes Northern Ireland and a substantial part of the report is given over to the record of human rights violations there. As with America, however, the September 11 attacks have been seized upon to introduce sweeping new legislation that severely curtails democratic rights and civil liberties.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair sought to strengthen Britain’s ties with the US by providing crucial political support to Bush’s war drive. As with Bush, the climate of hysteria produced after the terrorist attacks provided a useful cloak behind which to make inroads into democratic rights and civil liberties within Britain.
The report explains, “In the United Kingdom (UK), the government passed ‘emergency’ legislation which provided for detention of foreign nationals without charge or trial, thereby creating a shadow criminal justice system without the essential safeguards of the formal system. Legislation was passed in the USA allowing for indefinite detention on national security grounds of non-US nationals facing deportation,” Kahn writes.
“The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 was passed in December after less than a month of parliamentary and public scrutiny. The UK derogated from Article 5(t) of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 9 of the ICCPR [International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights] in order to allow for indefinite administrative detention. Under the Act, the Secretary of State may order such detention, without charge or trial and without recourse to judicial review, of any non-UK national deemed a ‘suspected international terrorist and national security risk’ on the basis of reasonable suspicion. The evidence would not be subject to public scrutiny or effective challenge. Among other measures, the Act also denies asylum-seekers labelled as ‘terrorist’ the right to have the merits of their claim individually assessed. In December, eight people were detained under the new legislation.” the report says.
In a separate press briefing on anti-terrorism legislation internationally, AI says of the European Union, “The European Commission prepared a proposal for a set of ‘terrorism’ offences that all member states should prohibit. In Amnesty International’s view, some of the proposed offences were excessively broad or too vague and could criminalise peaceful activities. The Commission also proposed an EU arrest warrant and surrender procedures between member states. Aspects of this would infringe human rights guarantees, e.g. not to be extradited to a jurisdiction where the person might face an unfair trial. New measures might prevent people from seeking asylum on the basis that they may be involved in ‘acts of terrorism’ without fully considering their claims in fair and satisfactory procedures.”
Kahn goes on to cite many other examples of countries that have imposed repressive and undemocratic legislation, concluding, “the aftermath of 11 September saw a resurgence in the powers of the military. More and more civilians were detained by the military and tried by military courts. Military forces, as well as unaccountable security and intelligence services, were increasingly involved in public security functions and in intelligence operations targeted at the civilian population.”
The “hypocrisy and selectivity of governments,” while not new, “became even clearer in the drive to build an alliance in the ‘war against terrorism’. Governments remained silent on abuses committed by those they counted or sought as allies. The same governments that denounced the human rights abuse of women by the Taleban government of Afghanistan remained silent about the plight of women in Saudi Arabia. Those who condemned human rights violations in Iraq did not protest against human rights violations by Russian troops in Chechnya, or by the authorities in Uzbekistan against Muslims who peacefully practise their faith outside state controls.”
The AI report draws particular attention to the impact of the war on terrorism upon immigrants and asylum seekers. Kahn states that the “tendency... to portray foreigners, particularly refugees and asylum-seekers, as ‘terrorists’” has led to “a refuelling of the fires of racism... People were attacked in the USA, Canada, western Europe, parts of Asia and Africa, not for what they did but for who they were, simply for being a Muslim or Arab or Asian, or even for looking like a Muslim, Arab or Asian.”
Source: World Socialist Web Site
Thursday, May 16, 2002
R1.6m gun claim: Govt appeals
Bloemfontein - The government will ask the Supreme Court of Appeal on Friday to overturn an earlier judgment holding it liable for failing to prevent a 1995 shooting spree in which a man killed his wife and daughter and wounded five neighbours.
One of the neighbours, Dirk van Duivenboden, succeeded in a Cape High Court claim seeking to hold the minister for safety and security liable for damages as a result of the police's failure to seize the firearm from Neil Brooks before the shooting.
Brooks, from Bothasig near Cape Town, shot at his wife, Dawn, who fled with her son across the road to Van Duivenboden's house on October 21, 1995.
Brooks shot dead his daughter, Nicole (11), and went over to his neighbour's house where he shot his wife in Van Duivenboden's garage. Van Duivenboden, who had tried to come to her rescue, was shot in the ankle.
Brooks then put the pistol to his neighbour's head and pulled the trigger, but the gun did not discharge. He fired again, and hit Van Duivenboden in the shoulder.
Brooks was sentenced to 27 years in prison in 1996 on two counts of murder and five of attempted murder.
Van Duivenboden initially lost his R1.6-million claim in the Cape High Court, but his appeal was upheld by a full Bench of the same court in December 2000.
Previous incidents with guns
He claimed that Brooks was known to be threatening and aggressive, was often under the influence of alcohol, and always carried firearms and ammunition.
There had been two earlier incidents involving Brooks and a gun, claimed Van Duivenboden. In the first, Brooks and his wife pointed firearms at one another in a family squabble. In the second, Brooks held up his family and threatened to shoot
anyone who came near his house.
The police failed to take any steps to seize his firearm, says Van Duivenboden in court documents.
He contends they should have instituted proceedings in terms of the Arms and Ammunition Act to declare Brooks unfit to possess a firearm.
The government's defence is based on the premise that it was not reasonably foreseeable that Brooks would shoot a member of the public.
It claims SA Police Service members had no legal duty towards Van Duivenboden to institute or initiate proceedings against Brooks under the act.
The appeal follows days after a Cape High Court judgment that the departments of justice and safety and security were liable for an attack on rape victim Alix Carmichele.
Her assailant, Francois Coetzee, had previous convictions for assault, housebreaking and indecent assault and was awaiting trial for the alleged rape of a 16-year-old girl when he attacked Carmichele.
Long road to victory
After the August 1995 attack, she had a fractured skull, broken arm, and a deep knife wound in the chest.
Carmichele on Tuesday won a seven-year legal battle against the government.
Her claim was first dismissed in the High Court, and then in the Supreme Court of Appeal. The matter then went to the Constitutional Court, which ordered the High Court to hear the case afresh.
The court found the State had been negligent and failed in its legal duty to protect Carmichele against the risk of violence.
On Friday, the Appeal Court will also hear an appeal by the government against a Pretoria High Court judgment in February last year holding it liable to a member of the public to the tune of R600 000. This was the amount stolen from him in a robbery, which police subsequently recovered and decided to keep for themselves.
The minister of safety and security contends the police concerned were not acting in the scope of their duties, and the government could not be held liable for their deeds.
One of the neighbours, Dirk van Duivenboden, succeeded in a Cape High Court claim seeking to hold the minister for safety and security liable for damages as a result of the police's failure to seize the firearm from Neil Brooks before the shooting.
Brooks, from Bothasig near Cape Town, shot at his wife, Dawn, who fled with her son across the road to Van Duivenboden's house on October 21, 1995.
Brooks shot dead his daughter, Nicole (11), and went over to his neighbour's house where he shot his wife in Van Duivenboden's garage. Van Duivenboden, who had tried to come to her rescue, was shot in the ankle.
Brooks then put the pistol to his neighbour's head and pulled the trigger, but the gun did not discharge. He fired again, and hit Van Duivenboden in the shoulder.
Brooks was sentenced to 27 years in prison in 1996 on two counts of murder and five of attempted murder.
Van Duivenboden initially lost his R1.6-million claim in the Cape High Court, but his appeal was upheld by a full Bench of the same court in December 2000.
Previous incidents with guns
He claimed that Brooks was known to be threatening and aggressive, was often under the influence of alcohol, and always carried firearms and ammunition.
There had been two earlier incidents involving Brooks and a gun, claimed Van Duivenboden. In the first, Brooks and his wife pointed firearms at one another in a family squabble. In the second, Brooks held up his family and threatened to shoot
anyone who came near his house.
The police failed to take any steps to seize his firearm, says Van Duivenboden in court documents.
He contends they should have instituted proceedings in terms of the Arms and Ammunition Act to declare Brooks unfit to possess a firearm.
The government's defence is based on the premise that it was not reasonably foreseeable that Brooks would shoot a member of the public.
It claims SA Police Service members had no legal duty towards Van Duivenboden to institute or initiate proceedings against Brooks under the act.
The appeal follows days after a Cape High Court judgment that the departments of justice and safety and security were liable for an attack on rape victim Alix Carmichele.
Her assailant, Francois Coetzee, had previous convictions for assault, housebreaking and indecent assault and was awaiting trial for the alleged rape of a 16-year-old girl when he attacked Carmichele.
Long road to victory
After the August 1995 attack, she had a fractured skull, broken arm, and a deep knife wound in the chest.
Carmichele on Tuesday won a seven-year legal battle against the government.
Her claim was first dismissed in the High Court, and then in the Supreme Court of Appeal. The matter then went to the Constitutional Court, which ordered the High Court to hear the case afresh.
The court found the State had been negligent and failed in its legal duty to protect Carmichele against the risk of violence.
On Friday, the Appeal Court will also hear an appeal by the government against a Pretoria High Court judgment in February last year holding it liable to a member of the public to the tune of R600 000. This was the amount stolen from him in a robbery, which police subsequently recovered and decided to keep for themselves.
The minister of safety and security contends the police concerned were not acting in the scope of their duties, and the government could not be held liable for their deeds.
Tuesday, April 23, 2002
Cwele new intelligence chair
African National Congress MP Dr Siyabonga Cwele was on Tuesday sworn in by Cape Judge-President John Hlophe as chairperson of Parliament's standing committee on intelligence. Cwele, who has been a member of the committee for two years, replaces ANC colleague Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, who was appointed ANC Chief Whip earlier this year.
In welcoming guests to the ceremony, Mapisa-Nqakula said Cwele would have his hands full, as the joint standing committee on intelligence (JSCI) was "the kind of committee that keeps you on your toes for 24 hours a day". She had the utmost confidence in him, as a highly principled man of integrity, to keep the committee united and not to compromise national security. National security came first in the JSCI, no matter "what party you are from", she said.
After taking the oath, Cwele said he intended to build on the firm foundation laid by his predecessors. He was committed to working as part of a team in the committee and to build on its high level of integrity.
In welcoming guests to the ceremony, Mapisa-Nqakula said Cwele would have his hands full, as the joint standing committee on intelligence (JSCI) was "the kind of committee that keeps you on your toes for 24 hours a day". She had the utmost confidence in him, as a highly principled man of integrity, to keep the committee united and not to compromise national security. National security came first in the JSCI, no matter "what party you are from", she said.
After taking the oath, Cwele said he intended to build on the firm foundation laid by his predecessors. He was committed to working as part of a team in the committee and to build on its high level of integrity.
Cwele new intelligence chair
African National Congress MP Dr Siyabonga Cwele was on Tuesday sworn in by Cape Judge-President John Hlophe as chairperson of Parliament's standing committee on intelligence. Cwele, who has been a member of the committee for two years, replaces ANC colleague Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, who was appointed ANC Chief Whip earlier this year.
In welcoming guests to the ceremony, Mapisa-Nqakula said Cwele would have his hands full, as the joint standing committee on intelligence (JSCI) was "the kind of committee that keeps you on your toes for 24 hours a day". She had the utmost confidence in him, as a highly principled man of integrity, to keep the committee united and not to compromise national security. National security came first in the JSCI, no matter "what party you are from", she said.
After taking the oath, Cwele said he intended to build on the firm foundation laid by his predecessors. He was committed to working as part of a team in the committee and to build on its high level of integrity.
Source: News 24
In welcoming guests to the ceremony, Mapisa-Nqakula said Cwele would have his hands full, as the joint standing committee on intelligence (JSCI) was "the kind of committee that keeps you on your toes for 24 hours a day". She had the utmost confidence in him, as a highly principled man of integrity, to keep the committee united and not to compromise national security. National security came first in the JSCI, no matter "what party you are from", she said.
After taking the oath, Cwele said he intended to build on the firm foundation laid by his predecessors. He was committed to working as part of a team in the committee and to build on its high level of integrity.
Source: News 24
Thursday, March 21, 2002
Defiant Mugabe presses Tsvangirai treason charge
Morgan Tsvangirai, the leader of the Zimbabwean opposition, was charged with high treason by President Robert Mugabe's government yesterday: a defiant response to Zimbabwe's suspension from the Commonwealth. Earlier this week the South African president, Thabo Mbeki, and other neighbouring African leaders urged Mr Mugabe not to press the charge, to create a more conciliatory political climate after last week's bitterly contested presidential election. By going ahead with it Mr Mugabe seems to be showing that he is not interested in negotiations with Mr Tsvangirai.
Since Mr Mugabe was declared the winner on March 13 he has signed into law a repressive press bill and his supporters have begun a campaign of violent retribution against the opposition. Four supporters of Mr Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change have been killed, and a white farmer.
In a courtroom packed with his supporters, Mr Tsvangirai pleaded not guilty to the charge that he sought to hire Canadian political consultants to assassinate Mr Mugabe. His lawyer, Eric Matinenga, said told the court that the charge was "a kneejerk reaction" to Zimbabwe's one-year suspension from Commonwealth membership. "Mr Tsvangirai's stake in this country is too high to think he would run away from allegations that are very weak indeed," Mr Matinenga said.
The MDC's secretary general, Welshman Ncube, who is also charged with treason, said the charges were "an attempt to continue the harassment of the leadership of the MDC and to make it impossible for us to continue to resist an illegitimate government". He said the suggestion that the MDC should enter into a government of national unity with Mr Mugabe's Zanu-PF party "was always out of the question", adding: "You cannot negotiate a government of national unity with a government you believe to be illegitimate."
Mr Tsvangirai was remanded until April 30 and released on bail of Z$1.5m (£20,000) in cash and Z$3m in property surety. He had to surrender his passport and must appear at his local police station every Monday. Renson Gasela, an MDC MP and the shadow agriculture minister, was also charged with treason and released on bail of Z$500,000. The state said it would produce six witnesses, a videotape and other evidence against Mr Tsvangirai.
Legal experts dismiss the evidence as "unconvincing and circumstantial, at best". But Zimbabwe's judicial system has lost a great deal of its independence and lawyers say that Mr Tsvangirai may not get a fair trial.
As he went to court, most Zimbabweans went to work, ignoring the three-day strike called by the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions. Virtually all shops and banks were open, but about half the country's factories were closed. Factory workers said the ZCTU had not explained the reasons for the strike. "No one told us what this strike is about," said a machinist who did not want his name used. "I missed work last Monday to vote. If I missed three days this week I would not have enough pay to feed my family. But if the unions had called a protest against the elections and said that clearly, we would have all supported it."
International pressure on Mr Mugabe is continuing to grow. His party's violent retribution against the MDC was criticised yesterday by the Norwegian election observers. "Following the election it quickly emerged that Zanu-PF supporters had embarked on systematic reprisals against opposition members and supporters," said Kare Vollan, the leader of the group, which reported that Mr Mugabe's followers were carrying out arson, beating, torture and killing with "impunity".
Source: The Guardian
Since Mr Mugabe was declared the winner on March 13 he has signed into law a repressive press bill and his supporters have begun a campaign of violent retribution against the opposition. Four supporters of Mr Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change have been killed, and a white farmer.
In a courtroom packed with his supporters, Mr Tsvangirai pleaded not guilty to the charge that he sought to hire Canadian political consultants to assassinate Mr Mugabe. His lawyer, Eric Matinenga, said told the court that the charge was "a kneejerk reaction" to Zimbabwe's one-year suspension from Commonwealth membership. "Mr Tsvangirai's stake in this country is too high to think he would run away from allegations that are very weak indeed," Mr Matinenga said.
The MDC's secretary general, Welshman Ncube, who is also charged with treason, said the charges were "an attempt to continue the harassment of the leadership of the MDC and to make it impossible for us to continue to resist an illegitimate government". He said the suggestion that the MDC should enter into a government of national unity with Mr Mugabe's Zanu-PF party "was always out of the question", adding: "You cannot negotiate a government of national unity with a government you believe to be illegitimate."
Mr Tsvangirai was remanded until April 30 and released on bail of Z$1.5m (£20,000) in cash and Z$3m in property surety. He had to surrender his passport and must appear at his local police station every Monday. Renson Gasela, an MDC MP and the shadow agriculture minister, was also charged with treason and released on bail of Z$500,000. The state said it would produce six witnesses, a videotape and other evidence against Mr Tsvangirai.
Legal experts dismiss the evidence as "unconvincing and circumstantial, at best". But Zimbabwe's judicial system has lost a great deal of its independence and lawyers say that Mr Tsvangirai may not get a fair trial.
As he went to court, most Zimbabweans went to work, ignoring the three-day strike called by the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions. Virtually all shops and banks were open, but about half the country's factories were closed. Factory workers said the ZCTU had not explained the reasons for the strike. "No one told us what this strike is about," said a machinist who did not want his name used. "I missed work last Monday to vote. If I missed three days this week I would not have enough pay to feed my family. But if the unions had called a protest against the elections and said that clearly, we would have all supported it."
International pressure on Mr Mugabe is continuing to grow. His party's violent retribution against the MDC was criticised yesterday by the Norwegian election observers. "Following the election it quickly emerged that Zanu-PF supporters had embarked on systematic reprisals against opposition members and supporters," said Kare Vollan, the leader of the group, which reported that Mr Mugabe's followers were carrying out arson, beating, torture and killing with "impunity".
Source: The Guardian
Wednesday, March 20, 2002
Sierra Leone War Crimes Court to Begin Deliberations in Fall
The United Nations is pressing ahead with arrangements for a special war crimes court in Sierra Leone that officials say will be leaner and less bureaucratic than the tribunals that were created to prosecute war criminals in the Balkans and Rwanda. The United Nations signed an agreement with Sierra Leone two months ago creating a legal framework for trying a score of defendants accused of atrocities in the West African country's civil war.
Ralph Zacklin, the assistant secretary general for legal affairs, visited Sierra Leone from Jan. 7 to 19 to lay the groundwork. He said today that the new court could start operating in Sierra Leone by this fall and return its first indictments before the end of the year. Mr. Zacklin briefed the Security Council on the proposed court on Tuesday. Today, he discussed some of the details.
The new court, he said, would enlist judges and lawyers in Sierra Leone as well as prominent jurists from outside the country. Secretary General Kofi Annan would appoint a majority of judges; the Sierra Leonean government would select the other judges and the chief prosecutor. The court in Sierra Leone would have a single trial chamber with three judges, two of them foreign. The appeals chamber would have five judges, three of them foreign. In a report last week to the Security Council, Mr. Annan said the United Nations mission in Sierra Leone, through its human rights section, was in a position to provide evidence of abuses to the prosecutor.
Three weeks ago, the Bush administration's war crimes ambassador, Pierre-Richard Prosper, criticized the tribunals for the Balkans and Rwanda, suggesting they were flawed by unprofessionalism and mismanagement. United Nations officials and other legal experts disputed Mr. Prosper's characterization. The tribunals for Rwanda and the Balkans have annual budgets of $100 million. The Sierra Leone special court, with a smaller staff, would get only $60 million over three years, financed by 15 to 20 countries, including the United States, Britain and the Netherlands. ''A lot of states are looking at the special court to see if this kind of court can work and if it can be leaner'' than the other tribunals, Mr. Zacklin said. He cited Cambodia, which has yet to bring to justice the Khmer Rouge officials who oversaw the killings of more than a million Cambodian civilians. ''I have no doubt whatsoever that the Cambodians are looking at what is happening in Sierra Leone,'' Mr. Zacklin said.
The defendants in Sierra Leone would include the likes of Foday Sankoh, a former army sergeant who headed the Revolutionary United Front. His insurgent group inspired terror by hacking off limbs of thousands of civilians, raping women and forcing children to fight. Some former rebels contend that government soldiers also committed atrocities and should be brought to account. The court is deemed essential for Sierra Leone's return to relative normality. With elections planned for May 14, the government has lifted the state of emergency to allow campaigning by political parties.
The United Nations had 17,400 troops deployed in Sierra Leone as of Jan. 31, making it the largest peacekeeping mission. Mr. Annan asked the Security Council to extend the mission's mandate, which expires at the end of this month, until Sept. 30. The secretary general said in his report that more than 47,000 combatants in Sierra Leone have put aside their weapons.
Source: New York Times
Ralph Zacklin, the assistant secretary general for legal affairs, visited Sierra Leone from Jan. 7 to 19 to lay the groundwork. He said today that the new court could start operating in Sierra Leone by this fall and return its first indictments before the end of the year. Mr. Zacklin briefed the Security Council on the proposed court on Tuesday. Today, he discussed some of the details.
The new court, he said, would enlist judges and lawyers in Sierra Leone as well as prominent jurists from outside the country. Secretary General Kofi Annan would appoint a majority of judges; the Sierra Leonean government would select the other judges and the chief prosecutor. The court in Sierra Leone would have a single trial chamber with three judges, two of them foreign. The appeals chamber would have five judges, three of them foreign. In a report last week to the Security Council, Mr. Annan said the United Nations mission in Sierra Leone, through its human rights section, was in a position to provide evidence of abuses to the prosecutor.
Three weeks ago, the Bush administration's war crimes ambassador, Pierre-Richard Prosper, criticized the tribunals for the Balkans and Rwanda, suggesting they were flawed by unprofessionalism and mismanagement. United Nations officials and other legal experts disputed Mr. Prosper's characterization. The tribunals for Rwanda and the Balkans have annual budgets of $100 million. The Sierra Leone special court, with a smaller staff, would get only $60 million over three years, financed by 15 to 20 countries, including the United States, Britain and the Netherlands. ''A lot of states are looking at the special court to see if this kind of court can work and if it can be leaner'' than the other tribunals, Mr. Zacklin said. He cited Cambodia, which has yet to bring to justice the Khmer Rouge officials who oversaw the killings of more than a million Cambodian civilians. ''I have no doubt whatsoever that the Cambodians are looking at what is happening in Sierra Leone,'' Mr. Zacklin said.
The defendants in Sierra Leone would include the likes of Foday Sankoh, a former army sergeant who headed the Revolutionary United Front. His insurgent group inspired terror by hacking off limbs of thousands of civilians, raping women and forcing children to fight. Some former rebels contend that government soldiers also committed atrocities and should be brought to account. The court is deemed essential for Sierra Leone's return to relative normality. With elections planned for May 14, the government has lifted the state of emergency to allow campaigning by political parties.
The United Nations had 17,400 troops deployed in Sierra Leone as of Jan. 31, making it the largest peacekeeping mission. Mr. Annan asked the Security Council to extend the mission's mandate, which expires at the end of this month, until Sept. 30. The secretary general said in his report that more than 47,000 combatants in Sierra Leone have put aside their weapons.
Source: New York Times
Friday, March 15, 2002
Court orders Gayadin millions held in trust
Sunny Gayadin and his family's millions in foreign banks, local money, and Durban and Dundee properties, are now held in trust, pending an action for them to be forfeit to the state. This order was made by Judge Kondile in the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Friday. The curator who is to assume control over the assets is chartered accountant John Waymark of Ernst and Young. Gayadin assented to the order.
In another court on Tuesday, Gayadin and a close corporation admitted liability for damage to the historic Buchanan Street swimming pool in Pietermaritzburg. The pool was closed for six months when its buildings were damaged by illegal demolition of a building ordered by Gayadin.
In Friday's case, Scorpions staff said the vast amounts of money and properties were the proceeds of the Gayadins' illegal casinos. In November 2000 Gayadin paid an admission of guilt fine of R248 250 in the Durban regional court for illegal gambling. Scorpions chartered accountant Keith Flack said the amounts held overseas were transferred in contravention of the exchange control regulations. He said the family's legitimate business interests made a profit of R458 404 from 1995 to 2000, which allowed him to say the Gayadin assets were the proceeds of illegal casinos.
Money held in foreign banks includes R1 324 620 in Barclays Bank in the Isle of Man and R9 091 778 in Standard Charter Bank, Jersey. Also held in trust are local financial assets totalling R1 480 094, properties at 158 West Street, Durban, and 63 Victoria Street, Dundee.
Source: IoL
In another court on Tuesday, Gayadin and a close corporation admitted liability for damage to the historic Buchanan Street swimming pool in Pietermaritzburg. The pool was closed for six months when its buildings were damaged by illegal demolition of a building ordered by Gayadin.
In Friday's case, Scorpions staff said the vast amounts of money and properties were the proceeds of the Gayadins' illegal casinos. In November 2000 Gayadin paid an admission of guilt fine of R248 250 in the Durban regional court for illegal gambling. Scorpions chartered accountant Keith Flack said the amounts held overseas were transferred in contravention of the exchange control regulations. He said the family's legitimate business interests made a profit of R458 404 from 1995 to 2000, which allowed him to say the Gayadin assets were the proceeds of illegal casinos.
Money held in foreign banks includes R1 324 620 in Barclays Bank in the Isle of Man and R9 091 778 in Standard Charter Bank, Jersey. Also held in trust are local financial assets totalling R1 480 094, properties at 158 West Street, Durban, and 63 Victoria Street, Dundee.
Source: IoL
Mugabe signs off draconian press laws
Press freedom in Zimbabwe suffered a further blow today after president Robert Mugabe declared that all journalists have to be licensed by the government. The newly re-elected president also put into law controls that will limit foreign correspondents' freedom to work in the country even more severely.
Mr Mugabe formally enacted the access to information act today. The act was passed in January, but he delayed signing it into law after some of his own supporters expressed reservations about it. It will now be illegal for journalists to operate in Zimbabwe without government accreditation. A state-appointed media commission has been set up with disciplinary powers to withdraw journalists' licences, confiscate equipment and jail journalists for up to two years. It also restricts visits by foreign journalists. Specific assignments have to be cleared first by Zimbabwe's embassies in the journalists' home countries.
The new measures come on top of recently passed security laws, which state that journalists can be prosecuted for criticising Mr Mugabe and his government.
Source: The Guardian
Mr Mugabe formally enacted the access to information act today. The act was passed in January, but he delayed signing it into law after some of his own supporters expressed reservations about it. It will now be illegal for journalists to operate in Zimbabwe without government accreditation. A state-appointed media commission has been set up with disciplinary powers to withdraw journalists' licences, confiscate equipment and jail journalists for up to two years. It also restricts visits by foreign journalists. Specific assignments have to be cleared first by Zimbabwe's embassies in the journalists' home countries.
The new measures come on top of recently passed security laws, which state that journalists can be prosecuted for criticising Mr Mugabe and his government.
Source: The Guardian
Sunday, March 10, 2002
Mugabe: The price of silence
Panorama goes inside Zimbabwe, defying the ban on BBC journalists, and investigates crimes against humanity under Robert Mugabe's rule. The situation is fraught as Mugabe unleashes more terror in a bid to secure re-election as president. Reporter Fergal Keane evades secret police and gangs of war veterans, travelling into southern Zimbabwe to hear accounts from eye-witnesses and victims of Mugabe's bloody campaign in Matabeleland in the 80s.Robert Mugabe is accused of committing mass murder in the early years of his rule. At this time, Britain was giving him huge sums in economic aid and was training the Zimbabwean army. Panorama reveals what the British Government knew about Mugabe's campaign of mass slaughter, and investigates whether anything was done to stop him. The programme asks whether failure to confront Mugabe then gave him the confidence to believe he could get away with murder. A leading British diplomat at the time tells Panorama: "I think this Matabeleland is a side issue, the real issues were much bigger. We were extremely interested that Zimbabwe should be a success story, and we were doing our best to help Mugabe and his people bring that about."
A prominent Church leader in Zimbabwe is furious: "It is gross irresponsibility to call it a side issue. How would he have felt if his own family had been murdered?" Panorama examines whether Britain was right to ignore these atrocities, and whether interventions would have made any difference.
A transcript of the interview can be found here.
A report on the 1980's deistunances in Matabeleland & the Midlands in Zimbabwe complied by the Cathlic Commission of Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe (March 1997) and be found here.
Source: BBC
Friday, February 1, 2002
FINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE CENTRE ACT 38 OF 2001
The purpose of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act is to establish a Financial Intelligence Centre and a Money Laundering Advisory Council in order to combat money laundering activities and the financing of terrorist and related activities; to impose certain duties on institutions and other persons who might be used for money laundering purposes and the financing of terrorist and related activities: to amend the Prevention of Organised Crime Act, 1998, and the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000; and to provide for matters connected therewith.
Establishment
(1) A Financial Intelligence Centre is hereby established as an institution outside the public service but within the public administration as envisaged in section 195 of the Constitution.
(2) The Centre is a juristic person.
Objectives
(1) The principal objective of the Centre is to assist in the identification of the proceeds of unlawful activities and the combating of money laundering activities and the financing of terrorist and related activities.
(2) The other objectives of the Centre are-
(a) to make information collected by it available to investigating authorities, the intelligence services and the South African Revenue Service to facilitate the administration and enforcement of the laws of the Republic;
(b) to exchange information with similar bodies in other countries regarding money laundering activities and similar offences.
Functions
To achieve its objectives the Centre must-
(a) process, analyse and interpret information disclosed to it, and obtained by it, in terms of this Act;
(b) inform, advise and cooperate with investigating authorities, supervisory bodies, the South African Revenue Service and the intelligence services;
(c) monitor and give guidance to accountable institutions, supervisory bodies and other persons regarding the performance by them of their duties and their compliance with the provisions of this Act;
(d) retain the information referred to in paragraph (a) in the manner and for the period required by this Act.
Source: SABINET
Establishment
(1) A Financial Intelligence Centre is hereby established as an institution outside the public service but within the public administration as envisaged in section 195 of the Constitution.
(2) The Centre is a juristic person.
Objectives
(1) The principal objective of the Centre is to assist in the identification of the proceeds of unlawful activities and the combating of money laundering activities and the financing of terrorist and related activities.
(2) The other objectives of the Centre are-
(a) to make information collected by it available to investigating authorities, the intelligence services and the South African Revenue Service to facilitate the administration and enforcement of the laws of the Republic;
(b) to exchange information with similar bodies in other countries regarding money laundering activities and similar offences.
Functions
To achieve its objectives the Centre must-
(a) process, analyse and interpret information disclosed to it, and obtained by it, in terms of this Act;
(b) inform, advise and cooperate with investigating authorities, supervisory bodies, the South African Revenue Service and the intelligence services;
(c) monitor and give guidance to accountable institutions, supervisory bodies and other persons regarding the performance by them of their duties and their compliance with the provisions of this Act;
(d) retain the information referred to in paragraph (a) in the manner and for the period required by this Act.
Source: SABINET
Friday, January 4, 2002
U.N. War Crimes Court to Try 20 Suspects in Sierra Leone
Secretary General Kofi Annan authorized a war crimes tribunal today to be set up in Sierra Leone despite a big shortfall in financial pledges from the member nations of the United Nations. Mr. Annan said a United Nations planning mission would go to Sierra Leone on Monday to start the process of arranging headquarters for the special court, hiring local staff members and beginning investigations.
The tribunal's task would be to prosecute about 20 people accused of being ringleaders of the West African nation's decade-long civil war, which appears to be winding down. In 2000, the Security Council voted to set up the tribunal to try people charged with crimes against humanity, war crimes and other serious violations of international law.
Sierra Leone's representative at the United Nations, Allieu Ibrahim Kanu, said the court could be ready to begin trying cases in about a year. The war pitted government forces and militias against rebels of the Revolutionary United Front who seized control of the country's diamond-mining areas and became notorious for hacking off the limbs of women and children, and for enlisting thousands of child soldiers in their cause. The rebels fueled the fighting by selling diamonds they mined for arms. But after a disarmament agreement was reached in May, the United Nations deployed its biggest peacekeeping operation across the country and collected the weapons of more than 40,000 fighters.
The United Nations mission would remain in the country through Jan. 18 and culminate in the signing of an agreement between the United Nations and Sierra Leone establishing a legal framework for the tribunal's operations, Mr. Annan said in a letter to the Security Council. While United Nations members have donated nearly enough money to finance the first year of the tribunal's operations, pledges for its second and third years have fallen well short of the amounts required, Mr. Annan reported. So the United Nations may have to request extra payments from members to make up any shortfalls, he said. The world body has already slashed the court's budget to $57 million from an original estimate of $114 million for three years because of problems raising the funds.
Source: New York Times
The tribunal's task would be to prosecute about 20 people accused of being ringleaders of the West African nation's decade-long civil war, which appears to be winding down. In 2000, the Security Council voted to set up the tribunal to try people charged with crimes against humanity, war crimes and other serious violations of international law.
Sierra Leone's representative at the United Nations, Allieu Ibrahim Kanu, said the court could be ready to begin trying cases in about a year. The war pitted government forces and militias against rebels of the Revolutionary United Front who seized control of the country's diamond-mining areas and became notorious for hacking off the limbs of women and children, and for enlisting thousands of child soldiers in their cause. The rebels fueled the fighting by selling diamonds they mined for arms. But after a disarmament agreement was reached in May, the United Nations deployed its biggest peacekeeping operation across the country and collected the weapons of more than 40,000 fighters.
The United Nations mission would remain in the country through Jan. 18 and culminate in the signing of an agreement between the United Nations and Sierra Leone establishing a legal framework for the tribunal's operations, Mr. Annan said in a letter to the Security Council. While United Nations members have donated nearly enough money to finance the first year of the tribunal's operations, pledges for its second and third years have fallen well short of the amounts required, Mr. Annan reported. So the United Nations may have to request extra payments from members to make up any shortfalls, he said. The world body has already slashed the court's budget to $57 million from an original estimate of $114 million for three years because of problems raising the funds.
Source: New York Times
Thursday, December 20, 2001
A letter from a reader in South Africa
To the editor, World Socialist Web Site,
First of all, accept my sincere appreciation for the significant and necessary role performed by the WSWS editorial committee in heightening our consciousness around so many facets of our daily lives and struggles. This, of course, includes your almost singular, and thus highly valuable, commentaries on the atrocities inflicted by the American administration/military on the innocent people of Afghanistan; a precursor of what will surely translate into full-scale plunder and rape of the resources of this already war-torn and destitute people.
Make no mistake, I fully abhor the atrocious acts perpetrated on September 11 by hitherto unknown and faceless cowards, but I strongly feel (like the overwhelming millions across the globe) that the American administration is acting tenfold worse by summarily executing and wiping out innocent men, women and children, in some cases even villages in its pursuit of so-called freedom and the eradication of terrorism. I have carefully followed your daily commentaries on developments both in Afghanistan and on American soil.
Recent developments in America, such as the curtailment of civil liberties, detention without trial and public notification, remind strongly of conditions in South Africa during the height of the struggle for liberation in the ’70s and ’80s especially. The world is reminded that during this time South Africa was ruled by a fascist, merciless, undemocratic, vehemently racist, abusive, exploitative and tyrannical government. Is this where America is heading?
Today in South Africa political liberties have been won, “democratic governance” abounds in all spheres of public life; however, the hard-won victories and programs of the progressive working class lie in tatters for all to behold. Since the dawn of our bourgeois democracy poverty, destitution, unemployment and crime have been progressively growing. Homelessness continues to ravage and kill the spirits of those who dreamed of and fought for freedom, democracy and equality in a liberated South Africa. The South African rulers have made their primary budgetary concern the escalation of its military arsenal (why? since the country is not at war, nor threatened by any of its neighbours or any other country in Africa or elsewhere for that matter). This will cost the country some 70 billion rands—the biggest expenditure in this field since 1994.
Another primary concern of the ANC government is the privatization of state assets. The leadership in the working class unions in South Africa is partly to be blamed and accountable for these developments as can be clearly observed from its close alliance with the bourgeois-capitalist ANC ruling class. The lesson to be learnt is simply that a system of capitalist exploitation and the accumulation of private wealth by those who control the means of production can never lead to the emancipation, freedom, happiness, progress, and well-being of the poor and working people of this world.
Recent events in America bring back stark images and nightmares strongly reminiscent of South Africa’s apartheid era. But above all, recent events in America similarly reveal the colossal power wielded by the political agents of the capitalist class. However, having said this, one should ask why are Western capitalist governments driven to such extremes as can be observed in their proclamations and decrees during the period following the September 11 attack? Is it because they realise the enormous power and challenge posed by an organised and principled international working class? Is it not time that workers internationally realise their own strengths and collectively obliterate all oppressive and exploitative systems which currently govern our lives?
Returning to the issue at hand, namely the war in Afghanistan, I am therefore particularly appreciative of your worthy efforts to make known to the world in clear and uncertain terms, an accurate account of this war (as observed not by the perpetrators but by the victims) and the true reasons behind this war (as espoused from a workers’ perspective, thus being anti-capitalist amidst the predominant media force internationally). I am also highly appreciative of your courageous efforts, knowing just of how ruthless and merciless the ruling class can be when faced with simple truths and honesty.
CK
Cape Town, South Africa
6 December 2001
First of all, accept my sincere appreciation for the significant and necessary role performed by the WSWS editorial committee in heightening our consciousness around so many facets of our daily lives and struggles. This, of course, includes your almost singular, and thus highly valuable, commentaries on the atrocities inflicted by the American administration/military on the innocent people of Afghanistan; a precursor of what will surely translate into full-scale plunder and rape of the resources of this already war-torn and destitute people.
Make no mistake, I fully abhor the atrocious acts perpetrated on September 11 by hitherto unknown and faceless cowards, but I strongly feel (like the overwhelming millions across the globe) that the American administration is acting tenfold worse by summarily executing and wiping out innocent men, women and children, in some cases even villages in its pursuit of so-called freedom and the eradication of terrorism. I have carefully followed your daily commentaries on developments both in Afghanistan and on American soil.
Recent developments in America, such as the curtailment of civil liberties, detention without trial and public notification, remind strongly of conditions in South Africa during the height of the struggle for liberation in the ’70s and ’80s especially. The world is reminded that during this time South Africa was ruled by a fascist, merciless, undemocratic, vehemently racist, abusive, exploitative and tyrannical government. Is this where America is heading?
Today in South Africa political liberties have been won, “democratic governance” abounds in all spheres of public life; however, the hard-won victories and programs of the progressive working class lie in tatters for all to behold. Since the dawn of our bourgeois democracy poverty, destitution, unemployment and crime have been progressively growing. Homelessness continues to ravage and kill the spirits of those who dreamed of and fought for freedom, democracy and equality in a liberated South Africa. The South African rulers have made their primary budgetary concern the escalation of its military arsenal (why? since the country is not at war, nor threatened by any of its neighbours or any other country in Africa or elsewhere for that matter). This will cost the country some 70 billion rands—the biggest expenditure in this field since 1994.
Another primary concern of the ANC government is the privatization of state assets. The leadership in the working class unions in South Africa is partly to be blamed and accountable for these developments as can be clearly observed from its close alliance with the bourgeois-capitalist ANC ruling class. The lesson to be learnt is simply that a system of capitalist exploitation and the accumulation of private wealth by those who control the means of production can never lead to the emancipation, freedom, happiness, progress, and well-being of the poor and working people of this world.
Recent events in America bring back stark images and nightmares strongly reminiscent of South Africa’s apartheid era. But above all, recent events in America similarly reveal the colossal power wielded by the political agents of the capitalist class. However, having said this, one should ask why are Western capitalist governments driven to such extremes as can be observed in their proclamations and decrees during the period following the September 11 attack? Is it because they realise the enormous power and challenge posed by an organised and principled international working class? Is it not time that workers internationally realise their own strengths and collectively obliterate all oppressive and exploitative systems which currently govern our lives?
Returning to the issue at hand, namely the war in Afghanistan, I am therefore particularly appreciative of your worthy efforts to make known to the world in clear and uncertain terms, an accurate account of this war (as observed not by the perpetrators but by the victims) and the true reasons behind this war (as espoused from a workers’ perspective, thus being anti-capitalist amidst the predominant media force internationally). I am also highly appreciative of your courageous efforts, knowing just of how ruthless and merciless the ruling class can be when faced with simple truths and honesty.
CK
Cape Town, South Africa
6 December 2001
Monday, December 17, 2001
Witch doctors 'cleanse' Vlakplaas
VLAKPLAAS, the notorious farm used covertly by the South African state for murder and torture under apartheid, saw blood spilled again yesterday as witch doctors slaughtered livestock to exorcise its evil spirits. Ten years after the last white secret policemen left, hundreds of black "traditional healers" gathered to cleanse a place viewed by most modern South Africans as the Jews view Auschwitz. Drums were beaten, whistles blown and elaborate dances performed by groups of witch doctors from all over South Africa, next to the now-overgrown helipad once used to deliver victims of the apartheid regime's security apparatus.
Farm buildings that once echoed to the screams of victims echoed to the screams of cattle and goats that had their throats cut by experts in magic and the black arts. "This is to put the souls of the victims to rest and to appease their ancestors," said one woman between gyrations under the baking hot December sun.
Some of the men wore beaded head-dresses and animal skins while the women wrapped themselves in an elaborate collection of bright scarves and shawls. A few white members of the local police contingent deployed at the farm raised their eyebrows in surprise at some of the performances. But the commander said he thought the event a "good idea". "Traditional healers feel the collective wound left by Vlakplaas can be healed," said Wally Serote, chairman of the Indigenous Knowledge Secretariat. "Vlakplaas with its horrific memories can be turned into a place of reconciliation and healing."
The white caretaker of the farm, Louis Smit, who is a born-again Christian, said he hoped the ceremony would rid the place of some of its demons. He casually pointed to a room next to the verandah where a man was beaten to death with a snooker cue in the 1980s and at the barbecue area, which was used to burn body parts.
Vlakplaas, a pretty, 250-acre farm only 20 minutes' drive from Pretoria but hidden by a ring of mountains, has yet to have its full history revealed. It served for more than 10 years as the headquarters of the secret police's often brutal efforts to hold on to power but was kept secret by the white government. During the Truth and Reconciliation Commission hearings, which were meant to draw a line under apartheid-era atrocities, visits were made to the Vlakplaas and a number of unmarked graves were discovered. The event at Vlakplaas was intended to pave the way for the farm being turned into a museum and a centre for the training of witch doctors.
Source: Telegraph
Farm buildings that once echoed to the screams of victims echoed to the screams of cattle and goats that had their throats cut by experts in magic and the black arts. "This is to put the souls of the victims to rest and to appease their ancestors," said one woman between gyrations under the baking hot December sun.
Some of the men wore beaded head-dresses and animal skins while the women wrapped themselves in an elaborate collection of bright scarves and shawls. A few white members of the local police contingent deployed at the farm raised their eyebrows in surprise at some of the performances. But the commander said he thought the event a "good idea". "Traditional healers feel the collective wound left by Vlakplaas can be healed," said Wally Serote, chairman of the Indigenous Knowledge Secretariat. "Vlakplaas with its horrific memories can be turned into a place of reconciliation and healing."
The white caretaker of the farm, Louis Smit, who is a born-again Christian, said he hoped the ceremony would rid the place of some of its demons. He casually pointed to a room next to the verandah where a man was beaten to death with a snooker cue in the 1980s and at the barbecue area, which was used to burn body parts.
Vlakplaas, a pretty, 250-acre farm only 20 minutes' drive from Pretoria but hidden by a ring of mountains, has yet to have its full history revealed. It served for more than 10 years as the headquarters of the secret police's often brutal efforts to hold on to power but was kept secret by the white government. During the Truth and Reconciliation Commission hearings, which were meant to draw a line under apartheid-era atrocities, visits were made to the Vlakplaas and a number of unmarked graves were discovered. The event at Vlakplaas was intended to pave the way for the farm being turned into a museum and a centre for the training of witch doctors.
Source: Telegraph
Wednesday, December 5, 2001
South Africa: 3 Cleared Of Coup Accusation
Three of the country's leading black businessmen, all central figures in the anti-apartheid struggle and senior members of the governing African National Congress, have been cleared of accusations that they were plotting to oust President Thabo Mbeki. The accusations against Cyril Ramaphosa, Tokyo Sexwale and Matthews Phosa were widely denounced as absurd and dangerous when they were made in April.
In announcing the results of the investigation, Minister of Safety and Security Steve Tshwete, who first accused the men, expressed his ''profound apologies'' to them and their families.
Source: New York Times
In announcing the results of the investigation, Minister of Safety and Security Steve Tshwete, who first accused the men, expressed his ''profound apologies'' to them and their families.
Source: New York Times
Friday, November 23, 2001
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (PROTECTION OF FUNDS) ACT 28 OF 2001
The purpose of the G=Financial Institutions )protections of Funds) Act is to provide for, and consolidate the laws relating to, the investment, safe custody and administration of funds and trust property by financial institutions; to enable the registrar to protect such funds and trust property; to repeal the Financial Institutions (Investment of Funds) Act, 1984 (Act No. 39 of 1984); to improve the enforcement powers of the registrar; and to provide for matters incidental thereto.
Duties of persons dealing with funds of, and with trust property controlled by, financial institutions
A director, member, partner, official, employee or agent of a financial institution or of a nominee company who invests, holds, keeps in safe custody, controls, administers or alienates any funds of the financial institution or any trust property-
(a) must, with regard to such funds, observe the utmost good faith and exercise proper care and diligence;
(b) must, with regard to the trust property and the terms of the instrument or agreement by which the trust or agency in question has been created, observe the utmost good faith and exercise the care and diligence required of a trustee in the exercise or discharge of his or her powers and duties; and
(c) may not alienate, invest, pledge, hypothecate or otherwise encumber or make use of the funds or trust property or furnish any guarantee in a manner calculated to gain directly or indirectly any improper advantage for himself or herself or for any other person to the prejudice of the financial institution or principal concerned.
Declaration of interest
A director, member, partner, official, employee or agent of a financial institution or of a nominee company who takes part in a decision to invest any of the funds of the financial institution or any trust property in a company or other undertaking in which he or she has a direct or indirect financial interest, must declare that interest in writing to the board of management or other governing body of the financial institution or nominee company, indicating the nature and extent of such interest, before such decision is made.
Enforcement
The registrar may, on good cause shown, apply to a division of the High Court having jurisdiction for the appointment of a curator to take control of, and to manage the whole or any part of, the business of an institution.
Source: SABINET
Duties of persons dealing with funds of, and with trust property controlled by, financial institutions
A director, member, partner, official, employee or agent of a financial institution or of a nominee company who invests, holds, keeps in safe custody, controls, administers or alienates any funds of the financial institution or any trust property-
(a) must, with regard to such funds, observe the utmost good faith and exercise proper care and diligence;
(b) must, with regard to the trust property and the terms of the instrument or agreement by which the trust or agency in question has been created, observe the utmost good faith and exercise the care and diligence required of a trustee in the exercise or discharge of his or her powers and duties; and
(c) may not alienate, invest, pledge, hypothecate or otherwise encumber or make use of the funds or trust property or furnish any guarantee in a manner calculated to gain directly or indirectly any improper advantage for himself or herself or for any other person to the prejudice of the financial institution or principal concerned.
Declaration of interest
A director, member, partner, official, employee or agent of a financial institution or of a nominee company who takes part in a decision to invest any of the funds of the financial institution or any trust property in a company or other undertaking in which he or she has a direct or indirect financial interest, must declare that interest in writing to the board of management or other governing body of the financial institution or nominee company, indicating the nature and extent of such interest, before such decision is made.
Enforcement
The registrar may, on good cause shown, apply to a division of the High Court having jurisdiction for the appointment of a curator to take control of, and to manage the whole or any part of, the business of an institution.
Source: SABINET
Tuesday, November 20, 2001
South Africa: Stop Court Fight on AIDS Drugs
Appealing to his history of leadership in the country’s struggle for rights and freedoms, Human Rights Watch today urged President Thabo Mbeki to have his government drop its fight against a legal appeal for low-cost AIDS treatment for pregnant women.
The South African government is currently in court fighting a case brought by the Treatment Action Campaign of South Africa to ensure HIV-positive women have access to affordable antiretroviral treatment to reduce the risk of transmission of HIV to their newborns. A hearing in the case is scheduled for November 26 in the Pretoria High Court. President Mbeki has at various times denied that the human immunodeficiency virus is the cause of AIDS and has alleged dangers of anti-AIDS drugs that are unproven in clinical science.
“Mbeki should pull the government out of this case and support programs to help newborns start life free of HIV,” said Peter Takirambudde, executive director of Human Rights Watch’s Africa Division. “Even in much lower-income African countries, women increasingly have access to this treatment.”
South Africa has the largest number of persons living with HIV/AIDS of any country, about 4.2 million, according to United Nations figures. The Medical Research Council of South Africa recently estimated that 7 million persons could die of HIV/AIDS by 2010, mostly young adults in their prime. Although South Africa has resources to provide treatment to a significant number of AIDS sufferers, the government has consistently resisted supporting treatment programs.
In April 2001, South Africa won a victory against 39 pharmaceutical companies that had sued the government because of the provisions of a 1997 law that would have facilitated the production and importation of generic drugs for HIV/AIDS. The opportunity for treatment programs that was created when the companies dropped their suit in the face of national and international pressure has been left unused by the government, which does not fund treatment programs on a significant level.
“President Mbeki could go a long way to redeeming his mishandling of AIDS by supporting the treatment for mother-to-child transmission,” said Takirambudde.
Human Rights Watch urged President Mbeki to lead the government in increasing budgetary support for HIV/AIDS programs – currently allocated less than 1 percent of the national budget – and in working with the medical and public health leaders in South Africa who are already mobilized to strengthen both prevention and treatment programs.
“President Mbeki’s questioning of the science of HIV/AIDS and the South African government’s active refusal to support programs of known effectiveness is helping to fuel the AIDS crisis in South Africa,” said Takirambudde. “This is much worse than the government inaction we have seen so often regarding HIV/AIDS.”
Source: Human Rights Watch
The South African government is currently in court fighting a case brought by the Treatment Action Campaign of South Africa to ensure HIV-positive women have access to affordable antiretroviral treatment to reduce the risk of transmission of HIV to their newborns. A hearing in the case is scheduled for November 26 in the Pretoria High Court. President Mbeki has at various times denied that the human immunodeficiency virus is the cause of AIDS and has alleged dangers of anti-AIDS drugs that are unproven in clinical science.
“Mbeki should pull the government out of this case and support programs to help newborns start life free of HIV,” said Peter Takirambudde, executive director of Human Rights Watch’s Africa Division. “Even in much lower-income African countries, women increasingly have access to this treatment.”
South Africa has the largest number of persons living with HIV/AIDS of any country, about 4.2 million, according to United Nations figures. The Medical Research Council of South Africa recently estimated that 7 million persons could die of HIV/AIDS by 2010, mostly young adults in their prime. Although South Africa has resources to provide treatment to a significant number of AIDS sufferers, the government has consistently resisted supporting treatment programs.
In April 2001, South Africa won a victory against 39 pharmaceutical companies that had sued the government because of the provisions of a 1997 law that would have facilitated the production and importation of generic drugs for HIV/AIDS. The opportunity for treatment programs that was created when the companies dropped their suit in the face of national and international pressure has been left unused by the government, which does not fund treatment programs on a significant level.
“President Mbeki could go a long way to redeeming his mishandling of AIDS by supporting the treatment for mother-to-child transmission,” said Takirambudde.
Human Rights Watch urged President Mbeki to lead the government in increasing budgetary support for HIV/AIDS programs – currently allocated less than 1 percent of the national budget – and in working with the medical and public health leaders in South Africa who are already mobilized to strengthen both prevention and treatment programs.
“President Mbeki’s questioning of the science of HIV/AIDS and the South African government’s active refusal to support programs of known effectiveness is helping to fuel the AIDS crisis in South Africa,” said Takirambudde. “This is much worse than the government inaction we have seen so often regarding HIV/AIDS.”
Source: Human Rights Watch
Thursday, November 1, 2001
Masetlha 'above the law'
Home Affairs DG Billy Masetlha seems to have placed himself above the law resulting in a major setback for democracy in South Africa, the department's minister Mangosuthu Buthelezi said on Thursday. Replying to questions in the National Assembly, Buthelezi said by working without a valid contract, Masetlha had placed the legality of all actions taken by the department in jeopardy. "It is possible that Mr Masetlha is placing himself above the rule of law and creating the invalidity of an enormous amount of actions taken by my department with unforseeable consequences for the state. It was also an enormous setback for our democracy as it seems that certain people are becoming untouchable and beyond the reach of law."
The support Masetlha was receiving from "many sectors" was effectively placing him beyond the reach of the law. Buthelezi said he, as the political head of the department, was therefore not able to perform his Constitutionally mandated function of being accountable to Parliament. Relations between the minister and the DG have been strained for months and Buthelezi has claimed - backed by legal opinion of senior counsel - that Masetlha had not had a valid employment contract since June this year. The minister told MPs on Thursday that "no conclusions were reached" at a meeting earlier this week between himself, President Thabo Mbeki and Deputy President Jacob Zuma. Contrary to statements issued by the Presidency, the meeting was not convened to deal solely with the Masetlha issue. "The impression I got from the Deputy President was that it was a meeting that we have, the three of us, from time to time. At this meeting this issue, among other things, was raised but no conclusions were reached on that," he said.
Both Buthelezi - the Inkatha Freedom Party leader - and Masetlha, a former ANC intelligence operative, have previously asked for Mbeki's intervention. Buthelezi said he had referred all information and documentation on Masetlha's contract to the Public Service Commission following a recommendation by Parliament's home affairs portfolio committee. The commission was investigating the matter, but ultimately the final decision of the DG's status rested with the President. The minister said he had only agreed to Mbeki's request that Masetlha's contract be extended on condition that the situation was reviewed when the President returned from an overseas trip. He had, at that time, communicated this to Masetlha and the Cabinet.
Buthelezi last week presented a 10-page document citing 64 examples of alleged wrongdoing by Masetlha to the home affairs committee. He accused the director-general of insubordination and defiance. Masetlha said in response that he was angry and disappointed by the accusations, which he contended were part of a campaign to vilify him.
Source: mail & Guardian
The support Masetlha was receiving from "many sectors" was effectively placing him beyond the reach of the law. Buthelezi said he, as the political head of the department, was therefore not able to perform his Constitutionally mandated function of being accountable to Parliament. Relations between the minister and the DG have been strained for months and Buthelezi has claimed - backed by legal opinion of senior counsel - that Masetlha had not had a valid employment contract since June this year. The minister told MPs on Thursday that "no conclusions were reached" at a meeting earlier this week between himself, President Thabo Mbeki and Deputy President Jacob Zuma. Contrary to statements issued by the Presidency, the meeting was not convened to deal solely with the Masetlha issue. "The impression I got from the Deputy President was that it was a meeting that we have, the three of us, from time to time. At this meeting this issue, among other things, was raised but no conclusions were reached on that," he said.
Both Buthelezi - the Inkatha Freedom Party leader - and Masetlha, a former ANC intelligence operative, have previously asked for Mbeki's intervention. Buthelezi said he had referred all information and documentation on Masetlha's contract to the Public Service Commission following a recommendation by Parliament's home affairs portfolio committee. The commission was investigating the matter, but ultimately the final decision of the DG's status rested with the President. The minister said he had only agreed to Mbeki's request that Masetlha's contract be extended on condition that the situation was reviewed when the President returned from an overseas trip. He had, at that time, communicated this to Masetlha and the Cabinet.
Buthelezi last week presented a 10-page document citing 64 examples of alleged wrongdoing by Masetlha to the home affairs committee. He accused the director-general of insubordination and defiance. Masetlha said in response that he was angry and disappointed by the accusations, which he contended were part of a campaign to vilify him.
Source: mail & Guardian
Wednesday, October 31, 2001
The Club of Madrid was launched following the Conference on Democratic Transition and Consolidation (CDTC), held in Madrid, Spain, in October 2001. At that unprecedented gathering, 35 heads of state and government from Europe, the Americas, Asia and Africa met with more than 100 of the world's most respected scholars and policy experts to discuss the problems of building democracy from both a theoretical and practical point of view. The CDTC looked at eight core issues, including constitutional design, the legislature and its relations with the executive, the judiciary and its relations with the executive, anti-corruption measures, the role of armed forces and security forces, reform of the state bureaucracy, strengthening of political and social pluralism and of political parties, and economic and social conditions. In four days of intensive discussion between the leaders and experts, the two groups were able to identify areas of agreement and disagreement, and formulate practical recommendations for strengthening democracy around the world. For more on the CDTC, go here.
The Club of Madrid's primary asset is its membership, which includes almost 90 distinguished former heads of state and government of democratic nations. The Club of Madrid seeks to leverage the first-hand experience of its members to assist countries with critical elements of their democratic transition or consolidation. A distinguished group of scholars, former policy makers and political leaders provides additional advice and assistance on a wide range of issues. The Club of Madrid is supported institutionally by the Fundación para las Relaciones Internacionales y el Diálogo Exterior (FRIDE) and the Gorbachev Foundation of North America (GFNA), the original sponsors of the 2001 conference.
Source: Club of Madrid
The Club of Madrid's primary asset is its membership, which includes almost 90 distinguished former heads of state and government of democratic nations. The Club of Madrid seeks to leverage the first-hand experience of its members to assist countries with critical elements of their democratic transition or consolidation. A distinguished group of scholars, former policy makers and political leaders provides additional advice and assistance on a wide range of issues. The Club of Madrid is supported institutionally by the Fundación para las Relaciones Internacionales y el Diálogo Exterior (FRIDE) and the Gorbachev Foundation of North America (GFNA), the original sponsors of the 2001 conference.
Source: Club of Madrid
Tuesday, October 30, 2001
ID fraudsters arrested
Five more Home Affairs employees have been arrested for allegedly issuing false birth certificates and identity documents, bringing to 12 the number of officials apprehended since June, the department announced on Tuesday.
Director-general Billy Masetlha said two officials allegedly linked to a Chinese syndicate were arrested in Pretoria in the morning. They allegedly helped process fake identity document applications lodged in the Eastern Cape. Two weeks ago, another three officials were arrested in Pretoria. Nokuzola Funani, Yolanda Mfunzi and Ncomeca Nombembe were charged with fraud, corruption and theft in the Pretoria Magistrate's Court and freed on R1 000 bail. They were due to appear in court again on Tuesday. Funani and Mfunzi were employed at the department's regional office in Pretoria, while Nombembe worked at the identification directorate in head office. They were arrested with a fourth man not employed by the department.
Masetlha said the arrests formed part of a joint investigation by his department, the police and customs officials into corrupt officials. Operation Molopo started in June and had so far identified seven syndicates of different nationalities involved in the issuing of fake birth and identity documents. The investigation was also focusing on those making the applications. "We would like to get them to lead us to the main culprits," Masetlha said. The director-general expressed concern about refugees evading the system by marrying South Africans in order to obtain residence status. Recently, some 300 refugee applications were withdrawn by foreigners who subsequently married local partners.
Masetlha conceded "very little" controls were in place and said special measures should be introduced to tackle the problem of so-called marriages of convenience. This could include measures as used in the US, where married couples of which one partner was a foreigner, were regularly grilled in a bid to establish if they truly lived together as husband and wife.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Director-general Billy Masetlha said two officials allegedly linked to a Chinese syndicate were arrested in Pretoria in the morning. They allegedly helped process fake identity document applications lodged in the Eastern Cape. Two weeks ago, another three officials were arrested in Pretoria. Nokuzola Funani, Yolanda Mfunzi and Ncomeca Nombembe were charged with fraud, corruption and theft in the Pretoria Magistrate's Court and freed on R1 000 bail. They were due to appear in court again on Tuesday. Funani and Mfunzi were employed at the department's regional office in Pretoria, while Nombembe worked at the identification directorate in head office. They were arrested with a fourth man not employed by the department.
Masetlha said the arrests formed part of a joint investigation by his department, the police and customs officials into corrupt officials. Operation Molopo started in June and had so far identified seven syndicates of different nationalities involved in the issuing of fake birth and identity documents. The investigation was also focusing on those making the applications. "We would like to get them to lead us to the main culprits," Masetlha said. The director-general expressed concern about refugees evading the system by marrying South Africans in order to obtain residence status. Recently, some 300 refugee applications were withdrawn by foreigners who subsequently married local partners.
Masetlha conceded "very little" controls were in place and said special measures should be introduced to tackle the problem of so-called marriages of convenience. This could include measures as used in the US, where married couples of which one partner was a foreigner, were regularly grilled in a bid to establish if they truly lived together as husband and wife.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)