Durban - The public protector is under siege from many quarters and has had little vocal support from citizens whose interests she is tasked to protect. We need to play our role in defending the space for her to work without fear or favour.
Our political environment reminds me of Machiavelli’s words that: “There is nothing more difficult, nothing more doubtful of success than to initiate new ways of things. For the reformer has enemies in all those who profit from the old ways, and only lukewarm support from those who would profit from the new way. This lukewarmness arising partly from fear of their adversaries, and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who do not actually believe in anything until they have had experience of it.”
Change agents like our public protector are up against a political culture that has still to grow into the promise of freedom embedded in our constitution. Holding those in public office accountable is only possible if citizens demand it and support organs of state responsible for protecting the public interest.
The biggest challenge facing chapter nine institutions such as the public protector is the tolerance by citizens of the confusion deliberately created by the ANC between the state, the government, the governing party and the president. When ministers in the security cluster invoke the risks to “state security”, that the release of the public protector’s report on the upgrades of President Jacob Zuma’s Nkandla residence would entail, are they focusing on the “state” or the person of the “president”?
The state represents the “commonwealth” that belongs to all citizens. How can this commonwealth’s security be put at risk by the exposure of improprieties in the procurement processes regarding the expenditure of a significant amount of taxpayers’ money in excess of R200 million? How does exposure of the suggested presence of a cattle kraal worth an estimated R1.2m jeopardise the security of our commonwealth as citizens?
It is the concealment of wrongdoing in public procurement processes that is putting our commonwealth at risk. In my travels across the country in villages, townships, universities, workplaces and corporate offices, my fellow citizens point to corruption as the biggest threat to our future as a society.
They identify corruption as the reason we have not come far enough and fast enough in living out our aspirations as a society in the past 20 years. Disclosure is like sunshine that disinfects hidden wrongdoing and eradicates corruption.
Young people who comprise the largest segment of our population can shape the country’s future in next year’s elections. Yet many are not sure that registering and voting will have any impact on their future. A big part of their misgiving comes from their perception that the state, government, ANC and president are an unmovable corrupt monolith that is destroying the country. This misgiving represents the biggest risk to our democracy.
The fearless work of the public protector’s office is essential to restoring the hope in young people that no one is above the law and that citizens’ rights matter and will be protected.
Moreover, there was a worrying phenomenon among poor communities this past weekend. In some areas, people refused to register or to allow registration to take place in their areas until their demands are met. They, too, do not distinguish between the IEC, a chapter nine institution, and the government.
We must stand up and defend the space for the key institutions of our democracy to operate without fear or favour. It is a question of “for whom the bell tolls” – it tolls for all of us. Today it is the public protector, tomorrow it is the judiciary, then it will be citizens without the protection of those key institutions. By then, it will be too late to stand up.
We have been through similar moments in our history and must not return there. When I was banned and banished to Tzaneen, my lawyer was told it was not in the state’s interests to disclose why I had been banished to that area.
Are we again ready to tolerate threats to our democracy in the name of “state security” as defined by those determined to secure their positions in power? Are we willing to protect abuse of power and resources in order to protect those in public office?
We can stop abuse of power by those who should be serving us who instead focus on serving themselves. We must not shy away from raising our voices in protection of the public protector so she can do her work to secure the public interest. We have seen how her report on the IEC chairwoman’s impropriety in procuring the lease of property for IEC offices has been attacked on procedural grounds. Are we to condone wrongdoing in this and many other matters through political procedural stonewalling? Where will these stonewalling tactics end?
We have seen enough signs of the president’s lack of capacity to take responsibility for executive action at too many levels: the Schabir Shaik case, his rape trial, Guptagate etc.
His performance in Parliament where he trivialised accountability for Guptagate into a joke about it not being realistic for him to know who is landing at our airports was an embarrassment. Waterkloof is an airforce base that we have afforded him and authorised other officials to use – to serve us. It is not to be used to curry favour with his friends.
We need a strong public protector to keep the executive branch of the state accountable to citizens. We have to protect the public protector so she can continue to protect the “commonwealth” from those invoking “state security” to put our democracy at risk. We dare not fail.
Mamphela Ramphele
Source: The Mercury
Showing posts with label Siyabonga Cwele. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Siyabonga Cwele. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Friday, November 30, 2012
Secrecy Bill gets NCOP approval, marches towards becoming law
The African National Congress is using its majority might to bulldoze the Protection of State Information Bill through Parliament. It now goes to the National Assembly after being passed by the upper house, where MPs were given suspicious, unmarked propaganda documents promoting the Bill’s “benefits”. By MANDY DE WAAL.
South Africa’s Protection of State Information Bill (POIB) was pushed through Parliament's National Council of Provinces (NCOP) by the ANC’s majority muscle late on Thursday 29 November 2012. The vote was 34 in favour of the draft legislation, while 16 members of Parliament voted against the Bill.
As MPs filed into Parliament’s upper house, the Right2Know campaign, a coalition formed in August 2010 to oppose the Secrecy Bill, handed out letters spelling out its concerns. “One of our campaign supporters noticed that the MPs were carrying documents themselves, and did an exchange,” says Murray Hunter, Right2Know’s spokesperson and organiser. “What we got hold of was a spin sheet with sound bites spinning certain aspects of the Bill. It was a document called “Myths about the Protection of State Information Bill” asserting that the Bill did indeed contain a public interest defence and would make it impossible to hide corruption.”
Murray says that the information used in the document – which had no source or logo on it – was filled with flawed and confused arguments. The Right2Know campaign said it wanted to know who had drafted the document and how it was funded.
Parliamentary leader for the DA, Lindiwe Mazibuko, said her biggest issue was the source of the anonymous document, and possible interference by the ministry of State Security. “We know that Siyabonga Cwele’s department has been interfering in the legislative process quite publicly by saying what NCOP members should and shouldn’t do with the legislation, which is in itself a violation of the separation of powers. That is problematic because once the law is in Parliament, it must be dealt with by MPs, and an MP’s job is not to do the bidding of government,” said Mazibuko. She added that if the document did indeed come from the ministry of State Security, it would be a “huge problem”.
“It is well known that Parliament has a research unit in every single portfolio committee, and every select committee, which has a secretariat and a researcher, and often they provide committee members with information. But there is something very suspicious about parties and MPs being given a script on their way into a debate, whether or not that script came from Parliament or a government department. It is suspicious when this document comes late in the game, when the legislation is being debated upon,” she said, and added: “At the moment we are concerned with some of the procedural problems with the Information Bill, and it is certainly one of the things we will look into.”
Earlier in the week, the controversial Bill – subject of much civil society protest – was adopted by an NCOP ad hoc Parliamentary committee which had been working on changes to the Bill for the last year. Mail & Guardian reported that opposition parties were given just 10 minutes to study the 22-page report on the ad hoc committee’s deliberations, and amendments to the Secrecy Bill. The opposition walked out and ANC members voted to send the Bill to a plenary session of the NCOP.
“It is clear that the Bll’s final process through the NCOP has been rushed and botched very badly,” said Nic Dawes, editor-in-chief of the Mail & Guardian. “Despite the initial willingness of members of all parties in the NCOP to do this properly and to try and hear the concerns that were raised by civil society, by lawyers, by the media, by activists, this potential to do a good job has been replaced by a mad rush to meet a self-imposed deadline. Serious damage has been done to the process as a result.”
Dawes said people weren’t able to properly consider the committee report earlier in the week and added it was likely that the remainder of the NCOP, and plenary session, hadn’t had a proper chance to consider the amended legislation in its entirety, nor to make an informed decision on it.
“The remaining options are for the National Assembly to do what it ought to have done all along, and that is to say that this legislation needs major revisions. It needs a proper public interest defence and a public domain defence. It needs to have an appropriate balance between freedom of information and the need to protect very narrowly and carefully defined state secrets, and it needs to be subordinate to the main piece of Constitutional legislation in this area, and that is the Promotion of Information Act,” Dawes said, adding that the National Assembly had one last chance to do the right thing.
“If they don’t, I hope a draft of MPs will send this for Constitutional review; I have been advised that they will try. Or alternatively that President Zuma does that, and then ultimately we will end up in the Constitutional Court, testing the legislation vigorously, and it is a pity that it looks like we are going to get to that place, but if need be that is what we will do,” Dawes said.
As the NCOP session got underway, State Security minister Cwele worked hard to sell the “benefits” of the Bill. Cwele, who had long pushed for the more draconian aspects of the Bill to remain intact, said the draft legislation sought to “advance the public interest by protecting certain classified information held by the state that if it became known to adversaries, would prejudice state programmes and hinder its ability to perform its duties.”
Reaching for a snappy quotable quote, Cwele addressed those scared of the implementation of the Bill into law. “To those who fear that the Bill may be abused, we say: the only thing to fear is fear itself.” (We presume Mr Cwele is FDR's fan - Ed)
BDLive reported that there was fierce opposition debate in the NCOP, with DA MP Alf Lees accusing the ANC of misleading the public by claiming extensive amendments to the Bill had ruled out the possibility of a state official using it to conceal wrongdoing. "Given the levels of corruption we see in government today, it is inevitable that the Bill will be used to cover up crime and corruption by those who risk exposure," he said, to ANC jeers.
Lees said the Bill still lacked a proper public interest defence clause to protect the media and whistle blowers, while his colleague Albert Fritz added, "This Bill is Stasi-like in its content and design."
Anton Harber, who directs the Journalism and Media Studies Programme at Wits University, agrees that there is still much to fear about the Bill. “It affects people in two ways. If one comes across information that needs to be out there in the public interest, clearly it raises the risks of being a whistle blower enormously,” said Harber.
“I have no doubt it will have a chilling effect on certain kinds of investigative journalism. It means an impact on the flow of information in the public arena. The penalties for whistle blowing potentially jump enormously here,” he added.
To understand the practical impact of the Bill, should it become law, Daily Maverick spoke to an activist in Kwazulu-Natal, a province where the political body count has been rising during recent months.
“We have a lot of political killings in the province at the moment, and in some cases even within the same political party,” said Desmond D'sa, a veteran political activist who’s currently in an organisational role for Right2Know in Kwazulu-Natal. “We believe that this is because of all the corruption that’s happening in this province. We have been asking for information related to this for a long, long time; for instance, we’ve asked for the Manase report in Durban, which reveals a lot of the shenanigans that going on.”
But the city refused to let activists, who report and organise against corruption, to have a copy of the report. “The city cites that whistle-blowers will lose their jobs or get killed and all of that, but that’s exactly what’s going on here in the ruling party. We believe that the Manase report is linked to these killings and will reveal a lot about what’s going on in the ANC in Kwazulu-Natal. The killings are about who is in power, who controls the resources, and who gets access to resources,” he said.
D'sa said even less “sensitive” information, like finding out about funding of housing projects, is blocked by officials who are already using the Bill (which hasn’t been passed in to law) to stop activists, the media or concerned citizens from getting information.
“If, for instance, you want to know what housing projects are being done and what funds have been made available for this in the city, you won’t get to the bottom of it. This is because the information is classified and not released. It is classified by people right at the top. It is going to make it impossible for people to find out what is really going on here in the province,” said D’sa.
The activist explained that the control of information made it impossible for civic society to do its job as a watchdog of government, and stated that the Bill was particularly threatening for whistle blowers.
“The NGOs and the civic organisations depend on whistle blowers to uncover corruption, and whistle blowers are crucial to the functioning of a democratic society and to help us get to the truth. However, the situation with whistle-blowers will get even worse because of the mounting fear. People will be fearful of being arrested, and now will be scared to release any kind of information because of the consequences,” D’sa said.
In terms of the proposed law, whistle blowers who reveal “corruption, malfeasance or wrongdoing by the State” can look at jail terms of up to 15 years. Furthermore, the Right2Know campaign also fears that whistle blowers may be charged under espionage clauses of the law which would see penalties of up to 25 years imposed.
In Kwazulu-Natal, this might be the case for activists investigating chemical fires and explosions. “In Durban the chemical cluster operates under the military, and under this new law, the military and the ‘securocrats’ in government won’t release any information at all. Even when people are getting killed or people are being affected by chemical emissions, this will not be released because they will deem it confidential and they will classify it,” D'sa told Daily Maverick.
“We have had over thirty explosions in the past few years, and fires in Durban, and we asked the department of labour to release certain forensic reports and they won’t do it. Can you imagine now if the law comes out? The flow of information with come to a standstill,” he added.
In the past, activists have been able to eke out some information through whistle blowers, but this will either dry up, or both activists and whistle blowers could face jail stiff terms. But D’sa and the Right2Know campaign are unrelenting.
“I hope that everyone realises that the democracy that everyone fought for and yearned for will be curtailed by this new law, as it is being bulldozed through Parliament. We are worried that we have gone right back, right back to the dark days of the Apartheid government, in bringing about these laws to stifle civil society, and to stifle ordinary people from standing up and asking the right questions, and getting the answers.”
“We will up the tempo of our protests. We are going to fight, even to the extent of being imprisoned. We are not going to shy away from standing up for the truth – even to the extent of being imprisoned because we need to fight this,” he added. DM
Source: Daily Maverick
South Africa’s Protection of State Information Bill (POIB) was pushed through Parliament's National Council of Provinces (NCOP) by the ANC’s majority muscle late on Thursday 29 November 2012. The vote was 34 in favour of the draft legislation, while 16 members of Parliament voted against the Bill.
As MPs filed into Parliament’s upper house, the Right2Know campaign, a coalition formed in August 2010 to oppose the Secrecy Bill, handed out letters spelling out its concerns. “One of our campaign supporters noticed that the MPs were carrying documents themselves, and did an exchange,” says Murray Hunter, Right2Know’s spokesperson and organiser. “What we got hold of was a spin sheet with sound bites spinning certain aspects of the Bill. It was a document called “Myths about the Protection of State Information Bill” asserting that the Bill did indeed contain a public interest defence and would make it impossible to hide corruption.”
Murray says that the information used in the document – which had no source or logo on it – was filled with flawed and confused arguments. The Right2Know campaign said it wanted to know who had drafted the document and how it was funded.
Parliamentary leader for the DA, Lindiwe Mazibuko, said her biggest issue was the source of the anonymous document, and possible interference by the ministry of State Security. “We know that Siyabonga Cwele’s department has been interfering in the legislative process quite publicly by saying what NCOP members should and shouldn’t do with the legislation, which is in itself a violation of the separation of powers. That is problematic because once the law is in Parliament, it must be dealt with by MPs, and an MP’s job is not to do the bidding of government,” said Mazibuko. She added that if the document did indeed come from the ministry of State Security, it would be a “huge problem”.
“It is well known that Parliament has a research unit in every single portfolio committee, and every select committee, which has a secretariat and a researcher, and often they provide committee members with information. But there is something very suspicious about parties and MPs being given a script on their way into a debate, whether or not that script came from Parliament or a government department. It is suspicious when this document comes late in the game, when the legislation is being debated upon,” she said, and added: “At the moment we are concerned with some of the procedural problems with the Information Bill, and it is certainly one of the things we will look into.”
Earlier in the week, the controversial Bill – subject of much civil society protest – was adopted by an NCOP ad hoc Parliamentary committee which had been working on changes to the Bill for the last year. Mail & Guardian reported that opposition parties were given just 10 minutes to study the 22-page report on the ad hoc committee’s deliberations, and amendments to the Secrecy Bill. The opposition walked out and ANC members voted to send the Bill to a plenary session of the NCOP.
“It is clear that the Bll’s final process through the NCOP has been rushed and botched very badly,” said Nic Dawes, editor-in-chief of the Mail & Guardian. “Despite the initial willingness of members of all parties in the NCOP to do this properly and to try and hear the concerns that were raised by civil society, by lawyers, by the media, by activists, this potential to do a good job has been replaced by a mad rush to meet a self-imposed deadline. Serious damage has been done to the process as a result.”
Dawes said people weren’t able to properly consider the committee report earlier in the week and added it was likely that the remainder of the NCOP, and plenary session, hadn’t had a proper chance to consider the amended legislation in its entirety, nor to make an informed decision on it.
“The remaining options are for the National Assembly to do what it ought to have done all along, and that is to say that this legislation needs major revisions. It needs a proper public interest defence and a public domain defence. It needs to have an appropriate balance between freedom of information and the need to protect very narrowly and carefully defined state secrets, and it needs to be subordinate to the main piece of Constitutional legislation in this area, and that is the Promotion of Information Act,” Dawes said, adding that the National Assembly had one last chance to do the right thing.
“If they don’t, I hope a draft of MPs will send this for Constitutional review; I have been advised that they will try. Or alternatively that President Zuma does that, and then ultimately we will end up in the Constitutional Court, testing the legislation vigorously, and it is a pity that it looks like we are going to get to that place, but if need be that is what we will do,” Dawes said.
As the NCOP session got underway, State Security minister Cwele worked hard to sell the “benefits” of the Bill. Cwele, who had long pushed for the more draconian aspects of the Bill to remain intact, said the draft legislation sought to “advance the public interest by protecting certain classified information held by the state that if it became known to adversaries, would prejudice state programmes and hinder its ability to perform its duties.”
Reaching for a snappy quotable quote, Cwele addressed those scared of the implementation of the Bill into law. “To those who fear that the Bill may be abused, we say: the only thing to fear is fear itself.” (We presume Mr Cwele is FDR's fan - Ed)
BDLive reported that there was fierce opposition debate in the NCOP, with DA MP Alf Lees accusing the ANC of misleading the public by claiming extensive amendments to the Bill had ruled out the possibility of a state official using it to conceal wrongdoing. "Given the levels of corruption we see in government today, it is inevitable that the Bill will be used to cover up crime and corruption by those who risk exposure," he said, to ANC jeers.
Lees said the Bill still lacked a proper public interest defence clause to protect the media and whistle blowers, while his colleague Albert Fritz added, "This Bill is Stasi-like in its content and design."
Anton Harber, who directs the Journalism and Media Studies Programme at Wits University, agrees that there is still much to fear about the Bill. “It affects people in two ways. If one comes across information that needs to be out there in the public interest, clearly it raises the risks of being a whistle blower enormously,” said Harber.
“I have no doubt it will have a chilling effect on certain kinds of investigative journalism. It means an impact on the flow of information in the public arena. The penalties for whistle blowing potentially jump enormously here,” he added.
To understand the practical impact of the Bill, should it become law, Daily Maverick spoke to an activist in Kwazulu-Natal, a province where the political body count has been rising during recent months.
“We have a lot of political killings in the province at the moment, and in some cases even within the same political party,” said Desmond D'sa, a veteran political activist who’s currently in an organisational role for Right2Know in Kwazulu-Natal. “We believe that this is because of all the corruption that’s happening in this province. We have been asking for information related to this for a long, long time; for instance, we’ve asked for the Manase report in Durban, which reveals a lot of the shenanigans that going on.”
But the city refused to let activists, who report and organise against corruption, to have a copy of the report. “The city cites that whistle-blowers will lose their jobs or get killed and all of that, but that’s exactly what’s going on here in the ruling party. We believe that the Manase report is linked to these killings and will reveal a lot about what’s going on in the ANC in Kwazulu-Natal. The killings are about who is in power, who controls the resources, and who gets access to resources,” he said.
D'sa said even less “sensitive” information, like finding out about funding of housing projects, is blocked by officials who are already using the Bill (which hasn’t been passed in to law) to stop activists, the media or concerned citizens from getting information.
“If, for instance, you want to know what housing projects are being done and what funds have been made available for this in the city, you won’t get to the bottom of it. This is because the information is classified and not released. It is classified by people right at the top. It is going to make it impossible for people to find out what is really going on here in the province,” said D’sa.
The activist explained that the control of information made it impossible for civic society to do its job as a watchdog of government, and stated that the Bill was particularly threatening for whistle blowers.
“The NGOs and the civic organisations depend on whistle blowers to uncover corruption, and whistle blowers are crucial to the functioning of a democratic society and to help us get to the truth. However, the situation with whistle-blowers will get even worse because of the mounting fear. People will be fearful of being arrested, and now will be scared to release any kind of information because of the consequences,” D’sa said.
In terms of the proposed law, whistle blowers who reveal “corruption, malfeasance or wrongdoing by the State” can look at jail terms of up to 15 years. Furthermore, the Right2Know campaign also fears that whistle blowers may be charged under espionage clauses of the law which would see penalties of up to 25 years imposed.
In Kwazulu-Natal, this might be the case for activists investigating chemical fires and explosions. “In Durban the chemical cluster operates under the military, and under this new law, the military and the ‘securocrats’ in government won’t release any information at all. Even when people are getting killed or people are being affected by chemical emissions, this will not be released because they will deem it confidential and they will classify it,” D'sa told Daily Maverick.
“We have had over thirty explosions in the past few years, and fires in Durban, and we asked the department of labour to release certain forensic reports and they won’t do it. Can you imagine now if the law comes out? The flow of information with come to a standstill,” he added.
In the past, activists have been able to eke out some information through whistle blowers, but this will either dry up, or both activists and whistle blowers could face jail stiff terms. But D’sa and the Right2Know campaign are unrelenting.
“I hope that everyone realises that the democracy that everyone fought for and yearned for will be curtailed by this new law, as it is being bulldozed through Parliament. We are worried that we have gone right back, right back to the dark days of the Apartheid government, in bringing about these laws to stifle civil society, and to stifle ordinary people from standing up and asking the right questions, and getting the answers.”
“We will up the tempo of our protests. We are going to fight, even to the extent of being imprisoned. We are not going to shy away from standing up for the truth – even to the extent of being imprisoned because we need to fight this,” he added. DM
Source: Daily Maverick
Saturday, August 18, 2012
Marikana and the man with the green blanket
The women of a South African community are coming to terms with a week of bloodshed that culminated with the deaths of 34 workers shot by police on Thursday during a protest at the Lonmin platinum mine in Marikana.
A stick to being used to beat Zuma? Just a thought …
Marikana action is a strike by the poor
Marikana was a war zone: Burger
Marikana action is a strike by the poor
Marikana was a war zone: Burger
Friday, August 3, 2012
President Jacob Zuma Laughs Alone
President Jacob Zuma has an infectious
laugh. His guffaws break the ice and disarm the tensest situation. At that
precise moment no answers are demanded on the infamous arms deal or police
corruption because the nation has the giggles and the President laughs loudest.
An ambassador – clearly charmed – once remarked to me that it is a ‘beautiful
laugh’ – and then laughed from his belly. The spell had been cast and from that
moment on he had a crush on my President.
However, for many South Africans the love
affair with our President is on the rocks. The polls reflect a growing unease
with politics that appears increasingly driven by self-preservation: preservation
of power, preservation from prosecution and preservation of moneyed lifestyles.
A potentially toxic mix and the basis of political impunity. How far are the
President and those around him prepared to go in pursuit of this goal?
In the shadows, formal and informal security
networks are settling scores and doing the dirty work of those in power.
Something sinister is afoot. A collusion of interests between people who have
guns and people who have money is starting to infect our politics in an
undeniable manner. The murder of a dozen ANC politicians, including a
whistleblower, in the past three years is an indication of this and the ruling
party has appointed a task team to look into it.
Why is this left to an ANC task team to
investigate when it should surely have been a matter that demanded attention
from the country’s spies at the State Security Agency? They have unparalleled
resources at their disposal, yet City
Press reports that the ANC’s Deputy General Manager will lead this
investigation. Why did the ANC leadership not call in State Security Minister
Siyabonga Cwele’s spies? Or are they not to be trusted to lead an investigation
and report to the President and to Parliament? Do the country’s elected
political leaders not represent the aspirations of a nation and not only party
apparatchiks?
One answer is that some politicians no
longer trust the state spies. While undertaking research on the unfolding saga
of alleged corruption and murder linked to suspended police crime intelligence
chief Lt-Gen Richard Mdluli a few months ago, I was struck by the fact that
some of the country’s highest ranking current and former police chiefs were
afraid to speak on their cellphones. It was a case of ‘batteries out of
cellphones first’. They, like former ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema, answer
their phones with the rhetorical ‘Hello Mr Mdluli’. Are top cops really that
afraid of an alleged criminal network that had come to control police crime
intelligence? This directly under the nose of the Minister of Police, the
Minister of State Security and the President?
What is certain is that a climate of fear is
gripping politics in the country and it is being driven by securocrats. This is
by no means a direct parallel to the machinations of the apartheid state.
However, the trend is worrying. Some of the feared repression is coated in
policy processes such as the Protection of State Information Bill (the Secrecy
Bill), and the current draft of the General Intelligence Amendment Bill – the Secrecy Bill’s ugly twin known as the
‘Spy Bill’. These pieces of legislation will block the free flow of
information, protect the corrupt and allow for the monitoring of communication
on email, MXit, Facebook, Twitter and Skype – providing more insight than spies
sitting in shebeens and potentially more effectively controlling the politically
disaffected urban population (those whose lives do not revolve around shopping
malls).
On the other hand, the proposed Traditional
Courts Bill (the ‘Chiefs Bill’) will ensure greater power for unelected male
traditional leaders at the expense of elected leaders. Thereby potentially drawing
together the strings of a patronage network in rural areas that is largely
accountable to the man who dispenses the money in Pretoria. These three pieces
of legislation, in tandem, will ensure that a conservative-minded state
apparatus inevitably works against the values of an open society. It has the
potential to keep a lid on urban and rural social dissent while ensuring the
possibility of unchecked accrual of wealth and power to those who loosely
control the network. It is cynical politics. Is this what 100 years of ANC
struggle was intended to culminate in?
This does not only manifest in policy.
Consider the sinister manner in which the editor of the Mail & Guardian and senior members of the M&G Centre for
Investigative Journalism (amaBhungane)
have been made to report to the police in what appears to be a pre-arrest
process in the past week. This foreplay to possible criminal sanction is all
because of an exposé that links President Zuma’s spokesperson Mac Maharaj – a
public servant – to corruption in tenders awarded while he was Minister of
Transport. Did Mr Maharaj consult with his direct supervisor before pressing
criminal charges? Is the intention to charge or scare investigative journalists?
Either way, the matter is a disgrace to the Presidency.
Other attempts at intimidation happen when
things go ‘bump in the night’ in a manner where nobody can pin the direct blame
on the state apparatus. Earlier this year Constitutional Court Judge Sisi Khampepe
and Advocate Muzi Sikhakhane’s homes were burgled and laptops stolen. According
to Sikhakhane, who also acts for Malema, one of the documents stolen was an
affidavit by Human Settlements Minister Tokyo Sexwale requesting a probe into Mdluli`s alleged
abuse of state resources. He suspects foul play. I have personally been
circumspect when such allegations are made. This is a country with high levels
of crime and an urban middle class that has developed an appetite for the crime
fiction genre. However, in the past eighteen months my own office has been
broken into twice late at night using exactly the same method of entry, which
requires the skill of a cat burglar. On one occasion my external hard-drive (containing
a draft manuscript of a book on the arms deal) was stolen. In recent weeks the
visitors took nothing, as the hard-drive was safely stored elsewhere (and for
the record I am not sitting on some smoking gun). All other shiny objects were
left untouched. It may be ordinary crime or coincidence.
What is far more worrying is the alleged
‘suicide’ of Arms Deal Commission of Inquiry secretary Advocate Mvuseni Ngubane
in May this year. On the same day he met the President he climbed into his
luxury vehicle, with no know financial or personal problems, and shot himself,
to the dismay of friends and family. A muted shock followed in the press at the
death of a man who in practical terms would be the most powerful person in the commission.
Whatever the reason for his death, it no doubt has delayed the work of the
commission, which is unlikely to start its public deliberations before the ANC’s
national conference in Mangaung and will
now probably only end its work after the 2014 general elections – a happy
coincidence for corrupt businessmen, arms dealers and politicians alike.
We live in a country
where enormous potential lies outside of its elite and within the ranks of
ordinary people who want a more just, fair society. An important element to unlocking
this potential is that we want to fear those with power far less. Without this
none of us will ever be equal. It is a reflex acquired through centuries of
jealously policed inequality that cannot be unlearnt overnight. But when a
handful of securocrats, spies, politicians and police, together with their
business associates, operate outside of the law they undermine the work of
everyone in their ranks. They also send a signal to our society that repression
remains central to maintaining power. This must have been present somewhere in
the minds of the youth gang in Khayelitsha outside Cape Town on Sunday night,
29 July, as they intimidated learners and terrorized an entire community with
knives and pangas. An ‘ordinary’ gang holding up the mirror to our politicians?
These are no laughing matters.
Hennie van Vuuren,
Director, ISS Cape Town Office
Source: ISS
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Durban advocate commits suicide
Durban advocate Mvuseni Ngubane has been found dead at his home in Pinetown, KwaZulu-Natal police said on Sunday. Lieutenant colonel Vincent Mdunge said Ngubane was found with a gunshot wound to the head at around 15:00 on Saturday. He said there was a pistol next to the body. "Police found a suicide note near his body. Some parts of the letter were not readable due to bloodstains." Mdunge said family members found Ngubane on the back seat of his Mercedes-Benz in the garage. Paramedics declared him dead on the scene.
Ngubane handled high profile cases including that of convicted drug dealer Cheryl Cwele, the wife of State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele. The SABC reported that Ngubane had served on various boards and committees. He was a former president of the Black Lawyers' Association and chaired the Law Society of SA.
Ngubane was a successful lawyer who was recently appointed to the president’s new arms deal commission of inquiry. He was highly respected among colleagues who twice elected him as president of the Black Lawyers’ Association (BLA). He hit the headlines in recent years when he represented Sheryl Cwele, the then-wife of State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele, in her drug trafficking case. She was convicted and sentenced to 12 years in prison for drug trafficking. She has appealed against the sentence.
Cwele told The Witness she had been informed of Ngubane’s death on Saturday night by one of his colleagues. “It was very shocking to me. I respected him and he was very professional. “I never had any suspicions that he had trouble in his personal life,” she said. She said it was too early to make any decisions regarding her court case.
A source who did not want to be named told The Witness that Ngubane had been under financial strain because many of his clients were not honouring their debts. “He was always a man for smiles and jokes, so he wasn’t hard enough on those who owed him,” said the source.
Ngubane’s brother, Boy Ngubane, said the suicide note found in the car did not shed light on what pushed him to commit suicide. “There was nothing significant on the note and as a family we have taken a decision not to talk about it.
“He was not a person who suffered from any form of depression, when we were together, he was a bit tired but I just assumed that it was because of his training schedule as he was the kind of person who enjoyed training and often ran short-distance marathons.”
Source: News24
Ngubane handled high profile cases including that of convicted drug dealer Cheryl Cwele, the wife of State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele. The SABC reported that Ngubane had served on various boards and committees. He was a former president of the Black Lawyers' Association and chaired the Law Society of SA.
Ngubane was a successful lawyer who was recently appointed to the president’s new arms deal commission of inquiry. He was highly respected among colleagues who twice elected him as president of the Black Lawyers’ Association (BLA). He hit the headlines in recent years when he represented Sheryl Cwele, the then-wife of State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele, in her drug trafficking case. She was convicted and sentenced to 12 years in prison for drug trafficking. She has appealed against the sentence.
Cwele told The Witness she had been informed of Ngubane’s death on Saturday night by one of his colleagues. “It was very shocking to me. I respected him and he was very professional. “I never had any suspicions that he had trouble in his personal life,” she said. She said it was too early to make any decisions regarding her court case.
A source who did not want to be named told The Witness that Ngubane had been under financial strain because many of his clients were not honouring their debts. “He was always a man for smiles and jokes, so he wasn’t hard enough on those who owed him,” said the source.
Ngubane’s brother, Boy Ngubane, said the suicide note found in the car did not shed light on what pushed him to commit suicide. “There was nothing significant on the note and as a family we have taken a decision not to talk about it.
“He was not a person who suffered from any form of depression, when we were together, he was a bit tired but I just assumed that it was because of his training schedule as he was the kind of person who enjoyed training and often ran short-distance marathons.”
Source: News24
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Madonsela: Secrecy Bill will 'bedevil' investigations
Public protector Thuli Madonsela has pleaded with parliamentarians to rethink key aspects of the Protection of State Information Bill, saying it would "severely" affect her work. Madonsela told them on Wednesday that the Bill, as it stood, would shrink her powers and bedevil investigations into state wrongdoing. It would reduce her to the status of an ordinary citizen because it would oblige her to hand classified information to the police like anyone else.
Likewise, it would strip away the right she held to access classified information in the course of her duty, instead forcing her to go to court to obtain it like any other South African. "The public protector is directly affected by this Bill," she told the second day of public hearings in Parliament on the contentious draft law. We will not be toothless but we are going to function under more onerous circumstances."
She said the obligation clause 15 of the Bill created for those who received classified information to hand it to the police to avoid prosecution posed the risk of her being arrested while she was studying any of the secret documents delivered to her office almost daily. "Will I be affected? Yes, severely. At the moment I'm not chasing around trying to find out what documents came to my office and which police station do I rush to report it. I don't want to do that. Unfortunately, Parliament has elevated the police above chapter nine institutions. Why does this democracy trust a police station above chapter nine institutions?" she asked.
Madonsela said that at the moment she had the prerogative to scrutinise any information sent to her office to see how it should be handled, but this would become a perilous exercise if the Bill were passed. "What if I am arrested while I'm applying my mind?" she asked, adding: "Probably the same could happen to journalists."
Madonsela tactfully suggested that the Bill's impact on her office was one of a number of unintended consequences of the legislation but baulked when ANC MP Nosipho Ntwanambi asked why the person in her post should not be treated in the same manner as ordinary South Africans. "When a member of Parliament says you should be subject to the same rights and responsibilities as a person in the street, it scares me. My responsibility is to be some kind of buffer between the state and the citizen."
Madonsela said she did not believe the Bill should include a special exemption for her office but rather a chapter recognising the special status of all similar institutions, in the same manner that it enshrined the special powers of courts. "What I am asking Parliament to accept is that chapter nine institutions were created by you as an accountability mechanism, and you should give them the space to exercise that responsibility."
Madonsela called for the inclusion of a public interest defence in the Bill, rejecting State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele's oft-repeated argument that this would lead to the wholesale publication of state secrets. "Will it open the floodgates? No, I don't think so." She said such a defence would have to withstand an objective test on whether the public good derived from publication of a classified document outweighed the risk to the national security.
Like many other critics of the legislation, she said its definition of national security was too wide and it could pave the way for over-classification. Asked whether she was flatly declaring the Bill unconstitutional, Madonsela declined to answer but impressed on MPs that rethinking the Bill could spare them the potential embarrassment of having it declared invalid by the courts. "You have the power to prevent this matter being settled by a court of law," she said.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Likewise, it would strip away the right she held to access classified information in the course of her duty, instead forcing her to go to court to obtain it like any other South African. "The public protector is directly affected by this Bill," she told the second day of public hearings in Parliament on the contentious draft law. We will not be toothless but we are going to function under more onerous circumstances."
She said the obligation clause 15 of the Bill created for those who received classified information to hand it to the police to avoid prosecution posed the risk of her being arrested while she was studying any of the secret documents delivered to her office almost daily. "Will I be affected? Yes, severely. At the moment I'm not chasing around trying to find out what documents came to my office and which police station do I rush to report it. I don't want to do that. Unfortunately, Parliament has elevated the police above chapter nine institutions. Why does this democracy trust a police station above chapter nine institutions?" she asked.
Madonsela said that at the moment she had the prerogative to scrutinise any information sent to her office to see how it should be handled, but this would become a perilous exercise if the Bill were passed. "What if I am arrested while I'm applying my mind?" she asked, adding: "Probably the same could happen to journalists."
Madonsela tactfully suggested that the Bill's impact on her office was one of a number of unintended consequences of the legislation but baulked when ANC MP Nosipho Ntwanambi asked why the person in her post should not be treated in the same manner as ordinary South Africans. "When a member of Parliament says you should be subject to the same rights and responsibilities as a person in the street, it scares me. My responsibility is to be some kind of buffer between the state and the citizen."
Madonsela said she did not believe the Bill should include a special exemption for her office but rather a chapter recognising the special status of all similar institutions, in the same manner that it enshrined the special powers of courts. "What I am asking Parliament to accept is that chapter nine institutions were created by you as an accountability mechanism, and you should give them the space to exercise that responsibility."
Madonsela called for the inclusion of a public interest defence in the Bill, rejecting State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele's oft-repeated argument that this would lead to the wholesale publication of state secrets. "Will it open the floodgates? No, I don't think so." She said such a defence would have to withstand an objective test on whether the public good derived from publication of a classified document outweighed the risk to the national security.
Like many other critics of the legislation, she said its definition of national security was too wide and it could pave the way for over-classification. Asked whether she was flatly declaring the Bill unconstitutional, Madonsela declined to answer but impressed on MPs that rethinking the Bill could spare them the potential embarrassment of having it declared invalid by the courts. "You have the power to prevent this matter being settled by a court of law," she said.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Monday, December 13, 2010
Cwele case: Judge allows intercepted calls
Pietermaritzburg High Court Judge Piet Koene on Monday ruled that intercepted cellphone calls were admissible as evidence in the drug trafficking case involving the state security minister's wife.
In October lawyers representing Sheryl Cwele, the wife of Minister Siyabonga Cwele, and her co-accused Frank Nabolisa, objected to the use of transcripts of intercepted calls. Koene said intercepted calls from two cellphone numbers were admissible. The police recorded calls between Cwele, Nabolisa and convicted drug mule Tessa Beetge. Monday's ruling meant the state could use transcripts of the calls as evidence against the pair.
Advocates representing Cwele and Nabolisa said the Act under which the interception of the calls was authorised [REGULATION OF INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS AND PROVISION OF COMMUNICATION-RELATED INFORMATION ACT 70 OF 2002] did not cover cellphones. They argued that the interception was not authorised by a designated judge and that it would "trample" the accused's privacy. The state believed the calls would present a detailed picture of what transpired between Cwele, Nabolisa and Beetge.
Beetge was arrested after 10kg of cocaine was found in her luggage in Brazil in 2008. Cwele and Nigerian national Nabolisa allegedly conspired to recruit Beetge and Charmaine Moss as drug mules. Moss previously told the court she turned down an offer of going to work overseas when she suspected something was amiss. Beetge is currently serving an eight-year jail sentence in São Paulo, Brazil.
The directive to monitor calls was granted by Judge J Swart on March 20 2008. It covered the period April 29 to June 16 2008. It was obtained to intercept calls to Nabolisa and others.
Beetge said in November that her "only mistake" had been in trusting Cwele. "Sheryl Cwele should be the one paying the price. She must face consequences for her actions," Beetge said from a Brazilian prison in an interview with Special Assignment. Beetge claimed she was offered a job by Cwele via SMS. She later met her for further details.
Source: Mail & Guardian
In October lawyers representing Sheryl Cwele, the wife of Minister Siyabonga Cwele, and her co-accused Frank Nabolisa, objected to the use of transcripts of intercepted calls. Koene said intercepted calls from two cellphone numbers were admissible. The police recorded calls between Cwele, Nabolisa and convicted drug mule Tessa Beetge. Monday's ruling meant the state could use transcripts of the calls as evidence against the pair.
Advocates representing Cwele and Nabolisa said the Act under which the interception of the calls was authorised [REGULATION OF INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATIONS AND PROVISION OF COMMUNICATION-RELATED INFORMATION ACT 70 OF 2002] did not cover cellphones. They argued that the interception was not authorised by a designated judge and that it would "trample" the accused's privacy. The state believed the calls would present a detailed picture of what transpired between Cwele, Nabolisa and Beetge.
Beetge was arrested after 10kg of cocaine was found in her luggage in Brazil in 2008. Cwele and Nigerian national Nabolisa allegedly conspired to recruit Beetge and Charmaine Moss as drug mules. Moss previously told the court she turned down an offer of going to work overseas when she suspected something was amiss. Beetge is currently serving an eight-year jail sentence in São Paulo, Brazil.
The directive to monitor calls was granted by Judge J Swart on March 20 2008. It covered the period April 29 to June 16 2008. It was obtained to intercept calls to Nabolisa and others.
Beetge said in November that her "only mistake" had been in trusting Cwele. "Sheryl Cwele should be the one paying the price. She must face consequences for her actions," Beetge said from a Brazilian prison in an interview with Special Assignment. Beetge claimed she was offered a job by Cwele via SMS. She later met her for further details.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Friday, September 17, 2010
Security Minister Defends Information Bill
South Africa's security minister is defending a bill that rights groups say may threaten freedom. Siyabonga Cwele said in parliament Friday there are ''several clear and present dangers'' that justify the law on national security grounds. Cwele says he agrees with criticism that the bill is too broad in protecting information deemed important to national or business interests.
Free speech lawyer Alison Tilley says Cwele has ''failed the freedom test'' because he has not scrubbed the bill of its most restrictive clauses. International and South African media and rights groups are lobbying against the bill and a proposal by the ruling party for a media tribunal that could discipline journalists. Parliament has not scheduled a vote on the bill.
Source: New York Times
Free speech lawyer Alison Tilley says Cwele has ''failed the freedom test'' because he has not scrubbed the bill of its most restrictive clauses. International and South African media and rights groups are lobbying against the bill and a proposal by the ruling party for a media tribunal that could discipline journalists. Parliament has not scheduled a vote on the bill.
Source: New York Times
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Cwele to defend Information bill in Parliament
State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele will be in the hot seat on Friday responding to the criticism over the Protection of Information Bill. Cwele is expected to brief parliamentarians on issues that were raised surrounding the bill. If it is passed Cwele and other designated state officials will have the right to classify information in the national interest.
Government lawyers have described the bill as an attempt to provide greater access of information to members of the public, while media organisations and opposition parties do not believe government’s reasoning behind the proposed legislation.
Journalists, editors and media analysts have said it is not constitutional as it works against transparency.
Source: Eye Witness News
Government lawyers have described the bill as an attempt to provide greater access of information to members of the public, while media organisations and opposition parties do not believe government’s reasoning behind the proposed legislation.
Journalists, editors and media analysts have said it is not constitutional as it works against transparency.
Source: Eye Witness News
Cwele faces 3rd degree on info bill
Intelligence Minister Siyabonga Cwele is to be grilled by MPs about provisions in the Protection of Information Bill that editors, civil society and opposition MPs fear could lead to de facto censorship. At issue is whether the bill, which is being processed by an ad hoc committee of Parliament, would pass constitutional muster as state advocates say it would - and whether classifying a document under a broad definition of "national interest" would amount to censorship. The bill provides for harsh jail terms of up to 25 years for the disclosure of classified information.
A range of submissions has been made to the committee warning against the inclusion of so wide and vague a definition of "national interest". Despite this, it remains in the latest draft of the bill, as do the penalty clauses. The bill is intended to replace a stringent apartheid-era act governing the classification of state secrets. According to its drafters, it is aimed at providing more constitutionally sound guidelines for classification and facilitating better access to information by the public.
Media and civil society advocacy groups have argued strongly for the inclusion of a clause that would protect those who disclose classified information on the grounds that doing so is in the public interest. The bill has been described as draconian and worse than a 2008 draft that was withdrawn because Parliament ran out of time to deal with concerns about constitutionality.
The chairman of the ad hoc committee, Cecil Burgess (ANC), pledged on Tuesday that all concerns would be put to the minister when he appeared before the committee on Friday. Answering MPs' fears that the minister would merely dictate his preferences, Burgess emphasised that the bill was already before Parliament. "The way forward here is that Parliament will change the bill. "I don't want it to be said that the minister would come here and change the bill. So there is the understanding that the minister may persuade us to change certain things, but he is not going to change it himself."
DA MPs also want Cwele to explain why the bill says its implementation would have no financial implications for the state. National archivist Graham Dominy has told the committee he would require a significant budget to set up the declassification database provided for in the bill. Burgess agreed to a request from DA MPs Dene Smuts and David Maynier that the committee try to gain independent legal opinion on whether the bill was constitutional.
Chief state law adviser Enver Daniels has told the committee he believes the bill will pass constitutional muster and that none of the issues raised by bodies, including the Institute for Democracy and the Centre for Constitutional Rights, has persuaded him otherwise. Writing in the Cape Times, sister to the Pretoria News, Daniels said he stood by this statement because the bill's provisions would have to be weighed against other legislation that protected the public interest. "Many commentators have called for a public interest defence provision, similar to that for defamation cases," Daniels wrote. "That would not affect the constitutionality of the bill, but may fuel the perception that two justice standards exist in South Africa, in breach of the equality provisions in our constitution - one for people who commit ordinary crimes, and one for those who contravene the law on classified information."
Disagreeing with this, Smuts emphasised that even previous intelligence minister Ronnie Kasrils believed there should be no penalties for whistle-blowers or the media for using classified information to expose corruption. The vagueness of definition of the "national interest" made the provisions more onerous, she told the Pretoria News. "It makes the offences so much worse because the definition of 'the national interest' is pure poetry - talking about such nonsense as 'the national interest is multi-faceted', which is the same as diamonds from the Democratic Republic of Congo," Smuts said. "National security did not feature in the offences (described in the 2008 bill), but now it does. "The definition was in the 2008 draft, but not in the offences. This is important because it determines what is 'sensitive' - and what is 'sensitive' is what you classify in the end."
As most opposition parties and constitutional experts have argued, Smuts said if state information were classified on the basis that disclosure would cause "demonstrable harm" to the state, the definition would no longer be needed.
Source: IoL
A range of submissions has been made to the committee warning against the inclusion of so wide and vague a definition of "national interest". Despite this, it remains in the latest draft of the bill, as do the penalty clauses. The bill is intended to replace a stringent apartheid-era act governing the classification of state secrets. According to its drafters, it is aimed at providing more constitutionally sound guidelines for classification and facilitating better access to information by the public.
Media and civil society advocacy groups have argued strongly for the inclusion of a clause that would protect those who disclose classified information on the grounds that doing so is in the public interest. The bill has been described as draconian and worse than a 2008 draft that was withdrawn because Parliament ran out of time to deal with concerns about constitutionality.
The chairman of the ad hoc committee, Cecil Burgess (ANC), pledged on Tuesday that all concerns would be put to the minister when he appeared before the committee on Friday. Answering MPs' fears that the minister would merely dictate his preferences, Burgess emphasised that the bill was already before Parliament. "The way forward here is that Parliament will change the bill. "I don't want it to be said that the minister would come here and change the bill. So there is the understanding that the minister may persuade us to change certain things, but he is not going to change it himself."
DA MPs also want Cwele to explain why the bill says its implementation would have no financial implications for the state. National archivist Graham Dominy has told the committee he would require a significant budget to set up the declassification database provided for in the bill. Burgess agreed to a request from DA MPs Dene Smuts and David Maynier that the committee try to gain independent legal opinion on whether the bill was constitutional.
Chief state law adviser Enver Daniels has told the committee he believes the bill will pass constitutional muster and that none of the issues raised by bodies, including the Institute for Democracy and the Centre for Constitutional Rights, has persuaded him otherwise. Writing in the Cape Times, sister to the Pretoria News, Daniels said he stood by this statement because the bill's provisions would have to be weighed against other legislation that protected the public interest. "Many commentators have called for a public interest defence provision, similar to that for defamation cases," Daniels wrote. "That would not affect the constitutionality of the bill, but may fuel the perception that two justice standards exist in South Africa, in breach of the equality provisions in our constitution - one for people who commit ordinary crimes, and one for those who contravene the law on classified information."
Disagreeing with this, Smuts emphasised that even previous intelligence minister Ronnie Kasrils believed there should be no penalties for whistle-blowers or the media for using classified information to expose corruption. The vagueness of definition of the "national interest" made the provisions more onerous, she told the Pretoria News. "It makes the offences so much worse because the definition of 'the national interest' is pure poetry - talking about such nonsense as 'the national interest is multi-faceted', which is the same as diamonds from the Democratic Republic of Congo," Smuts said. "National security did not feature in the offences (described in the 2008 bill), but now it does. "The definition was in the 2008 draft, but not in the offences. This is important because it determines what is 'sensitive' - and what is 'sensitive' is what you classify in the end."
As most opposition parties and constitutional experts have argued, Smuts said if state information were classified on the basis that disclosure would cause "demonstrable harm" to the state, the definition would no longer be needed.
Source: IoL
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Malema and the spy papers
Julius Malema's "intelligence document" was compiled by a former Sars employee - who is facing criminal charges but insists he was part of a sting operation. In an interview with the media following revelations of his business interests, Malema said he was in possession of a document listing the names of prominent political leaders who backed President Jacob Zuma's rise to power and were targeted for lifestyle audits. "I will make (the document) public, we just took it to the police to verify it," Malema told SAfm. He later told Metro FM last night that he would take the document to Zuma. "We received a document delivered in my office by anonymous fellows ... which has a long list of our names. There were instructions to people in Sars to investigate (me and) ... (deputy police minister) Fikile Mbalula and (Zuma's spokesman), Zizi Kodwa," he said.
Mbalula could not be reached, but Kodwa said even though he had not seen the document, he was aware of it. Although a cabinet minister anonymously told The Star last night that the document was "handled at the highest level", Ministry of State Security spokesman Brian Dube said Minister Siyabonga Cwele "does not know what Malema is talking about". Malema told e.tv that the document was compiled by "very senior people in Sars, very senior management, some of them in cabinet today" - a tacit reference to former Sars commissioner and Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan. Coincidentally, Gordhan called for lifestyle audits in his budget speech last week.
The Star was approached last year by a former Sars employee, Michael Peega, who claimed he was part of a secret intelligence unit in the revenue service established by Gordhan. The Pretoria-based Peega, 34, said Malema was referring to his document. Malema's spokesman, Floyd Shivambu, said they were yet to release the document, but refused to confirm that this was the same Peega report. Peega said part of their brief was to investigate the lifestyles and tax status of senior Zuma supporters. This was during 2007, when the ANC's succession battle reached its apex. Others on Peega's list included national police commissioner Bheki Cele. Cele, through his spokeswoman Nonkululeko Mbatha, said last year that he was aware of the document but had decided to treat it "as rumour". However, Peega was fired by Sars for allegedly getting involved in rhino poaching and is facing criminal charges. He claimed he was part of a sting operation, a claim denied by Sars. The revenue service fired him after he was arrested following an internal disciplinary hearing.
At that time, The Star could not establish the veracity of Peega's claims or Sars's denial. Contacted yesterday, Peega said he stood by the document. "I am not backing off. That's why I want (Sars) to confront me in public to say that this document is not authentic. I am 200 percent behind it," Peega said. Asked about the criminal charges, he said: "The case has not gone to trial, there have been postponements... I maintain what I told you, that (I was part of a sting operation)." Peega said they were given fake IDs to operate and place suspects under surveillance.
Peega, who was initially with the military's special forces, said other recruits in his units included former members of the defunct Scorpions and police. Sars's senior managers at the time dismissed Peega as a disgruntled employee and said the so-called intelligence unit was a legitimate department dealing with organised crime. The taxman showed The Star documents to illustrate that the unit was legitimate, audited and accounted for. Sars said at the time there was a different unit that conducted routine lifestyle audits, and not Peega's department.
Sars spokesman Adrian Lackay told The Star last night: "Sars has a proud record of integrity and applies the law with fairness, with impartiality, and equally to the affairs of all taxpayers."
Source: IoL
Mbalula could not be reached, but Kodwa said even though he had not seen the document, he was aware of it. Although a cabinet minister anonymously told The Star last night that the document was "handled at the highest level", Ministry of State Security spokesman Brian Dube said Minister Siyabonga Cwele "does not know what Malema is talking about". Malema told e.tv that the document was compiled by "very senior people in Sars, very senior management, some of them in cabinet today" - a tacit reference to former Sars commissioner and Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan. Coincidentally, Gordhan called for lifestyle audits in his budget speech last week.
The Star was approached last year by a former Sars employee, Michael Peega, who claimed he was part of a secret intelligence unit in the revenue service established by Gordhan. The Pretoria-based Peega, 34, said Malema was referring to his document. Malema's spokesman, Floyd Shivambu, said they were yet to release the document, but refused to confirm that this was the same Peega report. Peega said part of their brief was to investigate the lifestyles and tax status of senior Zuma supporters. This was during 2007, when the ANC's succession battle reached its apex. Others on Peega's list included national police commissioner Bheki Cele. Cele, through his spokeswoman Nonkululeko Mbatha, said last year that he was aware of the document but had decided to treat it "as rumour". However, Peega was fired by Sars for allegedly getting involved in rhino poaching and is facing criminal charges. He claimed he was part of a sting operation, a claim denied by Sars. The revenue service fired him after he was arrested following an internal disciplinary hearing.
At that time, The Star could not establish the veracity of Peega's claims or Sars's denial. Contacted yesterday, Peega said he stood by the document. "I am not backing off. That's why I want (Sars) to confront me in public to say that this document is not authentic. I am 200 percent behind it," Peega said. Asked about the criminal charges, he said: "The case has not gone to trial, there have been postponements... I maintain what I told you, that (I was part of a sting operation)." Peega said they were given fake IDs to operate and place suspects under surveillance.
Peega, who was initially with the military's special forces, said other recruits in his units included former members of the defunct Scorpions and police. Sars's senior managers at the time dismissed Peega as a disgruntled employee and said the so-called intelligence unit was a legitimate department dealing with organised crime. The taxman showed The Star documents to illustrate that the unit was legitimate, audited and accounted for. Sars said at the time there was a different unit that conducted routine lifestyle audits, and not Peega's department.
Sars spokesman Adrian Lackay told The Star last night: "Sars has a proud record of integrity and applies the law with fairness, with impartiality, and equally to the affairs of all taxpayers."
Source: IoL
Friday, January 29, 2010
Minister's wife in court on drug charges
Sheryl Cwele (50), wife of State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele, appeared on charges of drug dealing in the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Friday. Cwele and Frank Nabolis, a Nigerian arrested last month, are facing three charges, Hawks spokesperson Musa Zondi said. These are dealing or conspiring to deal in drugs, procuring a woman called Charmaine Moss to collect drugs in Turkey and another, Tessa Beetge, to smuggle 9kg of cocaine.
Beetge was arrested in São Paulo by Brazilian police on June 13 2008. They found 9,2kg of cocaine concealed in her baggage and she is currently serving an eight-year jail sentence for drug-trafficking in São Paulo. Zondi said Cwele, who was arrested at her office on Friday morning, would remain in jail until her bail application is heard next Friday. "The state intends opposing bail," he added.
The Hawks said Moss was the state's main witness in the case, which prompted a call from the Democratic Alliance on Friday for the state security minister to resign. Cwele, who is the director for health and community services at the Hibiscus Coast Municipality, was linked to Beetge in newspaper reports early last year but denied any involvement in drug dealing. According to the state, she was in contact with Nabolis soon after Beetge's arrest and the Nigerian then left the country for a while. He was arrested in Gauteng in December and has been in jail since then. The Hawks said he is also believed to be involved in drug manufacturing in Gauteng.
State counsel, advocate Ian Cook, said Cwele and Nabolis would appear in the Pietermaritzburg High Court again on February 12. In an interview with the Mercury newspaper a day before her arrest, Cwele insisted she was innocent and said as a Christian she believed "the only person who will solve the problem is God". Asked about the allegations against her, her husband reportedly told the newspaper: "I don't know anything you are talking about and nobody has been charged."
The DA on Friday urged him to prove that he was in no way involved in the matter or to resign from the Cabinet. "This is disturbing news and raises a number of serious questions regarding the minister. We believe that he must demonstrate to the South African public that he is in no way compromised by this matter; if he fails to do so, he ought to stand down from his position right away."
Source: Mail & Guardian
Beetge was arrested in São Paulo by Brazilian police on June 13 2008. They found 9,2kg of cocaine concealed in her baggage and she is currently serving an eight-year jail sentence for drug-trafficking in São Paulo. Zondi said Cwele, who was arrested at her office on Friday morning, would remain in jail until her bail application is heard next Friday. "The state intends opposing bail," he added.
The Hawks said Moss was the state's main witness in the case, which prompted a call from the Democratic Alliance on Friday for the state security minister to resign. Cwele, who is the director for health and community services at the Hibiscus Coast Municipality, was linked to Beetge in newspaper reports early last year but denied any involvement in drug dealing. According to the state, she was in contact with Nabolis soon after Beetge's arrest and the Nigerian then left the country for a while. He was arrested in Gauteng in December and has been in jail since then. The Hawks said he is also believed to be involved in drug manufacturing in Gauteng.
State counsel, advocate Ian Cook, said Cwele and Nabolis would appear in the Pietermaritzburg High Court again on February 12. In an interview with the Mercury newspaper a day before her arrest, Cwele insisted she was innocent and said as a Christian she believed "the only person who will solve the problem is God". Asked about the allegations against her, her husband reportedly told the newspaper: "I don't know anything you are talking about and nobody has been charged."
The DA on Friday urged him to prove that he was in no way involved in the matter or to resign from the Cabinet. "This is disturbing news and raises a number of serious questions regarding the minister. We believe that he must demonstrate to the South African public that he is in no way compromised by this matter; if he fails to do so, he ought to stand down from his position right away."
Source: Mail & Guardian
Thursday, September 25, 2008
New Minster of Intelligence
President Kgalema Motlanthe on Thursday appointed Dr Siyabonga Cwele as the new minister of intelligence. It is to replace Ronnie Kasrils, who has retired.
He served in the ANC underground structures from 1984 until 1990. He became a member of Parliament in 1994 and was well regarded as the chairperson of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence. But the committee was criticised for operating behind closed doors and never being open enough. They also trashed the inspector general of intelligence’s report which found against former NIA director general Billy Masetlha in 1996, in the interests of the Zuma camp.
People who have worked with him describe him as hardworking and independent-minded. His public statements have included an emphasis on the basics: intelligence as a means of combating crime and guaranteeing public safety.
Cwele received an MBchB from the University of KwaZulu Natal in 1984, and later also completed his MPhil in Economic Policy at the University of Stellenbosch
source: News 24
He served in the ANC underground structures from 1984 until 1990. He became a member of Parliament in 1994 and was well regarded as the chairperson of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence. But the committee was criticised for operating behind closed doors and never being open enough. They also trashed the inspector general of intelligence’s report which found against former NIA director general Billy Masetlha in 1996, in the interests of the Zuma camp.
People who have worked with him describe him as hardworking and independent-minded. His public statements have included an emphasis on the basics: intelligence as a means of combating crime and guaranteeing public safety.
Cwele received an MBchB from the University of KwaZulu Natal in 1984, and later also completed his MPhil in Economic Policy at the University of Stellenbosch
source: News 24
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)