Since mid-2005, hundreds of civilians have been killed, more than 10 thousand houses burned, and approximately 212,000 persons have fled their homes in terror to live in desperate conditions deep in the bush in northern Central African Republic (CAR). Bordering eastern Chad and war-ravaged Darfur in Sudan, this area has been destabilized by at least two major rebellions against the government of President Franois Boziz.
The vast majority of summary executions and unlawful killings, and almost all village burnings, have been carried out by government forces, often in reprisal for rebel attacks. While both main rebel groups have been responsible for widespread looting and the forced taxation of the civilian population in areas they control -and rebels in the northeast have committed killings, beatings, and rape -their abuses pale in comparison to those of the Central African Armed Forces (Forces armes Centrafricaines,FACA) and the elite Presidential Guard (Garde prsidentielle, GP). As the International Criminal Court (ICC) begins investigations into atrocities committed during the 2002-2003 rebellion against former President Patass, it should also investigate possible war crimes under its jurisdiction committed in the current round of fighting.
This report documents the human rights abuses and breaches of international humanitarian law being committed in northern CAR and describes the make-up, origins, and aims of the most significant rebel groups. The Popular Army for the Restoration of the Republic and Democracy (Arme populaire pour la restauration de la Rpublique et la dmocratie, APRD) is active in the northwestern provinces of Ouham, Ouham-Pend, and Nana-Grbizi. The Union of Democratic Forces for Unity (Union des forces dmocratiques pour la rassemblement,UFDR) is most active in remote northeastern provinces of Bamingui-Bangoran and Vakaga.
In February and March 2007 Human Rights Watch researchers visited the majority of towns and villages affected, documenting summary executions, unlawful killings, beatings, house burnings, extortion and unlawful taxation, the recruitment and use of children as soldiers, and many other human rights abuses. Human Rights Watch researchers interviewed over 100 persons, including many victims and witnesses, local and regional government officials, military commanders, rebel officials, religious leaders, and representatives of local and international humanitarian organizations active in northern CAR.
Until quite recently there was little international awareness of the situation in northern CAR. However, in 2006, human rights violations and breaches of international humanitarian law began to receive some attention. The killings, village burnings, displacement, and humanitarian suffering are now occasionally reported in the international press and are the subject of increasing diplomatic notice, usually being seen as "spill-over" from the continuing crisis in Darfur.
Little attention, however, has been paid to the actual dynamics of conflict, which are largely home grown. The main rebel protagonists are Central Africans with local grievances. Human Rights Watch's research suggests that the degree of linkage with the situation in Darfur has been exaggerated. The APRD in the northwest is so poorly equipped that it is difficult to imagine it has foreign sponsorship. Human Rights Watch has found no other evidence of such support. Although there have been contacts between the UFDR and Sudan-sponsored Chadian rebels opposed to the Chadian President Dby based in the northeast of CAR in early 2006, foreign support does not appear to be a driving force behind this rebellion.
Neither has attention been paid to the issue of responsibility for human rights violations and breaches of international humanitarian law, nor to action to ensure accountability. The sorry fact is that the perpetrators of violence and abuse, the majority of them government soldiers, have so far enjoyed total impunity for acts that include war crimes.
The APRD Rebellion
The APRD rebellion in the northwest was launched almost immediately after controversial 2005 elections led to the election of General Boziz as President. These had excluded the candidacy of ex-President Patass, who had been overthrown by General Boziz in March 2003. The leadership of the APRD rebellion consists mostly of former Presidential Guards of Patass, himself from the region. The APRD has about 1,000 poorly equipped members, including 200 rebels armed with automatic weapons, and another 600 with home-made hunting weapons. They claim their aim is to engage in "dialogue" to address the political exclusion of Patass and his supporters and to improve the security situation in the northwest, rather than to overthrow the government.
One of the main grievances of the population of the northwest is lack of security. Armed bandits, known as zaraguinas or coupeurs de route, regularly attack villagers and have taken advantage of insufficient security provided by the state to increase attacks. The zaraguinas commonly kidnap children for ransom and regularly kill civilians during raids. Many cattle-herders from the Peulh ethnic groupin the northwest, particularly targeted because of their valuable livestock, have fled to the safety of larger towns and refugee camps in Chad. Along with the political grievances of former Patass supporters, the failure of the CAR security forces to protect local communities from banditry is an important element in the development of the APRD, and many local armed self-defense groups have merged into the rebel group.
The UFDR Rebellion
From October to December 2006, the UFDR rebel movement gained international attention by seizing military control of the major towns in the remote Vakaga and Bamingui-Bangoran provinces of northeastern CAR, right on the border of Sudan's Darfur region. The UFDR's bold military offensive led to French military intervention on behalf of the CAR government in December 2006, allowing the security forces to regain control of urban centers.
The UFDR rebellion has its roots in the deep marginalization of northeastern CAR, which is virtually cut off from the rest of the country and is almost completely undeveloped. Elements from the Gula ethnic group, many of them trained militarily as anti-poaching units, are at the core of the rebellion, citing grievances such as discrimination against their community and the alleged embezzlement by the CAR authorities of compensation funds received from the Sudanese government following clashes perpetrated by Sudanese nomads in 2002. As the rebellion has grown, a backlash of anti-Gula sentiment among government officials, the military, and the general population has developed. As a result, most of the Gula population has fled government-controlled areas in fear of retaliation.
A second element making up the UFDR is Boziz's own former colleagues, so-called ex-librateurs, who participated in his overthrow of former President Patass in 2003. They accuse Boziz of betraying his promises and failing to compensate them for their support.
Abuses by FACA and GP Forces
Since the beginning of the conflict in mid 2005 with rebel forces in northern CAR, the CAR security forces have committed serious and widespread abuses against the civilian population, including multiple summary executions and unlawful killings, widespread burning of civilian homes, and the forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of civilians, which have instilled terror in the civilian population. In most instances, these village burnings and killings were in direct response to recent rebel activity in the area and amount to unlawful reprisals against the civilian population. It is the FACA and GP that have been responsible for the vast majority of the most serious human rights abuses in the conflict, and they have carried out these atrocities in full confidence of impunity from accountability for their crimes.
During the course of its research, Human Rights Watch documented 119 summary executions and unlawful killings committed by government security forces in both the northwest and northeast (the vast majority in the northwest), including at least 51 committed since late 2005 by a single military unit, the Bossangoa-based GP unit, commanded at the time by Lieutenant Eugne Ngakoss.
Human Rights Watch believes that the killings it has documented are only a fraction of the total number of those committed by government security forces. Since the beginning of the conflict these are estimated to amount to many hundreds. Killings committed by security forces have often involved dozens of civilian deaths in a single day and have often included unspeakable brutality. For example, on February 11, 2006, a single GP unit killed at least 30 civilians in more than a dozen separate villages located along the Nana-Barya to Bmal road. On March 22, this same GP unit beheaded a teacher in Bmal, cutting off his head with a knife while he was still alive. Other civilians have simply "disappeared" in military custody, arrested and not seen alive again.
Since December 2005, government forces, particularly the GP, have also been almost solely responsible for the burning down of more than 10,000 civilian homes in northwestern CAR. Hundreds of villages across vast swathes of northern CAR have been destroyed. Troops arrive in villages and indiscriminately fire into the civilian population, forcing them to flee before burning down their homes, sometimes looting them first. In December 2005, GP forces burned down 500 to 900 houses in the Markounda area. A Human Rights Watch count in the Batangafo-Kabo-Ouandago-Kaga Bandoro area found a total of 2,923 burned homes, including more than 1,000 homes in the large market town of Ouandago alone. In some places every single home in every single village was burned. Similarly massive destruction can be found all around the town of Paoua, all the way east to Nana Baryahundreds of kilometers of villages destroyed by government security forces.
The reprisal and counterinsurgency tactics of the CAR security forces have affected the lives of over 1 million people and have forced an estimated 212,000 civilians to abandon their road-side homes and live deep inside the bush, too fearful to return to their burned villages in case of repeat attack. Another 78,000 have sought refuge in neighboring Chad and Cameroon. The level of civilian fear in northern CAR is palpable. People are simply not to be seen in many areas, hiding far away. At the sound of approaching cars, everyone flees, dropping their possessions, sometimes even abandoning babies in their haste.
Living conditions for the displaced are life-threatening. They have no access to clean water, are often desperately short of food supplies, and their widely dispersed shelters are beyond the reach of the humanitarian community. Educational facilities have been closed, and aside from mobile clinics run by international organizations in some areas, health care is non-existent.
Rebel Abuses
APRD rebels in the northwest have engaged in widespread extortion, forced taxation, kidnappings for ransom, and beatings of civilians, particularly in the Batangafo-Kabo-Ouandago area of Ouham province. In that area, particularly on the Batangafo-Ouandago road, almost all villages have been systematically looted of all livestock, and village leaders have been regularly kidnapped for ransom. APRD rebels also have large numbers of child soldiers in their ranks, some as young as 12. APRD commanders expressed willingness to Human Rights Watch to demobilize the child soldiers if the post-demobilization security of the children could be guaranteed.
During its investigation in the field, Human Rights Watch documented one summary execution by the APRD (the killing of Mohammed Haroon in June 2006, in Gbazera) and did not identify any cases of home-burning by the group. Human Rights Watch has not received any credible additional reports of summary killings or village burnings by APRD rebels from local or international human rights organizations or journalists. On June 11, 2007, APRD rebels fired upon a vehicle of the international humanitarian organization Doctors without Borders (Mdecins Sans Frontires, MSF), killing Elsa Serfass, an MSF nurse. While the APRD immediately apologized for the incident, saying it had been a "mistake," the persons responsible should be held to account.
Human Rights Watch's research found that UFDR rebels in the northeast have carried out widespread abuses against the civilian population. During attacks on villages and towns they have often indiscriminately fired at fleeing civilians, leading to unlawful killings. Meanwhile, UFDR rebels have been responsible for summary executions of captured civilians. From October to December 2006, the rebels carried out massive looting of the belongings and livestock of the civilian population in areas they controlled. There have been allegations of rape by UFDR rebels, although Human Rights Watch has only been able to corroborate one case-a woman raped by five UFDR rebels during their brief capture of Birao in March 2007. The UFDR also has child soldiers in its ranks, and Human Rights Watch found that some of them had been forcibly recruited.
The Need for Protection
Establishing credible mechanisms to protect the civilian population from abuses is fundamental to addressing the human rights crisis in northern CAR. The responsibility for civilian protection lies first and foremost with the CAR authorities: they must take immediate steps to end military abuses and to re-establish a functioning police force and court system that serve to protect the rights of the civilian population.
However, the international community can also do more. A stronger international protection presence in the north is urgently needed. There already is a substantial UN human rights presence in CAR, in the form of a 19-person human rights unit in the office of the United Nations Peace-building Support Office in the Central African Republic (Bureau d'appui des Nations Unies pour la consolidation de la paix en Rpublique centrafricaine, BONUCA), a long-standing UN peace support mission established in 2000. However, the human rights unit has been largely passive to date and does not effectively monitor or report on human rights abuses in the north. The UN should take the necessary measures, including changes to the mandate of the human rights section, to ensure that the BONUCA human rights unit effectively monitors and reports on human rights abuses in the north, in the same way that the human rights units of UN peacekeeping missions operate in neighboring Sudan and DRC.
If the UN Security Council moves ahead with the deployment of a UN protection mission to CAR and Chad, that mission should focus on the real protection needs of the civilian population of both countries, and not focus solely on neutralizing the "spill-over effect" of the Darfur crisis.
The Need for Accountability
The crimes being committed in northern CAR by government security forces are no secret inside the country. Local newspapers and radio frequently report them, opposition parliamentarians have prepared public reports documenting the atrocities, and diplomatic envoys regularly raise their concerns with President Boziz. Despite this, the government has not investigated, prosecuted, or punished a single military officer, or even publicly reprimanded them for any of the abuses. Even in the capital, Bangui, security forces carry out summary killings of suspected bandits and rebels with impunity. During Human Rights Watch's visit, two handcuffed Chadian rebel suspects were executed on the outskirts of Bangui by security forces. The commander of the most notorious of the units, Lieutenant Eugne Ngakoss of the Bossangoa-based GP unit that has killed dozens of civilians and is directly implicated in most of the village burnings in the north, remains a free man and an active duty military officer to date.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor's office is already involved in the CAR, having announced in May 2007 that they would investigate crimes committed in CAR during the 2002-2003 fighting, and that they would continue to monitor possible crimes committed during the current conflict. The investigations of the ICC in CAR should not, however, detract from the primary obligation of the CAR authorities to end impunity and bring about accountability for crimes committed by its armed forces and others. Ultimately, the crisis in northern CAR will only be resolved when law and order is restored, and the institutions of justice have the capacity to punish those who commit crimes against the civilian population, including members of the army and the elite GP.
The international community-particularly France, without whose direct military support the government of President Boziz would not survive-have an obligation to speak out about the abuses in northern CAR and to demand accountability for the crimes committed in northern CAR.
Source: Human Rights Watch
Friday, September 14, 2007
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Lekota: revolutionary songs ANC policy
ANC national chairperson Mosiuoa Lekota has defended his negative remarks about people singing freedom songs such as Umshini Wami, saying the issue was not about ANC Deputy President Jacob Zuma, but about policy. Speaking to journalists at a media briefing on Wednesday, the defence minister said although he was talking to a specific audience when the remarks were made, the essence of what he said was relevant to everybody. "These liberation and freedom songs are not pop songs, which we sing for personal entertainment here and there. "These are instruments of revolution, cultivated since the inception of our movement," he said. They had been sung with a purpose, and been used to advance the ANC's policies, to announce them, and popularise them.
The songs had changed as policy positions had changed as the ANC went through its phases of struggle. This was why the ANC national executive committee (NEC) - following the conclusion of the negotiations at Codesa - had stepped in when Peter Mokaba continued using slogans such as "kill the boer, kill the farmer", which clearly flew in the face of policy.
The ANC had to look at what it was it wanted to say to the people, Lekota said. "We have a responsibility to unite the people of this country. We carry the responsibility to unite these people and to reconcile them, and to focus their attention on the task of national upliftment and a better life for the people. "Leaders of the ANC, therefore, cannot behave like anybody else on the street. I want to see the ANC work in the interests of the people of South.
Source: IoL
The songs had changed as policy positions had changed as the ANC went through its phases of struggle. This was why the ANC national executive committee (NEC) - following the conclusion of the negotiations at Codesa - had stepped in when Peter Mokaba continued using slogans such as "kill the boer, kill the farmer", which clearly flew in the face of policy.
The ANC had to look at what it was it wanted to say to the people, Lekota said. "We have a responsibility to unite the people of this country. We carry the responsibility to unite these people and to reconcile them, and to focus their attention on the task of national upliftment and a better life for the people. "Leaders of the ANC, therefore, cannot behave like anybody else on the street. I want to see the ANC work in the interests of the people of South.
Source: IoL
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Eskom looks to nuclear plants
South Africa's largely coal-driven power utility Eskom has hit the limits of its capacity and aims to double output by 2025, with nuclear plants supplying more than a quarter of future energy compared with 6% now. Eskom's chief executive Jacob Maroga told a coal conference on Tuesday the state-owned firm would cut back on polluting coal-fired plants that have made South Africa the world's lowest cost electricity producer. "The issues we're faced with are costs and lead time, but the debate around global warming is key, because coal is a big contributor to carbon dioxide emissions," Maroga told the Coaltrans conference. "We can now finally say we have run out of surplus capacity."
Maroga said plans to boost output to 80 000 megawatts (MW) by 2025 would include adding 20 000 MW of nuclear-supplied energy as well as extra renewable capacity. The proportion of output from coal would fall below 70% by 2025 from 86% currently. "All over the world nuclear is coming back," he said. "Going forward the electricity prices we have will not be sustainable."
The two reactors at South Africa's Koeberg, Africa's only nuclear-fired facility, generate some 6% of the country's electricity, mainly used around Cape Town. Maroga said South Africa, one of the biggest producers of uranium, was building a multi-billion dollar new technology pebble bed modular reactor (PBMR), and has mooted building more conventional plants to add to Koeberg.Eskom was currently planning to expand yearly by 4%, to keep up with a projected 6% growth in the gross domestic product of Africa's biggest economy.
The company has already outlined a R150-billion spending programme from 2007 to 2011, with more to follow.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Maroga said plans to boost output to 80 000 megawatts (MW) by 2025 would include adding 20 000 MW of nuclear-supplied energy as well as extra renewable capacity. The proportion of output from coal would fall below 70% by 2025 from 86% currently. "All over the world nuclear is coming back," he said. "Going forward the electricity prices we have will not be sustainable."
The two reactors at South Africa's Koeberg, Africa's only nuclear-fired facility, generate some 6% of the country's electricity, mainly used around Cape Town. Maroga said South Africa, one of the biggest producers of uranium, was building a multi-billion dollar new technology pebble bed modular reactor (PBMR), and has mooted building more conventional plants to add to Koeberg.Eskom was currently planning to expand yearly by 4%, to keep up with a projected 6% growth in the gross domestic product of Africa's biggest economy.
The company has already outlined a R150-billion spending programme from 2007 to 2011, with more to follow.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Zuma 'not right in the head'
The supporters of African National Congress deputy president Jacob Zuma were fuming on Monday after the party's national chairperson, Mosioua Lekota, took off the gloves in the ANC succession race by suggesting that Zuma was "not right in his head" by persisting in singing the "Umshini Wami" (Bring me my machine gun) song after the armed struggle had been abandoned.
Lekota, who is also minister of defence, was quoted on SABC TV News on Sunday as saying the ANC had suspended the armed struggle during negotiations with the apartheid government and thereafter it was totally abandoned. He was addressing a function in Gauteng to commemorate the Delmas treason trial, where he and other anti-apartheid activists were tried. Lekota did not refer to Zuma by name but many of his backers saw his statement as an attack on Zuma as "Umshini Wami" was his popular song. 'We expect Lekota to rise above petty squabbles. He did not understand why a person "obhadlile ekhanda lakhe" (who is right in his head) could keep on saying "bring on my machine gun" when the armed struggle had long been abandoned.
Political analysts saw Lekota's statement as indicating "gloves-off" ahead of the important ANC conference in Limpopo in December. There were angry reactions from Zuma backers who described it as "unfortunate and uncalled for". ANC Youth League spokesperson Zizi Kodwa said Lekota had "stooped so low". "As the national chairperson of the ANC we expect Lekota to rise above petty squabbles. But we are not surprised because this is indicative of personal frustration on his side because as we discuss the future of the ANC and its leadership, his name does not feature anywhere.
'This song was sung by our cadres during difficult times in exile' "He thinks people have abandoned him and it confirms our assessment of him is correct in that he should not be included in any key leadership position," said Kodwa.
He warned that revolutionary songs should not be interpreted literally. We did not expect such a thing from the national chairman of the ANC. "This song was sung by our cadres during difficult times in exile. "When we sing it, we do so to remember those times and to ponder the future," he said.
Don Mkhwanazi, the chairman of the Friends of Jacob Zuma Trust, a body charged with raising defence funds for Zuma, urged that there was a need to understand the song in its correct context. The song, he said, was being used figuratively to reflect on the challenges still ahead for the country. "Because of what has happened in South Africa, the national democratic revolution is not complete yet. "We have arrived at a political destination but we have not really arrived at the promised land, where political and economic equity will be realised. The song actually means that we must be vigilant and vigorous in defending the gains that we have made because there are certain things that are beginning to fester, like perceived selective justice which is going to undermine the rule of law. No one wants to shoot anyone; we have passed the stage of shooting but we cannot stop to defend our gains," said Mkhwanazi.
Zuma's aide, Renjeni Munusamy, said she could not comment as Zuma was out of the country. Political analyst Nhlanhla Mtaka said with the ANC conference on the horizon, the country was entering an interesting time where people, formations and cabals would be tempted to attack their opponents at every opportunity. "Particularly with provinces announcing their nominations, some leaders might be tempted to fight for their names to be there. "The unfortunate part in this exercise is that it will be the image of the ANC that will be tarnished as senior ANC members enter the street fight ahead of Limpopo. "However, it will not be those who are vocal that will win the day but those who present themselves as statesmen in the midst of this raging political storm," said Mtaka.
The spokesperson for Lekota, Sam Mkhwanazi, could not be contacted for comment.
Source: IoL
Lekota, who is also minister of defence, was quoted on SABC TV News on Sunday as saying the ANC had suspended the armed struggle during negotiations with the apartheid government and thereafter it was totally abandoned. He was addressing a function in Gauteng to commemorate the Delmas treason trial, where he and other anti-apartheid activists were tried. Lekota did not refer to Zuma by name but many of his backers saw his statement as an attack on Zuma as "Umshini Wami" was his popular song. 'We expect Lekota to rise above petty squabbles. He did not understand why a person "obhadlile ekhanda lakhe" (who is right in his head) could keep on saying "bring on my machine gun" when the armed struggle had long been abandoned.
Political analysts saw Lekota's statement as indicating "gloves-off" ahead of the important ANC conference in Limpopo in December. There were angry reactions from Zuma backers who described it as "unfortunate and uncalled for". ANC Youth League spokesperson Zizi Kodwa said Lekota had "stooped so low". "As the national chairperson of the ANC we expect Lekota to rise above petty squabbles. But we are not surprised because this is indicative of personal frustration on his side because as we discuss the future of the ANC and its leadership, his name does not feature anywhere.
'This song was sung by our cadres during difficult times in exile' "He thinks people have abandoned him and it confirms our assessment of him is correct in that he should not be included in any key leadership position," said Kodwa.
He warned that revolutionary songs should not be interpreted literally. We did not expect such a thing from the national chairman of the ANC. "This song was sung by our cadres during difficult times in exile. "When we sing it, we do so to remember those times and to ponder the future," he said.
Don Mkhwanazi, the chairman of the Friends of Jacob Zuma Trust, a body charged with raising defence funds for Zuma, urged that there was a need to understand the song in its correct context. The song, he said, was being used figuratively to reflect on the challenges still ahead for the country. "Because of what has happened in South Africa, the national democratic revolution is not complete yet. "We have arrived at a political destination but we have not really arrived at the promised land, where political and economic equity will be realised. The song actually means that we must be vigilant and vigorous in defending the gains that we have made because there are certain things that are beginning to fester, like perceived selective justice which is going to undermine the rule of law. No one wants to shoot anyone; we have passed the stage of shooting but we cannot stop to defend our gains," said Mkhwanazi.
Zuma's aide, Renjeni Munusamy, said she could not comment as Zuma was out of the country. Political analyst Nhlanhla Mtaka said with the ANC conference on the horizon, the country was entering an interesting time where people, formations and cabals would be tempted to attack their opponents at every opportunity. "Particularly with provinces announcing their nominations, some leaders might be tempted to fight for their names to be there. "The unfortunate part in this exercise is that it will be the image of the ANC that will be tarnished as senior ANC members enter the street fight ahead of Limpopo. "However, it will not be those who are vocal that will win the day but those who present themselves as statesmen in the midst of this raging political storm," said Mtaka.
The spokesperson for Lekota, Sam Mkhwanazi, could not be contacted for comment.
Source: IoL
Monday, September 3, 2007
Over 9 000 SA youths to be trained as social workers
More than 9 000 unemployed youths will be trained as auxiliary social workers by 2010, the Department of Social Development said on Monday. Social Development Minister Zola Skweyiya said the implementation of the training programme is part of an agreement of cooperation with Cuba's Minister of Labour and Social Security, Alfredo Morales Cartaya. "The youth will be trained and on completion be deployed in their communities to help us deal with the various social challenges such as assisting orphans and vulnerable children, alleviating the HIV and Aids [pandemic], vulnerable youth support and others," he said.
Cuba has developed a two-pronged work-training programme comprising a formal university-level programme and a rapid 12-month social work-training programme. As part of the implementation of the agreement, the Cuban programme will be replicated in South Africa to alleviate the shortage of social workers and create much-needed jobs as part of the Expanded Public Works Programme. "A rapid auxiliary social-worker training programme will surely help us deal with the critical shortages of social workers," said Skweyiya. He said the department will "train and absorb" 9360 auxiliary social workers by 2010.
Skweyiya was in Cuba to strengthen ties and formalise cooperation on social security, services to women, youth and children, community development, poverty alleviation and training of social service professionals. Departmental spokesperson Lakela Kaunda said youth from rural and poor communities will be favoured in the national recruitment programme.
The cooperation with Cuba will also include study tours and exchanges of technical expertise on policy development.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Cuba has developed a two-pronged work-training programme comprising a formal university-level programme and a rapid 12-month social work-training programme. As part of the implementation of the agreement, the Cuban programme will be replicated in South Africa to alleviate the shortage of social workers and create much-needed jobs as part of the Expanded Public Works Programme. "A rapid auxiliary social-worker training programme will surely help us deal with the critical shortages of social workers," said Skweyiya. He said the department will "train and absorb" 9360 auxiliary social workers by 2010.
Skweyiya was in Cuba to strengthen ties and formalise cooperation on social security, services to women, youth and children, community development, poverty alleviation and training of social service professionals. Departmental spokesperson Lakela Kaunda said youth from rural and poor communities will be favoured in the national recruitment programme.
The cooperation with Cuba will also include study tours and exchanges of technical expertise on policy development.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Friday, August 31, 2007
Fidentia trio in court again
Piet Bothma, the suspended chief executive of the Transport Education Training Authority, appeared in the Cape Town Magistrate's Court in connection with the Fidentia saga. It was Bothma's second court appearance. He was recently arrested as a third suspect in the affair.
Bothma was in the dock with Fidentia chief executive J Arthur Brown, and the company's former financial director, Graham Maddock, both of whom were arrested in March. Bothma was arrested on August 6, after he had flown to Cape Town with his attorney, Marco Martini, to surrender himself to the Scorpions.
The three appeared before magistrate Jesthree Steyn who, at the request of Scorpions senior counsel Bruce Morrison, postponed the case to February 12 next year. Morrison told the court the long postponement was needed to finalise the investigation, and to prepare the charge sheet. Attorney William Booth, who represents Brown, told the court he had no objection to the postponement, despite having at the previous hearing in May reserved the right to object to any further postponements for further investigation. Booth told the court: "Last time, I noted that I would object to any further postponement, requested by the State, for the purpose of finalising the investigation.
"I also said I would object if the defence had not at the present proceedings been furnished with the charge sheet. "I agree to the postponement to next year, but reserve the defence's rights to object if at the next hearing the defence has not yet been furnished with the charge sheet and other documents." Maddock was represented by attorney Cesare Baartman, who said he too would object if a further postponement was requested in February.
Technically, if the State again requests a postponement in February for further investigation, the defence will have the right to demand that the case be removed from the roll. If the case is then removed from the roll, it will amount to the withdrawal of charges, and the three will step out of the dock free men. The magistrate extended their bail: R1m in respect of Brown and Maddock, and R200 000 in respect of Bothma.
Source: News 24
Bothma was in the dock with Fidentia chief executive J Arthur Brown, and the company's former financial director, Graham Maddock, both of whom were arrested in March. Bothma was arrested on August 6, after he had flown to Cape Town with his attorney, Marco Martini, to surrender himself to the Scorpions.
The three appeared before magistrate Jesthree Steyn who, at the request of Scorpions senior counsel Bruce Morrison, postponed the case to February 12 next year. Morrison told the court the long postponement was needed to finalise the investigation, and to prepare the charge sheet. Attorney William Booth, who represents Brown, told the court he had no objection to the postponement, despite having at the previous hearing in May reserved the right to object to any further postponements for further investigation. Booth told the court: "Last time, I noted that I would object to any further postponement, requested by the State, for the purpose of finalising the investigation.
"I also said I would object if the defence had not at the present proceedings been furnished with the charge sheet. "I agree to the postponement to next year, but reserve the defence's rights to object if at the next hearing the defence has not yet been furnished with the charge sheet and other documents." Maddock was represented by attorney Cesare Baartman, who said he too would object if a further postponement was requested in February.
Technically, if the State again requests a postponement in February for further investigation, the defence will have the right to demand that the case be removed from the roll. If the case is then removed from the roll, it will amount to the withdrawal of charges, and the three will step out of the dock free men. The magistrate extended their bail: R1m in respect of Brown and Maddock, and R200 000 in respect of Bothma.
Source: News 24
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
SADC: Take Action to End Zimbabwe Rights Crisis
Government leaders gathered this week at a summit in Lusaka, Zambia should urgently press Zimbabwe’s government to end its broadscale attack on human rights, Human Rights Watch said in a briefing paper released today. Human Rights Watch called on the Southern African Development Community (SADC) to deploy human rights monitors to Zimbabwe to assess the situation.
The summit, which takes place on August 16 and 17, 2007 is expected to address the ongoing political and economic crisis in Zimbabwe. At an extraordinary summit in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in March 2007, SADC asked South African president Thabo Mbeki to mediate talks between the ruling Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) and the two factions of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). Mbeki is expected to report back on the progress of the talks in Lusaka.
“SADC members must take strong and effective action to deal with one of the region’s most grave crises – Zimbabwe,” said Peter Takirambudde, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “SADC’s credibility as a real force for change on human rights is on the line here and its leaders should insist on tangible improvements in Zimbabwe.”
Human Rights Watch urged SADC to more explicitly incorporate human rights concerns in the mediation talks and set clear benchmarks for progress within a clear time-frame. The summit should make a public acknowledgement of ongoing human rights problems, Human Rights Watch said, and deploy SADC human rights monitors as an essential first step in protecting Zimbabweans from state brutality.
In the past, SADC has failed to extract concrete commitments on human rights from the government of Zimbabwe. Although serious human rights problems have plagued Zimbabwe for the past seven years, the conclusions issued after SADC’s past summits have failed to adequately reflect these problems. For example, the final communique of the extraordinary summit in Tanzania failed to mention the arrests and beatings of opposition and civil society leaders or the broader human rights situation in Zimbabwe.
The 13-page briefing paper, “A Call to Action: The Crisis in Zimbabwe – SADC’s Human Rights Credibility on the Line,” highlights priority areas of concern on human rights and proposes a number of actions to help tackle the crisis. The government of Zimbabwe has used methods against critics that range from intimidation, threats and harassment to physical attacks and torture. Hundreds of civil society activists – including human rights defenders, independent journalists and members of the political opposition – have been arbitrarily arrested and beaten by police and other security agents.
Police often use unnecessary and lethal force to violently disrupt peaceful protests. Recent examples highlighted in the memorandum include: the arrest and assault in police custody of more than 200 activists from the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA) when they attempted to demonstrate against the Constitutional Amendment Bill in Harare on July 25, and the arrest and assault of up to 20 women from Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) during peaceful protests in Bulawayo on June 6.
Human Rights Watch called upon SADC to send a clear, visible and unambiguous message from this week’s summit, repudiating the Zimbabwean government’s policy of political repression through laws and the unaccountability of Zimbabwe’s police, army and security forces.
“The political and human rights crisis in Zimbabwe, which threatens to destabilize the whole region, is crying out for urgent and effective leadership,” said Takirambudde.
“Only by addressing the human rights violations in Zimbabwe can SADC hope to nurture a political and economic revival in the country.”
Source: Human Rights Watch
The summit, which takes place on August 16 and 17, 2007 is expected to address the ongoing political and economic crisis in Zimbabwe. At an extraordinary summit in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in March 2007, SADC asked South African president Thabo Mbeki to mediate talks between the ruling Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) and the two factions of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). Mbeki is expected to report back on the progress of the talks in Lusaka.
“SADC members must take strong and effective action to deal with one of the region’s most grave crises – Zimbabwe,” said Peter Takirambudde, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “SADC’s credibility as a real force for change on human rights is on the line here and its leaders should insist on tangible improvements in Zimbabwe.”
Human Rights Watch urged SADC to more explicitly incorporate human rights concerns in the mediation talks and set clear benchmarks for progress within a clear time-frame. The summit should make a public acknowledgement of ongoing human rights problems, Human Rights Watch said, and deploy SADC human rights monitors as an essential first step in protecting Zimbabweans from state brutality.
In the past, SADC has failed to extract concrete commitments on human rights from the government of Zimbabwe. Although serious human rights problems have plagued Zimbabwe for the past seven years, the conclusions issued after SADC’s past summits have failed to adequately reflect these problems. For example, the final communique of the extraordinary summit in Tanzania failed to mention the arrests and beatings of opposition and civil society leaders or the broader human rights situation in Zimbabwe.
The 13-page briefing paper, “A Call to Action: The Crisis in Zimbabwe – SADC’s Human Rights Credibility on the Line,” highlights priority areas of concern on human rights and proposes a number of actions to help tackle the crisis. The government of Zimbabwe has used methods against critics that range from intimidation, threats and harassment to physical attacks and torture. Hundreds of civil society activists – including human rights defenders, independent journalists and members of the political opposition – have been arbitrarily arrested and beaten by police and other security agents.
Police often use unnecessary and lethal force to violently disrupt peaceful protests. Recent examples highlighted in the memorandum include: the arrest and assault in police custody of more than 200 activists from the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA) when they attempted to demonstrate against the Constitutional Amendment Bill in Harare on July 25, and the arrest and assault of up to 20 women from Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) during peaceful protests in Bulawayo on June 6.
Human Rights Watch called upon SADC to send a clear, visible and unambiguous message from this week’s summit, repudiating the Zimbabwean government’s policy of political repression through laws and the unaccountability of Zimbabwe’s police, army and security forces.
“The political and human rights crisis in Zimbabwe, which threatens to destabilize the whole region, is crying out for urgent and effective leadership,” said Takirambudde.
“Only by addressing the human rights violations in Zimbabwe can SADC hope to nurture a political and economic revival in the country.”
Source: Human Rights Watch
Monday, August 13, 2007
Darfur force 'to be all-African'
Africa will provide all of the 26,000 peacekeepers to be sent to Sudan's Darfur region, the head of the African Union (AU) has said. AU chairman Alpha Oumar Konare said enough African troops had been promised for no outside help to be needed but he did not give details.
The UN had expected to call on Asian troops. Critics say Africa lacks enough trained troops for an effective force. Sudan's government has long opposed the involvement of non-African soldiers. It only agreed to a joint United Nations-AU force after months of negotiations. The UN Security Council resolution setting up the force said the troops would be mostly African but they would be under UN command.
UN spokesman Farhan Haq said that while there may be enough AU troops for the force, it was important to get the right mix of abilities on the ground. "It's not simply a question of raw numbers of troops - we're trying to find a good mix of skills," he told the BBC News website. "We're looking to make sure this force is robust, it's mobile, it's well-armed and equipped, so that it can carry out the full mandate that it needs to perform."
Speaking after talks in Khartoum with the Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, Mr Konare said: "I can confirm today that we have received sufficient commitments from African countries that we will not have to resort to non-African forces." He added that the "ball is now in the court of the UN" to provide funding for the force.
Mr Bashir, who has long argued that a UN-backed force would be a violation of Sudan's sovereignty and could worsen the situation there, backed Mr Konare's plan. "[We] support the AU force, which consolidates the efforts of the Sudanese government to ensure security, peace and stability in Darfur," he said after their meeting. Mr Konare did not give a breakdown of the countries offering to supply more personnel, leading correspondents to question the viability of an all-African force.
BBC Africa analyst David Bamford said it was unclear where so many African troops would come from. Senegal and Malawi have promised to send peacekeepers to Darfur, while the AU has said that Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia and Nigeria have also promised to contribute.
Hafiz Mohamed from lobby group Justice Africa said Sudan would be able to manipulate AU troops - as he said they had been doing with the 7,000 AU troops already in Darfur. "This will affect the whole credibility of the new resolution," he told the BBC's Network Africa programme.
Mr Konare's announcement came just days after the UN published a list of Asian countries it said had already committed troops and police officers to a Darfur force. UN officials said the joint AU-UN force would be "predominantly African", but confirmed that countries including Indonesia, Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh had pledged personnel.
According to a UN resolution, the composition of the force must be decided by 30 August. At least 200,000 people are believed to have died and more than two million have been left homeless in Darfur since fighting broke out in 2003. Sudan's Arab dominated government, and the pro-government Janjaweed militias, are accused of war crimes against the region's black African population - although the UN has stopped short of calling it genocide. Sudan has always denied backing the Janjaweed militias and argued that the problems in Darfur were being exaggerated for political reasons.
Source: BBC
The UN had expected to call on Asian troops. Critics say Africa lacks enough trained troops for an effective force. Sudan's government has long opposed the involvement of non-African soldiers. It only agreed to a joint United Nations-AU force after months of negotiations. The UN Security Council resolution setting up the force said the troops would be mostly African but they would be under UN command.
UN spokesman Farhan Haq said that while there may be enough AU troops for the force, it was important to get the right mix of abilities on the ground. "It's not simply a question of raw numbers of troops - we're trying to find a good mix of skills," he told the BBC News website. "We're looking to make sure this force is robust, it's mobile, it's well-armed and equipped, so that it can carry out the full mandate that it needs to perform."
Speaking after talks in Khartoum with the Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, Mr Konare said: "I can confirm today that we have received sufficient commitments from African countries that we will not have to resort to non-African forces." He added that the "ball is now in the court of the UN" to provide funding for the force.
Mr Bashir, who has long argued that a UN-backed force would be a violation of Sudan's sovereignty and could worsen the situation there, backed Mr Konare's plan. "[We] support the AU force, which consolidates the efforts of the Sudanese government to ensure security, peace and stability in Darfur," he said after their meeting. Mr Konare did not give a breakdown of the countries offering to supply more personnel, leading correspondents to question the viability of an all-African force.
BBC Africa analyst David Bamford said it was unclear where so many African troops would come from. Senegal and Malawi have promised to send peacekeepers to Darfur, while the AU has said that Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia and Nigeria have also promised to contribute.
Hafiz Mohamed from lobby group Justice Africa said Sudan would be able to manipulate AU troops - as he said they had been doing with the 7,000 AU troops already in Darfur. "This will affect the whole credibility of the new resolution," he told the BBC's Network Africa programme.
Mr Konare's announcement came just days after the UN published a list of Asian countries it said had already committed troops and police officers to a Darfur force. UN officials said the joint AU-UN force would be "predominantly African", but confirmed that countries including Indonesia, Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh had pledged personnel.
According to a UN resolution, the composition of the force must be decided by 30 August. At least 200,000 people are believed to have died and more than two million have been left homeless in Darfur since fighting broke out in 2003. Sudan's Arab dominated government, and the pro-government Janjaweed militias, are accused of war crimes against the region's black African population - although the UN has stopped short of calling it genocide. Sudan has always denied backing the Janjaweed militias and argued that the problems in Darfur were being exaggerated for political reasons.
Source: BBC
Friday, August 10, 2007
Mauritania made slavery illegal
In August 2007, Mauritania’s parliament voted to make slavery illegal. It is a sad comment on the longevity and resilience of slavery that this occurred on the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the trans-Atlantic slave trade in the British Empire. This is not the first time that slavery has been outlawed in Mauritania. It was first declared illegal in 1905 and as recently as 1981.
Although numbers are difficult to establish, the Mauritanian advocacy group, SOS Slavery, estimates that as many as 600,000 people - about 20 per cent of the population - in the arid West Africa country could be enslaved. In the past, the Mauritanian government adopted an ambiguous stance. At times, it denied that slavery existed. Activists were unlikely to receive cooperation, and the use of the word ‘slave’ was discouraged.
The new government of President Sidi Ould Cheikh Abdellahi (installed in April) has tried to change this. Mauritania’s new arrangements make provision for prison terms of 10 years for slaveholders. Promoting or defending slavery carries a two-year term. Slavery is, in theory at least, illegal and punishable. Slavery is now near-universally acknowledged as an appalling violation of human rights - indeed, denial of the right to live free is arguably the greatest human rights violation of all. It is also one depressingly common to cultures throughout history. But changing laws alone is not enough. If Mauritania is to deal with it effectively, some lessons can be learned from history. Acknowledgement that slavery exists represents a notable advance. One study notes: "The most important lesson of all past interventions is that you can’t fight slavery if you don’t name it ‘slavery’."
For Mauritania’s ban on slavery to succeed, it must ensure that laws against slavery are enforced. The trans-Atlantic trade was abolished in the British Empire in 1807. The British Navy - then the world’s most powerful - attempted to intercept slave-carrying vessels, and enslavers faced arrest and punishment. Mauritania, one of the world’s poorer countries, will need to find the personnel and legal capacity - police, prosecutors and government inspectors - to enforce the law. It must also back change in law with change in culture and values. The British abolitionists fought a long campaign to convince people of the immorality of slavery. This was ultimately successful: The common view slowly changed, leading a slavery supporter to comment glumly that "the stream of popularity runs against us". Abolitionists pursued this through petitions and boycotts, and appeals to religious convictions the population. Periodic slave rebellions testified to their case.
According to Mauritanian activists and ex-slaves, the institution is so deeply woven into culture that slaves need little coercion: In the words of Mr Boubakar Messaoud of SOS Slavery: "We have achieved what the American plantation owners dreamed of - the breeding of perfectly submissive slaves." One slave told an interviewer: "God created me to be a slave, just as He created the camel to be a camel." These views must change. Unless freed slaves are helped to become self-sufficient, their future will be abject poverty. Opportunities in Mauritania are limited, and slaves have little education.
Former slaves face a stark choice upon emancipation: To go to the streets with no money or stay with their owners on whatever terms. Most choose to stay. In the US, slaves became “sharecroppers” who worked small plots on landowners’ estates, were paid a pittance - if at all - and kept in perpetual debt through charges for food, clothes and supplies. Previous emancipation in Mauritania failed largely because steps were not taken. This one will be nothing more than a re-branding exercise unless laws and enforcement change the slave-master relationship. The government should provide literacy and skills training to give freed slaves a chance to make use of their freedom.
Source: South African Institute of International Affairs
Although numbers are difficult to establish, the Mauritanian advocacy group, SOS Slavery, estimates that as many as 600,000 people - about 20 per cent of the population - in the arid West Africa country could be enslaved. In the past, the Mauritanian government adopted an ambiguous stance. At times, it denied that slavery existed. Activists were unlikely to receive cooperation, and the use of the word ‘slave’ was discouraged.
The new government of President Sidi Ould Cheikh Abdellahi (installed in April) has tried to change this. Mauritania’s new arrangements make provision for prison terms of 10 years for slaveholders. Promoting or defending slavery carries a two-year term. Slavery is, in theory at least, illegal and punishable. Slavery is now near-universally acknowledged as an appalling violation of human rights - indeed, denial of the right to live free is arguably the greatest human rights violation of all. It is also one depressingly common to cultures throughout history. But changing laws alone is not enough. If Mauritania is to deal with it effectively, some lessons can be learned from history. Acknowledgement that slavery exists represents a notable advance. One study notes: "The most important lesson of all past interventions is that you can’t fight slavery if you don’t name it ‘slavery’."
For Mauritania’s ban on slavery to succeed, it must ensure that laws against slavery are enforced. The trans-Atlantic trade was abolished in the British Empire in 1807. The British Navy - then the world’s most powerful - attempted to intercept slave-carrying vessels, and enslavers faced arrest and punishment. Mauritania, one of the world’s poorer countries, will need to find the personnel and legal capacity - police, prosecutors and government inspectors - to enforce the law. It must also back change in law with change in culture and values. The British abolitionists fought a long campaign to convince people of the immorality of slavery. This was ultimately successful: The common view slowly changed, leading a slavery supporter to comment glumly that "the stream of popularity runs against us". Abolitionists pursued this through petitions and boycotts, and appeals to religious convictions the population. Periodic slave rebellions testified to their case.
According to Mauritanian activists and ex-slaves, the institution is so deeply woven into culture that slaves need little coercion: In the words of Mr Boubakar Messaoud of SOS Slavery: "We have achieved what the American plantation owners dreamed of - the breeding of perfectly submissive slaves." One slave told an interviewer: "God created me to be a slave, just as He created the camel to be a camel." These views must change. Unless freed slaves are helped to become self-sufficient, their future will be abject poverty. Opportunities in Mauritania are limited, and slaves have little education.
Former slaves face a stark choice upon emancipation: To go to the streets with no money or stay with their owners on whatever terms. Most choose to stay. In the US, slaves became “sharecroppers” who worked small plots on landowners’ estates, were paid a pittance - if at all - and kept in perpetual debt through charges for food, clothes and supplies. Previous emancipation in Mauritania failed largely because steps were not taken. This one will be nothing more than a re-branding exercise unless laws and enforcement change the slave-master relationship. The government should provide literacy and skills training to give freed slaves a chance to make use of their freedom.
Source: South African Institute of International Affairs
Monday, August 6, 2007
Keen demand fuels global trade in body parts
Paul Lee got his liver from an executed Chinese prisoner; Karam in Egypt bought a kidney for his sister for $5Â 300; in Istanbul, Hakan is holding out for $30Â 700 for one of his kidneys.
They are not so unusual: a dire shortage of donated organs in rich countries is sending foreigners with end-stage illnesses to poorer places like China, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Colombia and the Philippines to buy a new lease of life.
Source: Mail & Guardian
They are not so unusual: a dire shortage of donated organs in rich countries is sending foreigners with end-stage illnesses to poorer places like China, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Colombia and the Philippines to buy a new lease of life.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Suspended Teta boss arrested
The suspended chief executive of the Transport Education Training Authority (Teta), Piet Bothma, has become the third person to be arrested in connection with the Fidentia affair. He appeared briefly in the Cape Town Magistrate's Court on Monday where he was released on R200 000 bail. Bothma has been charged with fraud and theft, and with corruption involving alleged kickbacks of just under R5m. He had earlier in the day flown down from Johannesburg with his attorney to report to the Scorpions' office in the city centre, where he was formally arrested.
Fidentia boss J Arthur Brown and financial director Graham Maddock were arrested in March, and are out on bail of R1m each.
Bothma was suspended from his Teta post in June. The State claims under the theft and fraud charges that he was part of a conspiracy with Brown, Maddock "and/or others" with regard to R200m that Teta invested with Fidentia Asset Management, now under curatorship. The corruption relates to an allegation that he got just under R5 million in unlawful kickbacks in the process. His attorney, Marco Martini, said neither he nor Bothma had any comment at this stage. "At this stage we're waiting to see a formal charge sheet," he said. Bothma will be in the dock alongside Brown and Maddock at their next court appearance on August 31.
Scorpions prosecutor Bruce Morrisson told the court the State did not object to bail, and that the amount had been agreed on by the State and defence. He said Bothma had co-operated with the Scorpions over his arrest, and had at the time of his arrest not given any false information. As part of his bail conditions, Bothma has been ordered to surrender all travel documents, and to seek Scorpions permission if he wants to leave South Africa. He has also been barred from communicating with any Teta board members, officials or employees. It is understood that the Scorpions are hoping to make further arrests in the case.
Source: News 24
Fidentia boss J Arthur Brown and financial director Graham Maddock were arrested in March, and are out on bail of R1m each.
Bothma was suspended from his Teta post in June. The State claims under the theft and fraud charges that he was part of a conspiracy with Brown, Maddock "and/or others" with regard to R200m that Teta invested with Fidentia Asset Management, now under curatorship. The corruption relates to an allegation that he got just under R5 million in unlawful kickbacks in the process. His attorney, Marco Martini, said neither he nor Bothma had any comment at this stage. "At this stage we're waiting to see a formal charge sheet," he said. Bothma will be in the dock alongside Brown and Maddock at their next court appearance on August 31.
Scorpions prosecutor Bruce Morrisson told the court the State did not object to bail, and that the amount had been agreed on by the State and defence. He said Bothma had co-operated with the Scorpions over his arrest, and had at the time of his arrest not given any false information. As part of his bail conditions, Bothma has been ordered to surrender all travel documents, and to seek Scorpions permission if he wants to leave South Africa. He has also been barred from communicating with any Teta board members, officials or employees. It is understood that the Scorpions are hoping to make further arrests in the case.
Source: News 24
Friday, July 27, 2007
Jailed policeman accuses De Klerk
An apartheid-era South African security police commander says ex-President FW de Klerk knew of gross human rights violations during his term of office. Eugene de Kock, jailed for his role in killing anti-apartheid activists, made the accusation a day after Mr De Klerk said that his conscience was clear. Talking from his prison cell to a radio station, he said the ex-president's hands were "soaked in blood".
De Kock said he was prepared to testify in court against Mr de Klerk. He claimed he could list exact instances where the country's last white president gave the order for specific killings. De Kock was nicknamed "Prime Evil" for his role in ordering the killing and maiming of dozens of anti-apartheid activists, often using very cruel methods. He is serving two life sentences in a maximum-security prison in Pretoria.
On Thursday, Mr de Klerk denied ever condoning the elimination of anti-apartheid activists or any other gross human rights violations during his term of office, which began in 1989 and ended in 1994 when Nelson Mandela became president. "I have not only a clear conscience, I am not guilty of any crime whatsoever," Mr de Klerk said while addressing the media in Cape Town. "I have never myself approved murder or the random killing of anybody, or gross violations of human rights."
There has been speculation about Mr de Klerk's knowledge of human rights violations during his term of office since news first broke last week that his former Police Minister, Adriaan Vlok, would face charges relating to the poisoning of the then secretary general of the South African Council of Churches, Reverend Frank Chikane, in 1989. Mr Vlok has admitted to approving the poisoning of the former church leader as well as other human rights violations. He publicly sought forgiveness by washing Rev Chikane's feet in his office last year.
Source: BBC
De Kock said he was prepared to testify in court against Mr de Klerk. He claimed he could list exact instances where the country's last white president gave the order for specific killings. De Kock was nicknamed "Prime Evil" for his role in ordering the killing and maiming of dozens of anti-apartheid activists, often using very cruel methods. He is serving two life sentences in a maximum-security prison in Pretoria.
On Thursday, Mr de Klerk denied ever condoning the elimination of anti-apartheid activists or any other gross human rights violations during his term of office, which began in 1989 and ended in 1994 when Nelson Mandela became president. "I have not only a clear conscience, I am not guilty of any crime whatsoever," Mr de Klerk said while addressing the media in Cape Town. "I have never myself approved murder or the random killing of anybody, or gross violations of human rights."
There has been speculation about Mr de Klerk's knowledge of human rights violations during his term of office since news first broke last week that his former Police Minister, Adriaan Vlok, would face charges relating to the poisoning of the then secretary general of the South African Council of Churches, Reverend Frank Chikane, in 1989. Mr Vlok has admitted to approving the poisoning of the former church leader as well as other human rights violations. He publicly sought forgiveness by washing Rev Chikane's feet in his office last year.
Source: BBC
Jailed policeman accuses De Klerk
An apartheid-era South African security police commander says ex-President FW de Klerk knew of gross human rights violations during his term of office. Eugene de Kock, jailed for his role in killing anti-apartheid activists, made the accusation a day after Mr De Klerk said that his conscience was clear. Talking from his prison cell to a radio station, he said the ex-president's hands were "soaked in blood".
De Kock said he was prepared to testify in court against Mr de Klerk. He said Mr de Klerk's hands were "soaked in blood", and claimed he could list exact instances where the country's last white president gave the order for specific killings. De Kock was nicknamed "Prime Evil" for his role in ordering the killing and maiming of dozens of anti-apartheid activists, often using very cruel methods. He is serving two life sentences in a maximum-security prison in Pretoria.
On Thursday, Mr de Klerk denied ever condoning the elimination of anti-apartheid activists or any other gross human rights violations during his term of office, which began in 1989 and ended in 1994 when Nelson Mandela became president. "I have not only a clear conscience, I am not guilty of any crime whatsoever," Mr de Klerk said while addressing the media in Cape Town. "I have never myself approved murder or the random killing of anybody, or gross violations of human rights."
There has been speculation about Mr de Klerk's knowledge of human rights violations during his term of office since news first broke last week that his former Police Minister, Adriaan Vlok, would face charges relating to the poisoning of the then secretary general of the South African Council of Churches, Reverend Frank Chikane, in 1989. Mr Vlok has admitted to approving the poisoning of the former church leader as well as other human rights violations. He publicly sought forgiveness by washing Rev Chikane's feet in his office last year.
Source: BBC
De Kock said he was prepared to testify in court against Mr de Klerk. He said Mr de Klerk's hands were "soaked in blood", and claimed he could list exact instances where the country's last white president gave the order for specific killings. De Kock was nicknamed "Prime Evil" for his role in ordering the killing and maiming of dozens of anti-apartheid activists, often using very cruel methods. He is serving two life sentences in a maximum-security prison in Pretoria.
On Thursday, Mr de Klerk denied ever condoning the elimination of anti-apartheid activists or any other gross human rights violations during his term of office, which began in 1989 and ended in 1994 when Nelson Mandela became president. "I have not only a clear conscience, I am not guilty of any crime whatsoever," Mr de Klerk said while addressing the media in Cape Town. "I have never myself approved murder or the random killing of anybody, or gross violations of human rights."
There has been speculation about Mr de Klerk's knowledge of human rights violations during his term of office since news first broke last week that his former Police Minister, Adriaan Vlok, would face charges relating to the poisoning of the then secretary general of the South African Council of Churches, Reverend Frank Chikane, in 1989. Mr Vlok has admitted to approving the poisoning of the former church leader as well as other human rights violations. He publicly sought forgiveness by washing Rev Chikane's feet in his office last year.
Source: BBC
Monday, July 2, 2007
Chad leader's son killed in Paris
The son of Chad's President Idriss Deby has been found dead in Paris after apparently being forced to inhale the chemicals from a fire extinguisher. The body of Brahim Deby, 27, was found in the car park of his block of flats. An extinguisher was found by his body. An autopsy report said he had likely been asphyxiated by "white powder". Police have launched a murder inquiry.
Brahim Deby was last year sacked as a presidential advisor after a conviction for drugs and weapons possession. His body was found in a corridor between the parking lot and the stairs leading to the flats in Courbevoie, west of Paris. An initial autopsy report concluded he had been "asphyxiated, probably by the white powder he was sprayed with", a spokeswoman for the prosecutor's office in the western suburb of Nanterre said. The source of the powder is believed to have been the fire extinguisher found near the body. A head wound found on Deby's body had not caused his death, the prosecutor's office said. "He clearly died a violent death," the spokeswoman said. "We are going on the hypothesis of murder."
President Idriss Deby came to power in a coup in 1991. Rebels trying to oust him last year attacked the capital, N'Djamena, before being repulsed with French military aid. A few months later, Mr Deby won elections boycotted by the opposition, who complained of fraud.
A spokesman for the rebel group, the Union of Forces for Democracy and Development (UFDD) spokesman Makaila Nguebla told Reuters news agency that Brahim Deby's conduct had prompted many top Chadian officials to join the rebellion. "He is at the root of all the frustration. He used to slap government ministers, senior Chadian officials were humiliated by Deby's son."
Source: BBC
Brahim Deby was last year sacked as a presidential advisor after a conviction for drugs and weapons possession. His body was found in a corridor between the parking lot and the stairs leading to the flats in Courbevoie, west of Paris. An initial autopsy report concluded he had been "asphyxiated, probably by the white powder he was sprayed with", a spokeswoman for the prosecutor's office in the western suburb of Nanterre said. The source of the powder is believed to have been the fire extinguisher found near the body. A head wound found on Deby's body had not caused his death, the prosecutor's office said. "He clearly died a violent death," the spokeswoman said. "We are going on the hypothesis of murder."
President Idriss Deby came to power in a coup in 1991. Rebels trying to oust him last year attacked the capital, N'Djamena, before being repulsed with French military aid. A few months later, Mr Deby won elections boycotted by the opposition, who complained of fraud.
A spokesman for the rebel group, the Union of Forces for Democracy and Development (UFDD) spokesman Makaila Nguebla told Reuters news agency that Brahim Deby's conduct had prompted many top Chadian officials to join the rebellion. "He is at the root of all the frustration. He used to slap government ministers, senior Chadian officials were humiliated by Deby's son."
Source: BBC
Sunday, July 1, 2007
PRECIOUS METALS ACT 37 OF 2005
The purpose of the Precious Metals Act is to provide for the acquisition, possession, smelting, refining, beneficiation, use and disposal of precious metals; and to provide for matters connected therewith.
Offences and penalties
(1) Any person who-
(a) contravenes section 4(1) or (3), 5(1) or (2), 7(5) or (6), 8(6), (7) or (9), 9(5), (9) or (10) or 11(1) or (2);
(b) buys unwrought or semi-fabricated precious metal without having satisfied himself or herself that the vendor thereof is lawfully entitled to sell or dispose of such metal; or
(c) maliciously places any unwrought or semi-fabricated precious metal in the possession or on the premises of any other person with intent that such other person may be convicted under this Act, is guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding one million rand or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 20 years or to both such fine and such imprisonment.
(2) Any person who-
(a) contravenes section 4(4), 7(8) or (9), 8(4) or (10), 9(7), (8), (10) or (11), 10(1) or (2), 13 or 15(1) or (2) or 22(1);
(b) being an authorised dealer contemplated in section 14(1), buys unwrought or semi-fabricated precious metal from any person who has not produced a licence, permit or certificate as provided in that section;
(c) being an authorised dealer contemplated in section 14(1), fails to obtain and retain the certificate contemplated in section 14(2); or
(d) fails to comply with any lawful request to produce and exhibit the register or proper books of account required to be kept by him or her in terms of this Act, is guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding five hundred thousand rand or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 10 years or to both such fine and such imprisonment.
(3) If any person convicted in terms of subsection (1) or (2) is at the time of his or her conviction the holder of a licence, permit or certificate contemplated in this Act, he or she shall forfeit such licence, permit or certificate and any right of renewal thereof for such period as the court convicting him or her may direct.
Source: SABINET
Offences and penalties
(1) Any person who-
(a) contravenes section 4(1) or (3), 5(1) or (2), 7(5) or (6), 8(6), (7) or (9), 9(5), (9) or (10) or 11(1) or (2);
(b) buys unwrought or semi-fabricated precious metal without having satisfied himself or herself that the vendor thereof is lawfully entitled to sell or dispose of such metal; or
(c) maliciously places any unwrought or semi-fabricated precious metal in the possession or on the premises of any other person with intent that such other person may be convicted under this Act, is guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding one million rand or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 20 years or to both such fine and such imprisonment.
(2) Any person who-
(a) contravenes section 4(4), 7(8) or (9), 8(4) or (10), 9(7), (8), (10) or (11), 10(1) or (2), 13 or 15(1) or (2) or 22(1);
(b) being an authorised dealer contemplated in section 14(1), buys unwrought or semi-fabricated precious metal from any person who has not produced a licence, permit or certificate as provided in that section;
(c) being an authorised dealer contemplated in section 14(1), fails to obtain and retain the certificate contemplated in section 14(2); or
(d) fails to comply with any lawful request to produce and exhibit the register or proper books of account required to be kept by him or her in terms of this Act, is guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding five hundred thousand rand or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 10 years or to both such fine and such imprisonment.
(3) If any person convicted in terms of subsection (1) or (2) is at the time of his or her conviction the holder of a licence, permit or certificate contemplated in this Act, he or she shall forfeit such licence, permit or certificate and any right of renewal thereof for such period as the court convicting him or her may direct.
Source: SABINET
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Click here to find out more! "Foreclosure Rescue Scams"
Have been meaning to mention a story I authored in last week’s magazine about the rise in so-called “Foreclosure Rescue Scams,” in which unscrupulous individuals or groups approach homeowners facing foreclosure and promise to help them save their homes. In many instances, they convince the troubled homeowner—who is desperate to save their homes—to transfer the deed over to them with the promise that the investor will make the mortgage payments going forward, and the previous owner can rent while they try to rebuild their savings and repair their credit.
You know how this ends: Once the supposed “angel investor” gets the deed to the house, they boot the former owner out—and sell the property for what’s often a hefty profit. Sometimes they comb through tax records for listings of homes whose owners are in default on their mortgage. In other instances, they market their services—using everything from billboards to those little hand-drawn “We Buy Houses” signs you see sticking out of the ground at intersections.
I mention the story because in the week since it appeared I’ve received emails from a few private investors who took me to task for the story. They claim that, in my zeal to take to task the growing number of “foreclosure rescue” scamsters, that I also tarred legitimate investors like themselves who, yes, buy homes from owners facing foreclosure, but try to help the previous owner salvage something from the deal.
But what? This is where I’m stuck. I’ve contacted a couple of the “foreclosure investors” who contacted me, and hope to get back to everyone, but when I ask, “So, give me the details of how one of these deals work,” they clam up. Don’t want to give away their secrets. I had this same problem when I was reporting out the original story.
So if you feel you were wronged, tell me: What are the normal terms of the deals you strike with these distressed homeowners? I’m all ears.
Source: Bloomberg
You know how this ends: Once the supposed “angel investor” gets the deed to the house, they boot the former owner out—and sell the property for what’s often a hefty profit. Sometimes they comb through tax records for listings of homes whose owners are in default on their mortgage. In other instances, they market their services—using everything from billboards to those little hand-drawn “We Buy Houses” signs you see sticking out of the ground at intersections.
I mention the story because in the week since it appeared I’ve received emails from a few private investors who took me to task for the story. They claim that, in my zeal to take to task the growing number of “foreclosure rescue” scamsters, that I also tarred legitimate investors like themselves who, yes, buy homes from owners facing foreclosure, but try to help the previous owner salvage something from the deal.
But what? This is where I’m stuck. I’ve contacted a couple of the “foreclosure investors” who contacted me, and hope to get back to everyone, but when I ask, “So, give me the details of how one of these deals work,” they clam up. Don’t want to give away their secrets. I had this same problem when I was reporting out the original story.
So if you feel you were wronged, tell me: What are the normal terms of the deals you strike with these distressed homeowners? I’m all ears.
Source: Bloomberg
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
First Sierra Leone war crimes verdicts
Three men have been convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity during Sierra Leone's decade-long war. These were the first verdicts of Sierra Leone's UN-backed war Special Court for Sierra Leone. Alex Tamba Brima, Brima Bazzy Kamara and Santigie Borbor Kanu were senior members of an armed faction that toppled the government in 1997. They were found guilty of 11 of the 14 charges, but acquitted of alleged sexual slavery and other inhuman acts. The men will be sentenced on 16 July.
The judges read out their verdicts before a packed courtroom in Sierra Leone's capital, Freetown. The three men face lengthy prison terms. During the conflict tens of thousands were killed as the rebel forces raped and mutilated defenceless innocent civilians.
The US-based Human Rights Watch hailed the verdict as "the first time that an international court has issued a verdict on child recruitment". The three had pleaded not guilty to the 14 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity including murder, rape and the use of child soldiers. They belonged to the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC), which formed an alliance with the notorious Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebels.
As the rebel groups attempted to hold power they were allegedly backed by the former president of Liberia, Charles Taylor, in return for Sierra Leone's diamonds. Following the end of the conflict five years ago, a UN-backed court was set up to try those people who bore the greatest responsibility for the atrocities committed. Trying all those who committed crimes would have been an impossible task says the BBC's West Africa correspondent, Will Ross. So many in Sierra Leone now live side-by-side with the very people they saw committing atrocities, he says.
The court has indicted 12 people, including http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Taylor_%28Liberia%29, although three of them have since died or are presumed to have died. Mr Taylor is currently in The Hague, where his war crimes trial is due to resume next week. His case was moved there to avoid unrest in Sierra Leone and Liberia. The head of the AFRC rebels was never apprehended but is presumed dead. The most notorious rebel leader, the RUF's Foday Sankoh, died in custody while awaiting trial.
Another high profile figure, former Interior Minister Sam Hinga Norman, died after surgery with his verdict pending. It may be slow and expensive but many view the court's work as an important step to help end impunity, our correspondent says.
Source: BBC
The judges read out their verdicts before a packed courtroom in Sierra Leone's capital, Freetown. The three men face lengthy prison terms. During the conflict tens of thousands were killed as the rebel forces raped and mutilated defenceless innocent civilians.
The US-based Human Rights Watch hailed the verdict as "the first time that an international court has issued a verdict on child recruitment". The three had pleaded not guilty to the 14 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity including murder, rape and the use of child soldiers. They belonged to the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC), which formed an alliance with the notorious Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebels.
As the rebel groups attempted to hold power they were allegedly backed by the former president of Liberia, Charles Taylor, in return for Sierra Leone's diamonds. Following the end of the conflict five years ago, a UN-backed court was set up to try those people who bore the greatest responsibility for the atrocities committed. Trying all those who committed crimes would have been an impossible task says the BBC's West Africa correspondent, Will Ross. So many in Sierra Leone now live side-by-side with the very people they saw committing atrocities, he says.
The court has indicted 12 people, including http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Taylor_%28Liberia%29, although three of them have since died or are presumed to have died. Mr Taylor is currently in The Hague, where his war crimes trial is due to resume next week. His case was moved there to avoid unrest in Sierra Leone and Liberia. The head of the AFRC rebels was never apprehended but is presumed dead. The most notorious rebel leader, the RUF's Foday Sankoh, died in custody while awaiting trial.
Another high profile figure, former Interior Minister Sam Hinga Norman, died after surgery with his verdict pending. It may be slow and expensive but many view the court's work as an important step to help end impunity, our correspondent says.
Source: BBC
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Fidentia victims mounting
The head of the Transport Education and Training Authority (Teta), Piet Bothma, has been placed on "compulsory leave" following a probe into his role in placing R246m of the body's funds with Fidentia, Business Day reported on Tuesday. Teta, a quasi-government body which collects skills levies from 10 000 transport firms, pumped R246m - nearly 75% of all its funds - into Fidentia, despite the company's almost non-existent track record.
Investigators now say this cash has been "misappropriated". This is likely to shed new light on exactly why Teta placed so much money with Fidentia, especially after it emerged that its first R88m investment in Fidentia took place without a proper risk assessment. It also adds to a list of casualties that has already seen Danisa Baloyi resign all her public positions because of the uproar at her conflict of interest in being a Fidentia shareholder and trustee of the Living Hands Trust, which poured R1.47bn into Fidentia. The links between Bothma and Fidentia, which have remained buried until now, are likely to emerge in the Teta probe.
Source: News 24
Investigators now say this cash has been "misappropriated". This is likely to shed new light on exactly why Teta placed so much money with Fidentia, especially after it emerged that its first R88m investment in Fidentia took place without a proper risk assessment. It also adds to a list of casualties that has already seen Danisa Baloyi resign all her public positions because of the uproar at her conflict of interest in being a Fidentia shareholder and trustee of the Living Hands Trust, which poured R1.47bn into Fidentia. The links between Bothma and Fidentia, which have remained buried until now, are likely to emerge in the Teta probe.
Source: News 24
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Special Tribunal for Lebanon
On 13 December 2005, the Government of the Republic of Lebanon requested the United Nations to establish a tribunal of an international character to try all those who are alleged responsible for the attack of 14 February 2005 in Beirut that killed the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri and 22 others. Pursuant to Security Council resolution 1664 (2006), the United Nations and the Lebanese Republic negotiated an agreement on the establishment of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. Further to Security Council resolution 1757(2007) of 30 May 2007, the provisions of the document annexed to it and the Statute of the Special Tribunal thereto attached, entered into force on 10 June 2007.
The mandate of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon is to prosecute persons responsible for the attack of 14 February 2005 resulting in the death of former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri and in the death or injury of other persons. The Tribunal’s jurisdiction could be extended beyond the 14 February 2005 bombing if the Tribunal finds that other attacks that occurred in Lebanon between 1 October 2004 and 12 December 2005 are connected in accordance with the principles of criminal justice and are of a nature and gravity similar to the attack of 14 February 2005.
This connection includes but is not limited to a combination of the following elements: criminal intent (motive), the purpose behind the attacks, the nature of the victims targeted, the pattern of the attacks (modus operandi), and the perpetrators. Crimes that occurred after 12 December 2005 can be eligible to be included in the Special Tribunal’s jurisdiction under the same criteria if it is so decided by the Government of the Republic of Lebanon and the United Nations and with the consent of the Security Council.
Source: Special Tribunal for Lebanon
The mandate of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon is to prosecute persons responsible for the attack of 14 February 2005 resulting in the death of former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri and in the death or injury of other persons. The Tribunal’s jurisdiction could be extended beyond the 14 February 2005 bombing if the Tribunal finds that other attacks that occurred in Lebanon between 1 October 2004 and 12 December 2005 are connected in accordance with the principles of criminal justice and are of a nature and gravity similar to the attack of 14 February 2005.
This connection includes but is not limited to a combination of the following elements: criminal intent (motive), the purpose behind the attacks, the nature of the victims targeted, the pattern of the attacks (modus operandi), and the perpetrators. Crimes that occurred after 12 December 2005 can be eligible to be included in the Special Tribunal’s jurisdiction under the same criteria if it is so decided by the Government of the Republic of Lebanon and the United Nations and with the consent of the Security Council.
Source: Special Tribunal for Lebanon
Friday, June 8, 2007
Systemic Stability & Transparency of Financial Markets
We discussed recent developments in global financial markets, including hedge funds, which, along with the emergence of advanced financial techniques and products, such as credit derivatives, have contributed significantly to the efficiency of the financial system.
Nevertheless, the assessment of potential systemic and operational risks associated with these activities has become more complex and challenging. Given the strong growth of the hedge fund industry and the increasing complexity of the instruments they trade, were affirm the need to be vigilant.
Source: G8 Summit, Heiligendamm, 8 June 2007
Nevertheless, the assessment of potential systemic and operational risks associated with these activities has become more complex and challenging. Given the strong growth of the hedge fund industry and the increasing complexity of the instruments they trade, were affirm the need to be vigilant.
Source: G8 Summit, Heiligendamm, 8 June 2007
Growth and responsibility in Africa
The discussions with African representatives were "very honest, very open" German Chancellor Angela Merkel said after the first working session on the last day of the Summit in Heiligendamm. US$60 billion have been pledged over the coming years to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis.
The Chancellor's message to the countries of Africa was this: "We are aware of our responsibility and we will honour our commitments." The G8 needed to "fulfil the promises we made," she said.
Source: G8 Summit 2007
The Chancellor's message to the countries of Africa was this: "We are aware of our responsibility and we will honour our commitments." The G8 needed to "fulfil the promises we made," she said.
Source: G8 Summit 2007
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Security Council votes to establish Hariri assassination tribunal
The Security Council agreed today that the special tribunal set up to try the suspected killers of the former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri will enter into force on 10 June unless Lebanon ratifies the tribunal itself before that date.
A resolution endorsing the tribunal’s formal establishment was adopted after 10 Council members voted in favour and no members voted against. Five countries – China, Russia, Indonesia, Qatar and South Africa – abstained.
The resolution was introduced after Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora sent a letter to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon earlier this month asking for the Council to put the tribunal into effect as a matter of urgency.
Mr. Ban told Council members in a subsequent letter that he concurred with Mr. Siniora “that, regrettably, all domestic options for the ratification of the Special Tribunal now appear to be exhausted, although it would have been preferable had the Lebanese parties been able to resolve the issue among themselves based on a national consensus.”
The tribunal will be of “an international character” to deal with the assassination of Mr. Hariri, who was killed along with 22 others in a massive car bombing in downtown Beirut in February 2005.
Once it is formally established, it will be up to the tribunal to determine whether other political killings in Lebanon since October 2004 were connected to Mr. Hariri’s assassination and could therefore be dealt with by the tribunal.
In April 2005 the Security Council set up the International Independent Investigation Commission (IIIC) after an earlier UN mission found that Lebanon’s own inquiry into the Hariri assassination was seriously flawed and that Syria was primarily responsible for the political tensions that preceded the attack.
Serge Brammertz, the current head of the IIIC, told the Council last September that evidence obtained so far suggests that a young, male suicide bomber, probably non-Lebanese, detonated up to 1,800 kilograms of explosives inside a van to assassinate Mr. Hariri.
Source: UN News Centre
A resolution endorsing the tribunal’s formal establishment was adopted after 10 Council members voted in favour and no members voted against. Five countries – China, Russia, Indonesia, Qatar and South Africa – abstained.
The resolution was introduced after Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora sent a letter to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon earlier this month asking for the Council to put the tribunal into effect as a matter of urgency.
Mr. Ban told Council members in a subsequent letter that he concurred with Mr. Siniora “that, regrettably, all domestic options for the ratification of the Special Tribunal now appear to be exhausted, although it would have been preferable had the Lebanese parties been able to resolve the issue among themselves based on a national consensus.”
The tribunal will be of “an international character” to deal with the assassination of Mr. Hariri, who was killed along with 22 others in a massive car bombing in downtown Beirut in February 2005.
Once it is formally established, it will be up to the tribunal to determine whether other political killings in Lebanon since October 2004 were connected to Mr. Hariri’s assassination and could therefore be dealt with by the tribunal.
In April 2005 the Security Council set up the International Independent Investigation Commission (IIIC) after an earlier UN mission found that Lebanon’s own inquiry into the Hariri assassination was seriously flawed and that Syria was primarily responsible for the political tensions that preceded the attack.
Serge Brammertz, the current head of the IIIC, told the Council last September that evidence obtained so far suggests that a young, male suicide bomber, probably non-Lebanese, detonated up to 1,800 kilograms of explosives inside a van to assassinate Mr. Hariri.
Source: UN News Centre
Monday, May 7, 2007
South Africa: Minister Under Fire Over Crime
Charles Nqakula, South Africa's security minister, dismissed calls for his resignation a day after government statistics showed some of the most violent crimes on an upswing. While the numbers showed a 3.4 percent overall decrease in ''contact crimes'' against people, including rape and assault, over the past year, the murder rate was up 2.4 percent, carjackings 6 percent and house robberies 25 percent. Bank robberies more than doubled. The numbers raised questions about the country's ability to tackle violent crime before welcomes hundreds of thousands of tourists for the 2010 World Cup. ''No matter how you massage the figures, the picture that comes out of these crime statistics is pretty dire,'' the influential newspaper Business Day said.
Source: New York Times
Source: New York Times
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Lay off NPA, Pikoli tells ANC
National prosecuting authority (NPA) head Vusi Pikoli has warned against ongoing "attacks" on the NPA by the African National Congress and its affiliates.
NPA spokesperson Panyaza Lesufi said on Thursday, Pikoli had issued his warning during a briefing to the national assembly's justice committee on Wednesday.
Pikoli warned: "Those who continue to attack the NPA to refrain from doing so immediately, unless they want to turn our hard-fought democracy into a lawless society.
"You can criticise us, but don't scandalise us," said Pikoli.
Lesufi said Pikoli was "forced to warn the NPA detractors after persistent attacks by high-ranking members of the ruling party accompanied by calls by the ANC Youth League for the disbandment of the NPA during their policy discussion meeting recently".
Pikoli also called on parliament to defend its laws, as the NPA was only implementing laws adopted by parliament.
"We feel defenceless when we are attacked for implementing laws adopted in this house," said Pikoli.
Source: News 24.com
NPA spokesperson Panyaza Lesufi said on Thursday, Pikoli had issued his warning during a briefing to the national assembly's justice committee on Wednesday.
Pikoli warned: "Those who continue to attack the NPA to refrain from doing so immediately, unless they want to turn our hard-fought democracy into a lawless society.
"You can criticise us, but don't scandalise us," said Pikoli.
Lesufi said Pikoli was "forced to warn the NPA detractors after persistent attacks by high-ranking members of the ruling party accompanied by calls by the ANC Youth League for the disbandment of the NPA during their policy discussion meeting recently".
Pikoli also called on parliament to defend its laws, as the NPA was only implementing laws adopted by parliament.
"We feel defenceless when we are attacked for implementing laws adopted in this house," said Pikoli.
Source: News 24.com
Monday, April 30, 2007
Andrew Young, bagman for US capitalism in Africa
Andrew Young, the former black civil rights leader and confidant of Martin Luther King Jr., has recently come under criticism for his dirty dealings with corrupt African governments, especially for his close relationship with General Olusegan Obasanjo, Nigeria’s former president.
Young has followed the well-worn path from protest to politician to venal corporate bagman. His case is particularly repugnant in that his earlier struggles against segregation and police repression in the American South of the 1960s contrast starkly with his present political alliances with brutal dictators. While operating as a purveyor for American corporations in their plunder of African resources, he has, not incidentally, gotten very rich in the process.
Recently both the New York Times and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution published exposes on Young’s consulting firm, ironically named GoodWorks International (GWI), as a lucrative conduit for facilitating US interests in the “emerging markets” of Africa.
According to the New York Times article, questions about Young and GWI’s relationship with the corrupt outgoing president of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo, became a lighting rod for those opposing Obasanjo’s anti-democratic policies during the run-up to the sham elections held last week. (See “Call for Nigerian presidential election to be annulled after massive corruption.”)
The firm advertises that it “opens doors for corporations interested in doing business in Africa and the Caribbean.” The mayor of Atlanta, Shirley Franklin, who is also a friend of Young, praised GWI for practicing “public-purpose capitalism.”
This view is not shared by those following human rights issues in Africa. “Andrew Young has never been interested in these [humanitarian] issues,” Femi Falana, president of the West African Bar Association, told the Times “He is just here making money.”
Young put it another way, “For 40 years of my life,” he told the Times, “I was on the outside seeking change. I realized that I could be more effective being on the inside implementing it.”
What changes have GWI implemented? As the principal lobbying agent for the government of Nigeria in the US, it is making millions representing major companies like ChevronTexaco, General Electric, and Motorola seeking contracts from the Nigerian government.
The company generally receives a commission equal to 1 ½ percent of a contract’s value. This is a tidy sum when GoodWorks consults on contracts such as General Electric Energy’s agreement to provide $400 million in turbines for Nigeria, as they did last year.
The firm is a major shareholder in a Nigerian energy company, Suntrust Oil, which won a lease for offshore oil fields. According to the Atlanta-Journal Constitution, Nigeria provides as much as 40 percent of GoodWorks revenues, paying $1.75 million to the company since 2000, not including a retainer fee of $60,000 a month.
GWI also specializes in relations with other oil-producing African states, including Sudan and Angola. Moreover, it represents other American companies among the most notorious for their slave-wages and environmental destruction in Africa, including Nike, Coca-Cola and the gold mining concern Barrick Gold, a company connected with the Bush family
The principals at GWI represent a virtual “who’s who” of political and corporate Democrats. According to the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, Young set up GWI in 1997 with the help of Hamilton Jordon, President Carter’s former chief of staff. Foundation directors for GWI include President Bill Clinton, Alexis Herman, the former Secretary of Labor, and Maurice Tempelsman, a diamond merchant and fund raiser in the Democratic Party. Tempelsman has been implicated as an important figure in the DeBeers diamond cartel in Africa, now known as the “blood diamond” business.
Reports indicate that Young’s ties to Africa developed while he was the US ambassador to the UN in the late 70s, meeting Obasanjo, the military-installed president of Nigeria, at the time. “Obasanjo and I kind of hit it off immediately,” Young told the Times. “We were mainly interested in democracy.”
Actually, Obasanjo was a US operative, closely allied to the CIA, who took power in 1976 after his predecessor, Murtala Muhammad, was assassinated under unexplained circumstances. At the time, the US was still reeling from the OPEC oil embargo and was vitally concerned with Nigerian oil interests.
When Obasanjo left power the first time, in 1979, he was appointed to the board of directors of the CIA-run African American Institute, headed by the former US ambassador to Nigeria Donald B. Easum. In the 1980s, Obasanjo was sent on high-profile speaking tours by the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the US Institute for Peace.
Young has defended his relations with Obasanjo, portraying him as the defender of democracy in Nigeria who has broken the past practice of corruption that has been rampant since the country won its independence. Obasanjo has also received the praises of President George W. Bush and Colin Powell as an example of the type of democracy they would like to see in Africa.
A very different picture is drawn in the February 14 issue of the International Herald Tribune, in an article entitled, “Fooling people some of the time,” which reports that Obasanjo has done nothing about corruption in the country with “as much as $600 billion in ill-gotten gains sitting in foreign bank accounts while the rural farmers live on less than one dollar a day.”
The paper accuses Obasanjo of “monopolizing power the day he entered office,” and of keeping “the oil portfolio for himself so that he could use Nigeria’s vast oil wealth for political ends.” As a result, all politicians in the government were “beholden to him for money.”
In an attempt change the constitution so that he could run a third term, he tried to pressure state governors and members of Parliament with bribes as high as $400,000, the Herald Tribune said. “Governors who refused were threatened with impeachment,” as was the case with his former ally and vice president, Atiku Abubakar, who broke with Obasanjo and ran against his hand picked successor for president.
In 2004 Transparency International ranked Nigeria the most corrupt regime in Africa. According to the BBC, out of 145 countries, only Haiti and Bangladesh ranked worse. That year, Obasanjo, despite sitting on the world’s sixth largest reserves of oil, ended government subsidies on oil, sparking a series of strikes and pitched battles in which the police and military murdered protesters. The removal of subsidies was part of an IMF restructuring program that Obasanjo imposed with a vengeance.
“Who benefits from Andy Young’s relationship with the government of Nigeria? It’s not the Nigerian people,” remarked Ken Silverstein, a reporter for Harper’s Magazine. “As I see it, the primary beneficiaries of his work in Nigeria and elsewhere in Africa are those corrupt, authoritarian regimes he works with and his private corporate clients.”
Young has provided his services both to enrich his clients and himself, but also to assist the United States as it joins hands with various blood-soaked dictatorships and strongman in order to secure American strategic interests in the pivotal continent.
Young is a member of the National Security Study Group and therefore would have been briefed on the Bush administration’s newly established United States Africa Command (AFRICOM).
Young is aware that the US has developed strategic interests in the oil states of Africa and has made plans for the establishment of strategic military bases. West Africa alone has an estimated 15 percent of the world’s oil reserves. And by 2015, the region is expected to provide 25 percent of the US energy market.
Meanwhile, the funds flowing into GWI and the hands of Andrew Young are at the expense of the Nigerian and African masses. Despite the nation’s wealth in natural resources, 70 percent of its population of 140 million lives on less than US $1 per day.
Source: World Socialist Web Site
Young has followed the well-worn path from protest to politician to venal corporate bagman. His case is particularly repugnant in that his earlier struggles against segregation and police repression in the American South of the 1960s contrast starkly with his present political alliances with brutal dictators. While operating as a purveyor for American corporations in their plunder of African resources, he has, not incidentally, gotten very rich in the process.
Recently both the New York Times and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution published exposes on Young’s consulting firm, ironically named GoodWorks International (GWI), as a lucrative conduit for facilitating US interests in the “emerging markets” of Africa.
According to the New York Times article, questions about Young and GWI’s relationship with the corrupt outgoing president of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo, became a lighting rod for those opposing Obasanjo’s anti-democratic policies during the run-up to the sham elections held last week. (See “Call for Nigerian presidential election to be annulled after massive corruption.”)
The firm advertises that it “opens doors for corporations interested in doing business in Africa and the Caribbean.” The mayor of Atlanta, Shirley Franklin, who is also a friend of Young, praised GWI for practicing “public-purpose capitalism.”
This view is not shared by those following human rights issues in Africa. “Andrew Young has never been interested in these [humanitarian] issues,” Femi Falana, president of the West African Bar Association, told the Times “He is just here making money.”
Young put it another way, “For 40 years of my life,” he told the Times, “I was on the outside seeking change. I realized that I could be more effective being on the inside implementing it.”
What changes have GWI implemented? As the principal lobbying agent for the government of Nigeria in the US, it is making millions representing major companies like ChevronTexaco, General Electric, and Motorola seeking contracts from the Nigerian government.
The company generally receives a commission equal to 1 ½ percent of a contract’s value. This is a tidy sum when GoodWorks consults on contracts such as General Electric Energy’s agreement to provide $400 million in turbines for Nigeria, as they did last year.
The firm is a major shareholder in a Nigerian energy company, Suntrust Oil, which won a lease for offshore oil fields. According to the Atlanta-Journal Constitution, Nigeria provides as much as 40 percent of GoodWorks revenues, paying $1.75 million to the company since 2000, not including a retainer fee of $60,000 a month.
GWI also specializes in relations with other oil-producing African states, including Sudan and Angola. Moreover, it represents other American companies among the most notorious for their slave-wages and environmental destruction in Africa, including Nike, Coca-Cola and the gold mining concern Barrick Gold, a company connected with the Bush family
The principals at GWI represent a virtual “who’s who” of political and corporate Democrats. According to the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, Young set up GWI in 1997 with the help of Hamilton Jordon, President Carter’s former chief of staff. Foundation directors for GWI include President Bill Clinton, Alexis Herman, the former Secretary of Labor, and Maurice Tempelsman, a diamond merchant and fund raiser in the Democratic Party. Tempelsman has been implicated as an important figure in the DeBeers diamond cartel in Africa, now known as the “blood diamond” business.
Reports indicate that Young’s ties to Africa developed while he was the US ambassador to the UN in the late 70s, meeting Obasanjo, the military-installed president of Nigeria, at the time. “Obasanjo and I kind of hit it off immediately,” Young told the Times. “We were mainly interested in democracy.”
Actually, Obasanjo was a US operative, closely allied to the CIA, who took power in 1976 after his predecessor, Murtala Muhammad, was assassinated under unexplained circumstances. At the time, the US was still reeling from the OPEC oil embargo and was vitally concerned with Nigerian oil interests.
When Obasanjo left power the first time, in 1979, he was appointed to the board of directors of the CIA-run African American Institute, headed by the former US ambassador to Nigeria Donald B. Easum. In the 1980s, Obasanjo was sent on high-profile speaking tours by the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the US Institute for Peace.
Young has defended his relations with Obasanjo, portraying him as the defender of democracy in Nigeria who has broken the past practice of corruption that has been rampant since the country won its independence. Obasanjo has also received the praises of President George W. Bush and Colin Powell as an example of the type of democracy they would like to see in Africa.
A very different picture is drawn in the February 14 issue of the International Herald Tribune, in an article entitled, “Fooling people some of the time,” which reports that Obasanjo has done nothing about corruption in the country with “as much as $600 billion in ill-gotten gains sitting in foreign bank accounts while the rural farmers live on less than one dollar a day.”
The paper accuses Obasanjo of “monopolizing power the day he entered office,” and of keeping “the oil portfolio for himself so that he could use Nigeria’s vast oil wealth for political ends.” As a result, all politicians in the government were “beholden to him for money.”
In an attempt change the constitution so that he could run a third term, he tried to pressure state governors and members of Parliament with bribes as high as $400,000, the Herald Tribune said. “Governors who refused were threatened with impeachment,” as was the case with his former ally and vice president, Atiku Abubakar, who broke with Obasanjo and ran against his hand picked successor for president.
In 2004 Transparency International ranked Nigeria the most corrupt regime in Africa. According to the BBC, out of 145 countries, only Haiti and Bangladesh ranked worse. That year, Obasanjo, despite sitting on the world’s sixth largest reserves of oil, ended government subsidies on oil, sparking a series of strikes and pitched battles in which the police and military murdered protesters. The removal of subsidies was part of an IMF restructuring program that Obasanjo imposed with a vengeance.
“Who benefits from Andy Young’s relationship with the government of Nigeria? It’s not the Nigerian people,” remarked Ken Silverstein, a reporter for Harper’s Magazine. “As I see it, the primary beneficiaries of his work in Nigeria and elsewhere in Africa are those corrupt, authoritarian regimes he works with and his private corporate clients.”
Young has provided his services both to enrich his clients and himself, but also to assist the United States as it joins hands with various blood-soaked dictatorships and strongman in order to secure American strategic interests in the pivotal continent.
Young is a member of the National Security Study Group and therefore would have been briefed on the Bush administration’s newly established United States Africa Command (AFRICOM).
Young is aware that the US has developed strategic interests in the oil states of Africa and has made plans for the establishment of strategic military bases. West Africa alone has an estimated 15 percent of the world’s oil reserves. And by 2015, the region is expected to provide 25 percent of the US energy market.
Meanwhile, the funds flowing into GWI and the hands of Andrew Young are at the expense of the Nigerian and African masses. Despite the nation’s wealth in natural resources, 70 percent of its population of 140 million lives on less than US $1 per day.
Source: World Socialist Web Site
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Czech fugitive nabbed at OR Tambo Airport
When millionaire Radovan Krejcir slipped out the back door of his luxury villa near Prague in the Czech Republic, and fled to the Seychelles, a police chief was fired for letting the wanted man escape.
Over the next two years, Czech authorities began losing hope of getting their suspect back as the 38-year-old Krejcir and his family secured new citizenship and settled down in the island paradise.
But in a surprise twist the alleged criminal boss - wanted for fraud and planning a murder - was arrested at OR Tambo International Airport on Saturday.
Krejcir, who appeared at the Kempton Park magistrate's court on Monday, had entered the country on a fake passport, national police spokesperson Director Sally de Beer said. He travelled under the name Egbert Jules Savy and was flying from Madagascar, members of the Crime Intelligence Unit reported. He was nabbed at 5.15pm as he got off the plane.
Krejcir has been on the run since 2005 and has reportedly made shocking claims of giving bribes to his country's government officials. From his hideout in the Seychelles, Krejcir said a book he was writing would prove to be "the next Watergate scandal" for the Czech government. He has maintained his innocence and benefited from the fact that no extradition agreement exists between the Czech Republic and the Seychelles. "It is believed he intended to settle in South Africa," De Beer said on Monday night. "He is wanted by the Czech Republic on charges of fraud involving hundreds of millions of euros, as well as for conspiracy to commit murder."
Krejcir is suspected of orchestrating a complex fraud scheme in 2004 and 2005. During his court appearance on Monday, Krejcir's identity was confirmed and his case postponed to May 2. He will remain in custody until then.
De Beer said a warrant of arrest would now have to be sent from the Czech Republic, after which the extradition process would start. Interpol had issued a red notice - an international warrant of arrest "with a view to extradition" - for Krejcir, but it seems unlikely that he will be boarding a plane soon.
Extraditions out of South Africa have been put on hold pending the outcome of an alleged stem cell fraud couple's challenge to the extradition agreement between South Africa and the US. If accused stem cell fraudsters Stephen van Rooyen and Laura Brown succeed in their Pretoria High Court bid, which is due to continue on Thursday, every single extradition treaty concluded by South Africa since 1996 would be rendered invalid.
Source: IoL
Monday, April 23, 2007
Huge win for Nigeria's Yar'Adua
Nigeria's ruling party candidate Umaru Yar'Adua has won controversial presidential elections by a landslide, according to official results. He gained 70% of the vote but European Union observers say the elections did not meet international standards and were not "credible". The EU says at least 200 people have died since campaigning began.
The two main opposition candidates have told their supporters to reject the results and want a re-run. Mr Yar'Adua gained 24.6m votes, against 6.6m for his closest challenger, Muhammadu Buhari. Vice-president turned opposition candidate Atiku Abubakar came third with 2.6m votes.
This should be the first time Africa's most populous nation replaces one elected civilian head with another. "I felt greatly humbled by the events of today and this mandate," Mr Yar'Adua, 56, told state television. Mr Buhari had earlier threatened to call his supporters onto the streets if Mr Yar'Adua was declared the winner and there was tight security outside the election commission headquarters in the capital, Abuja.
Independent National Election Commission (Inec) head Maurice Iwu refused to take any questions from the large crowd of journalists waiting for the results. He only read out the results. Shortly before the announcement was made, outgoing President Olusegun Obasanjo made a surprise televised address to the nation. He admitted that the poll had not been perfect but said the next elections would be better. "It is my fervent wish that Nigerians will consider this experience as a necessary step in our journey as a people towards consolidating our democracy," he said.
Nigeria's biggest election monitoring group said the presidential poll was so flawed that it should be scrapped and held again. "In many parts of the country elections did not start on time or did not start at all," said Transition Monitoring Group chief Innocent Chukwuma. The US says it is "deeply troubled" by the weekend polls which it said were "flawed". A spokesman at the State Department said Washington hoped the political parties would resolve any differences over the election through peaceful, constitutional means.
Voter Donaman Atezan, 25, told the BBC News website that election material was delivered late to his polling station in the central Benue Sate, after most people had gone home. "Thugs were then left alone to vote and each one of them voted for the PDP over and over as many times as the ballot papers were available," he said. He said he tried to vote for an opposition candidate but the ballot paper was ripped from his hand.
Officials had struggled to deliver some of the 60m ballot papers to stations in time for the vote. They only arrived in the country on Friday evening. “ [It is] a necessary step in our journey as a people towards consolidating our democracy ” The boldest of several attempts to disrupt polling was in the hours before voting was due to start when a petrol tanker laden with gas cylinders was used in an attack on the electoral commission's headquarters in Abuja. The attackers tried to roll the unmanned tanker into the building, but the vehicle missed its target and came to a halt.
The presidential poll was running alongside elections for the National Assembly and Senate. The new government is scheduled to take power on 29 May. Nigeria - one of the world's biggest oil producers - is of key strategic interest to both the West and the growing economies of the East. But despite the country's huge oil wealth, tens of millions live in poverty.
Source: New York Times
The two main opposition candidates have told their supporters to reject the results and want a re-run. Mr Yar'Adua gained 24.6m votes, against 6.6m for his closest challenger, Muhammadu Buhari. Vice-president turned opposition candidate Atiku Abubakar came third with 2.6m votes.
This should be the first time Africa's most populous nation replaces one elected civilian head with another. "I felt greatly humbled by the events of today and this mandate," Mr Yar'Adua, 56, told state television. Mr Buhari had earlier threatened to call his supporters onto the streets if Mr Yar'Adua was declared the winner and there was tight security outside the election commission headquarters in the capital, Abuja.
Independent National Election Commission (Inec) head Maurice Iwu refused to take any questions from the large crowd of journalists waiting for the results. He only read out the results. Shortly before the announcement was made, outgoing President Olusegun Obasanjo made a surprise televised address to the nation. He admitted that the poll had not been perfect but said the next elections would be better. "It is my fervent wish that Nigerians will consider this experience as a necessary step in our journey as a people towards consolidating our democracy," he said.
Nigeria's biggest election monitoring group said the presidential poll was so flawed that it should be scrapped and held again. "In many parts of the country elections did not start on time or did not start at all," said Transition Monitoring Group chief Innocent Chukwuma. The US says it is "deeply troubled" by the weekend polls which it said were "flawed". A spokesman at the State Department said Washington hoped the political parties would resolve any differences over the election through peaceful, constitutional means.
Voter Donaman Atezan, 25, told the BBC News website that election material was delivered late to his polling station in the central Benue Sate, after most people had gone home. "Thugs were then left alone to vote and each one of them voted for the PDP over and over as many times as the ballot papers were available," he said. He said he tried to vote for an opposition candidate but the ballot paper was ripped from his hand.
Officials had struggled to deliver some of the 60m ballot papers to stations in time for the vote. They only arrived in the country on Friday evening. “ [It is] a necessary step in our journey as a people towards consolidating our democracy ” The boldest of several attempts to disrupt polling was in the hours before voting was due to start when a petrol tanker laden with gas cylinders was used in an attack on the electoral commission's headquarters in Abuja. The attackers tried to roll the unmanned tanker into the building, but the vehicle missed its target and came to a halt.
The presidential poll was running alongside elections for the National Assembly and Senate. The new government is scheduled to take power on 29 May. Nigeria - one of the world's biggest oil producers - is of key strategic interest to both the West and the growing economies of the East. But despite the country's huge oil wealth, tens of millions live in poverty.
Source: New York Times
Monday, April 16, 2007
Scandal, political tensions spur demands for Wolfowitz’s ouster at World Bank
Pressure for the resignation of Paul Wolfowitz as president of the World Bank escalated over the weekend in the wake of a Group of Seven (G7) finance ministers meeting in Washington, where several participants suggested his position was untenable.
French Finance Minister Thierry Breton, for example, declined to say whether he believed Wolfowitz should be ousted but declared that the World Bank should be “ethically irreproachable,” an obvious reference to the seedy scandal involving a hefty pay raise and promotion for Wolfowitz’s girlfriend, Shaha Riza, a Libyan-born British citizen who was a career bureaucrat at the World Bank before US President George W. Bush appointed him to head the agency a little over two years ago.
“I fully trust the governing board to draw the consequences it must draw,” added Breton.
Germany’s development minister, Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, stated that Wolfowitz must decide “whether he still has the credibility to represent the position of the World Bank.”
Swiss Economics Minister Doris Leuthard declared, “It is not the World Bank’s credibility, but Mr. Wolfowitz’s credibility that is on the line.”
Brazil’s minister, Guido Mantega, echoed these sentiments, adding, “We’ll have to see if Wolfowitz will be able to retain the moral authority necessary to fulfill his duties.”
Meanwhile, the World Bank’s Development Committee, made up of 24 finance or development ministers representing the member countries on the bank’s board, issued a statement declaring, “We have to ensure that the bank can effectively carry out its mandate and maintain its credibility and reputation as well as motivation of staff. The current situation is of great concern to all of us.”
A day earlier, Wolfowitz was booed at a meeting with staff of the international lending agency, who overwhelmingly support his removal. The World Bank Group Staff Association issued a statement Thursday declaring that it “seems impossible for the institution to move forward with any sense of purpose under the present leadership, especially in our endeavor to assist governments and their people in improving their own governance.”
The association added, “The President must acknowledge that his conduct has compromised the integrity and effectiveness of the World Bank Group and has destroyed the staff’s trust in his leadership. He must act honorably and resign.”
It is widely believed that the board, which in practice votes according to the dictates of the world governments that its members represent, will stall in making any decision on Wolfowitz’s fate, in hopes that he will resign.
For its part, the Bush administration issued statements of strong support and confidence in its former second in command at the Pentagon continuing at the helm of the World Bank, an institution that employs some 13,000 people worldwide and lends approximately $25 billion annually.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that underlying this sharp difference over the personal and professional fate of Wolfowitz are profound and deepening tensions between US and European capitalism, not only over the role of the World Bank but a host of economic and political issues.
The appointment of the former US assistant defense secretary and key architect of the US war of aggression against Iraq had been opposed from the outset by the majority of the World Bank’s professional staff—an April 2005 poll showed 90 percent of staffers against it—as well as the bulk of the world’s governments that participate in its deliberations.
Wolfowitz was and remains irrevocably identified with the lies about “weapons of mass destruction” and terrorist ties employed by the Bush administration to justify launching the 2003 US invasion of Iraq—a war that Wolfowitz had supported well before the September 11, 2001 attacks and before the election of Bush himself.
The appointment was widely perceived as another gesture of the right-wing US administration’s contempt toward the rest of the world, as well as its determination to subordinate every international institution to its own militarist campaign to assert US global hegemony.
In two years, Wolfowitz has managed to fully live up to these expectations.
The scandal involving preferential treatment for someone with whom he was romantically involved is only the latest—and most personally embarrassing—of a series of controversies that have surrounded Wolfowitz’s tenure at the World Bank.
Nonetheless, this affair has its own unmistakable significance, both in what it says about the personal mores of those who make up the top echelons of capitalist politics in America and about the broader cynicism and hypocrisy that pervades US foreign policy.
Wolfowitz disclosed his relationship with Riza in the spring of 2005, during his negotiation of a lucrative five-year contract to serve as the board’s president. The bank’s ethics committee determined that maintaining her on staff in a position over which Wolfowitz would effectively exercise managerial control would violate the bank’s conflict-of-interest rules.
As the Washington Post revealed in an article by Karen DeYoung Sunday, the deal that Wolfowitz cut for his girlfriend was part of an aggressive and avaricious campaign to reap unprecedented compensation and perks for himself and his cronies. In his own case, this involved the negotiation of clauses allowing him to earn a substantial second income through lecture and book deals.
In the case of Riza, Wolfowitz issued a personal order to the bank’s director of personnel to increase her annual salary to $193,590—a $60,000 hike—while she was reassigned from the World Bank’s Middle East press office to the US State Department. She worked—making more than Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice herself—under the supervision of Vice President Dick Cheney’s daughter Elizabeth, who had been given her own nepotistic appointment to the number two position in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs only two months earlier. There Cheney’s daughter—who left the post last year—was reportedly a leading proponent of US aggression against Syria and Iran.
No doubt, the awarding of a salary increase that amounts to more than the total annual income earned by 75 percent of American households seemed like no big deal to Wolfowitz at the time. At the Pentagon, he had presided over multi-million-dollar corruption involving his Iraqi ally Ahmed Chalabi and the principal military contractor in Iraq—formerly headed by Dick Cheney—Halliburton.
Dictated unprecedented compensation for girlfriend, cronies
With the release of the details of his girlfriend’s pay deal—described by the staff association as “grossly out of line” with personnel policy—his office circulated a false claim that the arrangement had been approved by the World Bank’s relevant boards. In fact, as is now documented, Wolfowitz—together with Riza’s lawyer—dictated the terms, overriding the recommendations of the institution’s ethics committee and barring relevant personnel from any negotiations on the contract.
Riza, incredibly, has issued a statement claiming that she was “victimized” by this lucrative arrangement, and has demanded “an end the unwarranted and malicious public and private attacks.”
Similarly, Wolfowitz brought with him to the World Bank two right-wing Republican White House operatives—Robin Cleveland and Kevin Kellems—whom, the Post reports, he “installed in senior positions and rewarded with open-ended contracts and quarter-million-dollar, tax-free salaries, despite their lack of development experience.”
Significantly, just months after his installation at the World Bank, Wolfowitz named Suzanne Rich Folsom—an attorney and Republican activist—to head the agency’s Department of Institutional Integrity, which conducts internal corruption investigations. The appointment was made in the wake of the bank’s own search committee’s selection of nine suitable candidates, all of whom were rejected in favor of the Bush administration loyalist.
Wolfowitz’s arrogance and apparent personal corruption were all the more striking given his attempt to make a campaign against government corruption internationally the signature issue of his tenure at the World Bank. Like the “war on terror” and the crusade for “democracy,” this campaign became more and more obviously a cover for the pursuit of US global interests.
Corruption was invoked as a pretext for cutting off loans to countries under conditions in which it served Washington’s foreign policy purposes, while ignoring corruption whenever it would have cut across American interests.
Thus, Uzbekistan, which had received half a billion dollars in loans from the World Bank since 1992, had an aid package suddenly revoked on Wolfowitz’s orders in September 2005, just two months after the country’s dictator, Islam A. Karimov, terminated a US basing agreement, ordering American troops and warplanes out of the country.
When it came to Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other regimes of strategic importance to US military operations, however, the concern for corruption went out the window.
According to the Washington Post, “Both [World Bank] staff and management also have raised concerns over what several described as Wolfowitz’s insistence that the bank accelerate its lending to Iraq and open an office there.” The Iraqi government is universally acknowledged to be among the most corrupt on earth, and in the end, the World Bank proved unable to recruit qualified personnel to staff any such office, because of justified concern over the civil war conditions prevailing in the country.
Wolfowitz’s international critics have ample cause to press for his removal from the World Bank. However, underlying the firestorm over the unethical and reactionary policies pursued by a man who is by the strictest definition a war criminal are powerful international economic and political tensions that are increasingly coming to the surface.
The crisis confronting Wolfowitz at the World Bank is inseparable from the debacle created by the criminal enterprise with which his name will always be associated: the US war in Iraq. The turn against him by the ministers of one government after another is a further indication of the political isolation of the Bush administration both at home and abroad.
More fundamentally, the ex-Pentagon official’s predicament is a manifestation of the changed position of US capitalism in global economic and political affairs.
The World Bank—together with the International Monetary Fund—was one of the key institutions set up under US hegemony in the aftermath of the Second World War for the purpose of reconstructing European capitalism and creating the conditions for the further expansion of American capitalism itself.
Given Washington’s preeminent role in the institution’s creation, as well as the predominance of US finance capital in world economic affairs during the postwar period, the US government was given the right to appoint the president of the World Bank, as well as a share of the votes on its board of directors that amounted to effective veto power.
This share, however, has been reduced because of the relative decline of US economic preeminence and the rise of powerful capitalist rivals in Europe and Asia. While Washington held just over 37 percent of the voting rights at the foundation of the World Bank, today its share has been reduced to a little more than 16 percent. The four next most powerful shareholders in the bank—Japan, Germany, France and the United Kingdom—can now outvote the US. China, which still is allocated less than 3 percent of the votes, is making a strong case for strengthening its position at American expense.
Nonetheless, the bank remains headquartered in Washington, and the US government continues to exert decisive influence over its decisions.
But to the extent that American imperialism remains the dominant global power today, it is not on the basis of its economic might or productive capacity. Rather, it is attempting to compensate for its relative economic decline by military means. This inevitably generates immense inter-imperialist conflicts and tensions.
While for the most part, Washington’s rivals in Europe and Asia have bowed to US militarism, they have not done so without bitter resentment of Washington’s dominance and a determination to pursue their own interests as capitalist powers. In the ugly scandal surrounding Paul Wolfowitz, they have found a means of furthering these aims.
Source: World Socialist Web Site
French Finance Minister Thierry Breton, for example, declined to say whether he believed Wolfowitz should be ousted but declared that the World Bank should be “ethically irreproachable,” an obvious reference to the seedy scandal involving a hefty pay raise and promotion for Wolfowitz’s girlfriend, Shaha Riza, a Libyan-born British citizen who was a career bureaucrat at the World Bank before US President George W. Bush appointed him to head the agency a little over two years ago.
“I fully trust the governing board to draw the consequences it must draw,” added Breton.
Germany’s development minister, Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, stated that Wolfowitz must decide “whether he still has the credibility to represent the position of the World Bank.”
Swiss Economics Minister Doris Leuthard declared, “It is not the World Bank’s credibility, but Mr. Wolfowitz’s credibility that is on the line.”
Brazil’s minister, Guido Mantega, echoed these sentiments, adding, “We’ll have to see if Wolfowitz will be able to retain the moral authority necessary to fulfill his duties.”
Meanwhile, the World Bank’s Development Committee, made up of 24 finance or development ministers representing the member countries on the bank’s board, issued a statement declaring, “We have to ensure that the bank can effectively carry out its mandate and maintain its credibility and reputation as well as motivation of staff. The current situation is of great concern to all of us.”
A day earlier, Wolfowitz was booed at a meeting with staff of the international lending agency, who overwhelmingly support his removal. The World Bank Group Staff Association issued a statement Thursday declaring that it “seems impossible for the institution to move forward with any sense of purpose under the present leadership, especially in our endeavor to assist governments and their people in improving their own governance.”
The association added, “The President must acknowledge that his conduct has compromised the integrity and effectiveness of the World Bank Group and has destroyed the staff’s trust in his leadership. He must act honorably and resign.”
It is widely believed that the board, which in practice votes according to the dictates of the world governments that its members represent, will stall in making any decision on Wolfowitz’s fate, in hopes that he will resign.
For its part, the Bush administration issued statements of strong support and confidence in its former second in command at the Pentagon continuing at the helm of the World Bank, an institution that employs some 13,000 people worldwide and lends approximately $25 billion annually.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that underlying this sharp difference over the personal and professional fate of Wolfowitz are profound and deepening tensions between US and European capitalism, not only over the role of the World Bank but a host of economic and political issues.
The appointment of the former US assistant defense secretary and key architect of the US war of aggression against Iraq had been opposed from the outset by the majority of the World Bank’s professional staff—an April 2005 poll showed 90 percent of staffers against it—as well as the bulk of the world’s governments that participate in its deliberations.
Wolfowitz was and remains irrevocably identified with the lies about “weapons of mass destruction” and terrorist ties employed by the Bush administration to justify launching the 2003 US invasion of Iraq—a war that Wolfowitz had supported well before the September 11, 2001 attacks and before the election of Bush himself.
The appointment was widely perceived as another gesture of the right-wing US administration’s contempt toward the rest of the world, as well as its determination to subordinate every international institution to its own militarist campaign to assert US global hegemony.
In two years, Wolfowitz has managed to fully live up to these expectations.
The scandal involving preferential treatment for someone with whom he was romantically involved is only the latest—and most personally embarrassing—of a series of controversies that have surrounded Wolfowitz’s tenure at the World Bank.
Nonetheless, this affair has its own unmistakable significance, both in what it says about the personal mores of those who make up the top echelons of capitalist politics in America and about the broader cynicism and hypocrisy that pervades US foreign policy.
Wolfowitz disclosed his relationship with Riza in the spring of 2005, during his negotiation of a lucrative five-year contract to serve as the board’s president. The bank’s ethics committee determined that maintaining her on staff in a position over which Wolfowitz would effectively exercise managerial control would violate the bank’s conflict-of-interest rules.
As the Washington Post revealed in an article by Karen DeYoung Sunday, the deal that Wolfowitz cut for his girlfriend was part of an aggressive and avaricious campaign to reap unprecedented compensation and perks for himself and his cronies. In his own case, this involved the negotiation of clauses allowing him to earn a substantial second income through lecture and book deals.
In the case of Riza, Wolfowitz issued a personal order to the bank’s director of personnel to increase her annual salary to $193,590—a $60,000 hike—while she was reassigned from the World Bank’s Middle East press office to the US State Department. She worked—making more than Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice herself—under the supervision of Vice President Dick Cheney’s daughter Elizabeth, who had been given her own nepotistic appointment to the number two position in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs only two months earlier. There Cheney’s daughter—who left the post last year—was reportedly a leading proponent of US aggression against Syria and Iran.
No doubt, the awarding of a salary increase that amounts to more than the total annual income earned by 75 percent of American households seemed like no big deal to Wolfowitz at the time. At the Pentagon, he had presided over multi-million-dollar corruption involving his Iraqi ally Ahmed Chalabi and the principal military contractor in Iraq—formerly headed by Dick Cheney—Halliburton.
Dictated unprecedented compensation for girlfriend, cronies
With the release of the details of his girlfriend’s pay deal—described by the staff association as “grossly out of line” with personnel policy—his office circulated a false claim that the arrangement had been approved by the World Bank’s relevant boards. In fact, as is now documented, Wolfowitz—together with Riza’s lawyer—dictated the terms, overriding the recommendations of the institution’s ethics committee and barring relevant personnel from any negotiations on the contract.
Riza, incredibly, has issued a statement claiming that she was “victimized” by this lucrative arrangement, and has demanded “an end the unwarranted and malicious public and private attacks.”
Similarly, Wolfowitz brought with him to the World Bank two right-wing Republican White House operatives—Robin Cleveland and Kevin Kellems—whom, the Post reports, he “installed in senior positions and rewarded with open-ended contracts and quarter-million-dollar, tax-free salaries, despite their lack of development experience.”
Significantly, just months after his installation at the World Bank, Wolfowitz named Suzanne Rich Folsom—an attorney and Republican activist—to head the agency’s Department of Institutional Integrity, which conducts internal corruption investigations. The appointment was made in the wake of the bank’s own search committee’s selection of nine suitable candidates, all of whom were rejected in favor of the Bush administration loyalist.
Wolfowitz’s arrogance and apparent personal corruption were all the more striking given his attempt to make a campaign against government corruption internationally the signature issue of his tenure at the World Bank. Like the “war on terror” and the crusade for “democracy,” this campaign became more and more obviously a cover for the pursuit of US global interests.
Corruption was invoked as a pretext for cutting off loans to countries under conditions in which it served Washington’s foreign policy purposes, while ignoring corruption whenever it would have cut across American interests.
Thus, Uzbekistan, which had received half a billion dollars in loans from the World Bank since 1992, had an aid package suddenly revoked on Wolfowitz’s orders in September 2005, just two months after the country’s dictator, Islam A. Karimov, terminated a US basing agreement, ordering American troops and warplanes out of the country.
When it came to Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other regimes of strategic importance to US military operations, however, the concern for corruption went out the window.
According to the Washington Post, “Both [World Bank] staff and management also have raised concerns over what several described as Wolfowitz’s insistence that the bank accelerate its lending to Iraq and open an office there.” The Iraqi government is universally acknowledged to be among the most corrupt on earth, and in the end, the World Bank proved unable to recruit qualified personnel to staff any such office, because of justified concern over the civil war conditions prevailing in the country.
Wolfowitz’s international critics have ample cause to press for his removal from the World Bank. However, underlying the firestorm over the unethical and reactionary policies pursued by a man who is by the strictest definition a war criminal are powerful international economic and political tensions that are increasingly coming to the surface.
The crisis confronting Wolfowitz at the World Bank is inseparable from the debacle created by the criminal enterprise with which his name will always be associated: the US war in Iraq. The turn against him by the ministers of one government after another is a further indication of the political isolation of the Bush administration both at home and abroad.
More fundamentally, the ex-Pentagon official’s predicament is a manifestation of the changed position of US capitalism in global economic and political affairs.
The World Bank—together with the International Monetary Fund—was one of the key institutions set up under US hegemony in the aftermath of the Second World War for the purpose of reconstructing European capitalism and creating the conditions for the further expansion of American capitalism itself.
Given Washington’s preeminent role in the institution’s creation, as well as the predominance of US finance capital in world economic affairs during the postwar period, the US government was given the right to appoint the president of the World Bank, as well as a share of the votes on its board of directors that amounted to effective veto power.
This share, however, has been reduced because of the relative decline of US economic preeminence and the rise of powerful capitalist rivals in Europe and Asia. While Washington held just over 37 percent of the voting rights at the foundation of the World Bank, today its share has been reduced to a little more than 16 percent. The four next most powerful shareholders in the bank—Japan, Germany, France and the United Kingdom—can now outvote the US. China, which still is allocated less than 3 percent of the votes, is making a strong case for strengthening its position at American expense.
Nonetheless, the bank remains headquartered in Washington, and the US government continues to exert decisive influence over its decisions.
But to the extent that American imperialism remains the dominant global power today, it is not on the basis of its economic might or productive capacity. Rather, it is attempting to compensate for its relative economic decline by military means. This inevitably generates immense inter-imperialist conflicts and tensions.
While for the most part, Washington’s rivals in Europe and Asia have bowed to US militarism, they have not done so without bitter resentment of Washington’s dominance and a determination to pursue their own interests as capitalist powers. In the ugly scandal surrounding Paul Wolfowitz, they have found a means of furthering these aims.
Source: World Socialist Web Site
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
'Criminal justice must change'
The criminal justice system must revolve on the victims of crime, said national director of public prosecutions Vusi Pikoli on Wednesday.
"We want to change our criminal justice system. We want to ensure justice for the victims of crime by prosecuting without fear, favour or prejudice and by working with our partners and the public to solve and prevent crime," he said.
Launching the NPA's Strategy 2020 at a conference held in Midrand, Pikoli said there needed to be a "marked improvement" in the work of the NPA by 2020.
The programmes include reducing the number of awaiting-trail detainees by developing guidelines for prosecution, prosecution-guided investigation in which the NPA works with police, and community prosecutions in which "alternative and varied law-enforcement mechanisms" will be developed.
"We want to make sure that we create a society where people obey the laws of the republic voluntarily, not because of fear of sanctions. We want to encourage that culture," Pikoli said.
Source: News 24.com
"We want to change our criminal justice system. We want to ensure justice for the victims of crime by prosecuting without fear, favour or prejudice and by working with our partners and the public to solve and prevent crime," he said.
Launching the NPA's Strategy 2020 at a conference held in Midrand, Pikoli said there needed to be a "marked improvement" in the work of the NPA by 2020.
The programmes include reducing the number of awaiting-trail detainees by developing guidelines for prosecution, prosecution-guided investigation in which the NPA works with police, and community prosecutions in which "alternative and varied law-enforcement mechanisms" will be developed.
"We want to make sure that we create a society where people obey the laws of the republic voluntarily, not because of fear of sanctions. We want to encourage that culture," Pikoli said.
Source: News 24.com
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Sustained gunfire reported in Congo's capital
Heavy gunfire sounded in Congo's capital on Thursday around the home of presidential runner-up Jean-Pierre Bemba, witnesses said. "We've been hearing shooting from heavy arms coming from the area of Jean-Pierre Bemba's residence," office worker Emery Makumeno said by phone from a nearby building. Makumeno and an AP photographer in the area said the shooting had been going on for about an hour.
Soldiers deployed throughout the city and people could be seen fleeing in vehicles and on foot. It was unclear whether the gunfire was coming from government soldiers, civilians or members of Bemba's armed guard. Bemba's guard has refused to disband as promised as part of a deal with the government of President Joseph Kabila. It was the first fighting in the capital since Kabila was installed as the Central African country's first freely elected president in decades late last year.
Bemba, who came in second, initially rejected the election results and his militia took to the streets, clashing with Kabila's security forces. At least two dozen civilians were killed. He gave up his challenge after Congo's Supreme Court rejected his claims of an unfair vote. Bemba, an ex-warlord who was recently elected senator, was allowed keep his personal army - numbering in the thousands - until this month. Last week, his personal guard was expected to register at an army base, where they were to begin their integration into the Congolese security force. But his militia ignored the deadline, and a spokesperson said Bemba's security was still uncertain.
Armed men wearing uniforms that designated them as Bemba's fighters could be seen deployed around his residence, Makumeno said. He said they were holding guns ready, apparently ready to shoot out onto the street - a wide boulevard that was the site of earlier brawls.
Source: IoL
Soldiers deployed throughout the city and people could be seen fleeing in vehicles and on foot. It was unclear whether the gunfire was coming from government soldiers, civilians or members of Bemba's armed guard. Bemba's guard has refused to disband as promised as part of a deal with the government of President Joseph Kabila. It was the first fighting in the capital since Kabila was installed as the Central African country's first freely elected president in decades late last year.
Bemba, who came in second, initially rejected the election results and his militia took to the streets, clashing with Kabila's security forces. At least two dozen civilians were killed. He gave up his challenge after Congo's Supreme Court rejected his claims of an unfair vote. Bemba, an ex-warlord who was recently elected senator, was allowed keep his personal army - numbering in the thousands - until this month. Last week, his personal guard was expected to register at an army base, where they were to begin their integration into the Congolese security force. But his militia ignored the deadline, and a spokesperson said Bemba's security was still uncertain.
Armed men wearing uniforms that designated them as Bemba's fighters could be seen deployed around his residence, Makumeno said. He said they were holding guns ready, apparently ready to shoot out onto the street - a wide boulevard that was the site of earlier brawls.
Source: IoL
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Emerging Schemes: Foreclosure Fraud
Recent statistics suggest that escalating foreclosures provide criminals with the opportunity to exploit and defraud vulnerable homeowners seeking financial guidance. The perpetrators convince homeowners that they can save their homes from foreclosure through deed transfers and the payment of up-front fees. This “foreclosure rescue” often involves a manipulated deed process that results in the preparation of forged deeds. In extreme instances, perpetrators may sell the home or secure a second loan without the homeowners’ knowledge, stripping the property’s equity for personal enrichment.
While foreclosure scams vary, they may be used in combination with other fraudulent schemes. For instance, perpetrators may view foreclosure-rescue scams as a new method for fraudulently acquiring properties to facilitate illegal property-flipping and equity-skimming.
Source: FBI
While foreclosure scams vary, they may be used in combination with other fraudulent schemes. For instance, perpetrators may view foreclosure-rescue scams as a new method for fraudulently acquiring properties to facilitate illegal property-flipping and equity-skimming.
Source: FBI
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
J Arthur Brown arrested
The Scorpions have moved with astonishing speed, given that key components of the Fidentia Group were placed under curatorship just over a month ago, on February 2. Brown and Maddock were arrested in respect of criminal allegations relating to a transaction, or series of transactions, totalling R200m. The two men were immediately taken to the Cape Town Magistrates Court.
In the background lies a tangled web of burned cash, running to well over R1bn. The key victims of a massive scam conceived and perpetrated by Brown and his corrupt network are tens of thousands of widows and orphans registered under the Living Hands Umbrella Trust. In October 2004, R1,1bn belonging to the trust was transferred to Fidentia when Fidentia seized control of Living Hands Pty Ltd, the trust's administrator. This cash enabled Brown and his corrupt network to continue with a bizarre business model that appeared to be based on overpaying for acquisitions, in the hope that fresh cash could be seized to fund past peccadilloes. The business model was utterly unsustainable, and maxed out during the second half of last year, when the Financial Services Board started to take various Fidentia whistleblowers seriously.
The first hardcore cases of alleged fraud were outlined late in 2005. Hendrik Roedolf Bam, who worked in and around the Fidentia Group between December 2002 and December 2003, determined to expose the rot in Fidentia, eventually deposed several affidavits at a Cape Town police station, backed up by extensive annexures containing accounts and much other sensitive information. Bam showed how Maddock was not only auditor for Fidentia Holdings (for a certain period of time), he was also an ongoing director, employee and shareholder in the Fidentia Group through Bonus Way (12) (Pty) Ltd. Bam alleges that Maddock and Brown were involved in "so many instances of fraud that it would be impossible to unravel, if one does not start at a point".
Bam forewarns police that "during your investigation" it would be realised that client funds were handled out of Maddock's statutory trust account by Brown and Maddock without client permission and utilised for personal expenses, company expenses (including operating expenses), and "repaying other clients whose money they used" where earlier-dated money had fallen short. "When I asked Brown", Bam states, "why the company did not have its own banking accounts, Brown said for security purpose, safeguarding client funds. It later became clear that it was done to facilitate fraud of client's funds".
Reports filed after a limited inspection of Fidentia by the Financial Services Board (FSB) accused the group of inadequate corporate governance, material conflicts of interest, poor financial management and reporting, deviation from client mandates, misrepresentation to clients, defying the segregation of assets principle and co-mingling funds, misappropriation of client funds, misrepresenting investments, a probable shortfall in trust holding, and non-adherence to licence conditions. Clients, stated the FSB, would, according to allegations, "be paid out of new or existing client funds. The process then carries forward the problem to the next set of clients. In our opinion this modus operandi is akin to a pyramid scheme". It is apparent throughout the FSB report that Brown "is the directing mind and will of the group". The inspectors say emphatically that "Brown controls FAM [Fidentia Asset Management] and the client investment assets single handedly".
FAM's auditors reported certain irregularities in the conduct of the company's affairs to the relevant registrar. An affidavit by the responsible auditor, a CH Beekmans of Greenwoods Chartered Accountants, stated that the audit of FAM for the year ended 2005 was initiated by his firm on August 1 2005. But the auditors were unable to finalise and sign the audit report for the financial 2005 year, never mind 2006.
Source: Money Web
In the background lies a tangled web of burned cash, running to well over R1bn. The key victims of a massive scam conceived and perpetrated by Brown and his corrupt network are tens of thousands of widows and orphans registered under the Living Hands Umbrella Trust. In October 2004, R1,1bn belonging to the trust was transferred to Fidentia when Fidentia seized control of Living Hands Pty Ltd, the trust's administrator. This cash enabled Brown and his corrupt network to continue with a bizarre business model that appeared to be based on overpaying for acquisitions, in the hope that fresh cash could be seized to fund past peccadilloes. The business model was utterly unsustainable, and maxed out during the second half of last year, when the Financial Services Board started to take various Fidentia whistleblowers seriously.
The first hardcore cases of alleged fraud were outlined late in 2005. Hendrik Roedolf Bam, who worked in and around the Fidentia Group between December 2002 and December 2003, determined to expose the rot in Fidentia, eventually deposed several affidavits at a Cape Town police station, backed up by extensive annexures containing accounts and much other sensitive information. Bam showed how Maddock was not only auditor for Fidentia Holdings (for a certain period of time), he was also an ongoing director, employee and shareholder in the Fidentia Group through Bonus Way (12) (Pty) Ltd. Bam alleges that Maddock and Brown were involved in "so many instances of fraud that it would be impossible to unravel, if one does not start at a point".
Bam forewarns police that "during your investigation" it would be realised that client funds were handled out of Maddock's statutory trust account by Brown and Maddock without client permission and utilised for personal expenses, company expenses (including operating expenses), and "repaying other clients whose money they used" where earlier-dated money had fallen short. "When I asked Brown", Bam states, "why the company did not have its own banking accounts, Brown said for security purpose, safeguarding client funds. It later became clear that it was done to facilitate fraud of client's funds".
Reports filed after a limited inspection of Fidentia by the Financial Services Board (FSB) accused the group of inadequate corporate governance, material conflicts of interest, poor financial management and reporting, deviation from client mandates, misrepresentation to clients, defying the segregation of assets principle and co-mingling funds, misappropriation of client funds, misrepresenting investments, a probable shortfall in trust holding, and non-adherence to licence conditions. Clients, stated the FSB, would, according to allegations, "be paid out of new or existing client funds. The process then carries forward the problem to the next set of clients. In our opinion this modus operandi is akin to a pyramid scheme". It is apparent throughout the FSB report that Brown "is the directing mind and will of the group". The inspectors say emphatically that "Brown controls FAM [Fidentia Asset Management] and the client investment assets single handedly".
FAM's auditors reported certain irregularities in the conduct of the company's affairs to the relevant registrar. An affidavit by the responsible auditor, a CH Beekmans of Greenwoods Chartered Accountants, stated that the audit of FAM for the year ended 2005 was initiated by his firm on August 1 2005. But the auditors were unable to finalise and sign the audit report for the financial 2005 year, never mind 2006.
Source: Money Web
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Fidentia investment 'reckless'
The labour department has been urged to investigate the investment strategies of all sectoral training authorities after the Transport Education Training Authority (Teta) told the Standing Committee on Public Accounts on Wednesday that it had made a R250m investment in Fidentia on the advice of its lawyers.
The hearing by the National Assembly Standing Committee on Public Accounts (Scopa) saw Teta chief executive officer Piet Bothma being grilled by the committee chairperson Themba Godi, a Pan Africanist Congress Member of Parliament, and African National Congress MPs Pierre-Jean Gerber and Vincent Smith. Godi said the department should investigate the matter as "someone should be responsible for this mess" - referring to the report by the Financial Services Board that the Teta was unlikely to get its investment back from Fidentia - a black empowerment firm that has been placed under curatorship. Smith described the affair as "a seriously deficient investment strategy" on the part of Teta, while Gerber described the investment as "reckless". Gerber - who led the charge by MPs in the public finance watchdog committee - asked how it was that an investment of "a quarter of a billion rand" of public money had been made only on the advice of a company of lawyers - identified as SAB&T legal services.
Bothma replied: "We went through reference checks on the company and its directors and got legal advice on the mandate requested by Fidentia. There were checks and balances built in." Smith said that Setas were supposed to be "cost centres" and not investment or profit making institutions and suggested that it would be "crazy" if all 16 Setas had so much money on average available for investment. "Something is terribly wrong," he said. Gerber asked how the investment in Fidentia came about. "The name of the firm Fidentia didn't fall out of the air like a mosquito?" he charged. Bothma said the authority had been approached by Fidentia in "a marketing exercise". "After we looked at the proposal made... we went through reference checks on the company and its directors and got legal advice on the mandate requested by Fidentia," said Bothma.
Godi noted that what had been chosen was a newly established company and it appeared that the Teta had verified its business with Fidentia either without really looking at the detail or being caught out by the advice sought from the legal company. He posed the question why when doing a risk analysis the question of the company's track record had not been an issue.
Bothma said although there now "appeared to be gaps in that situation" the bottom line was that Teta had procured "an excellent company" - SAB&T - "that was given a mandate to do certain verifications and checks and balances". He noted that SAB&T had gone through a "three-quotation" process for this job. "They also at that stage (nearly four years ago) did work for us verifying contracts that we do for discretionary grants," he said. It emerged in the committee discussion that Fidentia offered Teta 10.5% interest on their 50-day investment against 8% from Standard Bank and Absa's 8.05%. Bothma said that Teta had last year requested a withdrawal of its funds in Fidentia - following the FSB investigation.
Godi said it appeared from the Teta's actions that it swung from "one extreme to the other" - first entrusting "such a large amount of money" in Fidentia and then suddenly after the investigation wanting to withdraw "all your monies". "This does suggest that at no point did you apply your mind," said the committee chairman.
The FSB report last week noted that it was its analysis that some R689m of some R1.5bn invested with Fidentia could not be accounted for.
Source: News 24
The hearing by the National Assembly Standing Committee on Public Accounts (Scopa) saw Teta chief executive officer Piet Bothma being grilled by the committee chairperson Themba Godi, a Pan Africanist Congress Member of Parliament, and African National Congress MPs Pierre-Jean Gerber and Vincent Smith. Godi said the department should investigate the matter as "someone should be responsible for this mess" - referring to the report by the Financial Services Board that the Teta was unlikely to get its investment back from Fidentia - a black empowerment firm that has been placed under curatorship. Smith described the affair as "a seriously deficient investment strategy" on the part of Teta, while Gerber described the investment as "reckless". Gerber - who led the charge by MPs in the public finance watchdog committee - asked how it was that an investment of "a quarter of a billion rand" of public money had been made only on the advice of a company of lawyers - identified as SAB&T legal services.
Bothma replied: "We went through reference checks on the company and its directors and got legal advice on the mandate requested by Fidentia. There were checks and balances built in." Smith said that Setas were supposed to be "cost centres" and not investment or profit making institutions and suggested that it would be "crazy" if all 16 Setas had so much money on average available for investment. "Something is terribly wrong," he said. Gerber asked how the investment in Fidentia came about. "The name of the firm Fidentia didn't fall out of the air like a mosquito?" he charged. Bothma said the authority had been approached by Fidentia in "a marketing exercise". "After we looked at the proposal made... we went through reference checks on the company and its directors and got legal advice on the mandate requested by Fidentia," said Bothma.
Godi noted that what had been chosen was a newly established company and it appeared that the Teta had verified its business with Fidentia either without really looking at the detail or being caught out by the advice sought from the legal company. He posed the question why when doing a risk analysis the question of the company's track record had not been an issue.
Bothma said although there now "appeared to be gaps in that situation" the bottom line was that Teta had procured "an excellent company" - SAB&T - "that was given a mandate to do certain verifications and checks and balances". He noted that SAB&T had gone through a "three-quotation" process for this job. "They also at that stage (nearly four years ago) did work for us verifying contracts that we do for discretionary grants," he said. It emerged in the committee discussion that Fidentia offered Teta 10.5% interest on their 50-day investment against 8% from Standard Bank and Absa's 8.05%. Bothma said that Teta had last year requested a withdrawal of its funds in Fidentia - following the FSB investigation.
Godi said it appeared from the Teta's actions that it swung from "one extreme to the other" - first entrusting "such a large amount of money" in Fidentia and then suddenly after the investigation wanting to withdraw "all your monies". "This does suggest that at no point did you apply your mind," said the committee chairman.
The FSB report last week noted that it was its analysis that some R689m of some R1.5bn invested with Fidentia could not be accounted for.
Source: News 24
Friday, February 2, 2007
Millions missing in Fidentia scandal
Cape-based financial services and technology company Fidentia has been placed under provisional curatorship by the Cape High Court in what could be the biggest scandal to hit the financial services sector in recent years. In its application for the curatorship yesterday, the Financial Services Board told the court that its inspectors could not trace R680-million of almost R2-billion taken in from various investors by its asset management subsidiary, Fidentia Asset Management. Much of the money is owed to widows and orphans of deceased members of the Mineworkers Provident Fund.
Based on the papers before the court, the scandal could be even bigger than the Masterbond, Owen & Wiggens and FundsTrust scams that rocked Cape Town in earlier years. With hours of the successful court application, curators Dines Gihwala - a top attorney - and one of the country's outstanding forensic accountants, George Papadakis, entered the opulent Canal Walk headquarters of Fidentia to take control. In their hands was a report of an FSB inspection team which has been trying to unravel the mess for the past six months. The report which accompanied the legal papers in the court application spells out a litany of mis-management and misappropriation of investors' money; total disregard for laws protecting investors; and significant contraventions of the financial licence conditions of Fidentia Asset Management. And the executive chairman of Fidentia Holdings, Arthur Brown, is accused in the report of using millions of rands invested with Fidentia Asset Management for himself, channelling the money through various family trusts.
Over the past two years the company has bought up a diverse group of companies, ranging from the Sante Winelands Health Centre to parts of the imploded financial services company MCubed, paying amounts which, at the time of the purchases, were considered to be excessive. The purchases raised suspicions because the source of the money used by the company, which was operating out of a rented garage at the upmarket Sunset Beach development as recently as four years ago, was not apparent.The inspection team's report indicates that the money came from two main sources: R150m from the Transport Education and Training Authority and R1,4-billion from a umbrella trust fund established to pay pensions to widows and orphans of retirement fund members.
The Cape High Court placed the financial services business of Fidentia Asset Management (Pty) Ltd, Bramber Alternative (Pty) Ltd and Fidentia Holdings (Pty) Ltd under curatorship. The curators have until March 27 to report back on what they find. At that date the court will make a further decision. Russel Michaels, FSB chief communications officer, said to-day that under the provisional order, the curators must take immediate control of, manage and investigate the business and operations of the companies, with a view to conserving the business and not alienate or dispose of any of the property of the companies. "In exercising their powers, the curators have been directed to give consideration to the best interests of investors in the companies." Michaels said members of the public should not attempt to approach the curators for information, "as their time will be fully occupied by this assignment. Progress with the curatorship will from time to time be made available through the media".
The court has ordered that the curators should, at their discretion, continue to make periodical payments to the thousands of pension fund beneficiaries whose money was invested with Fidentia Asset Management. The court has authorised the curators to conduct any investigation required to track down assets and exercise powers to take control of or freeze banking accounts of all the entities involved.
Source: Business Report
Based on the papers before the court, the scandal could be even bigger than the Masterbond, Owen & Wiggens and FundsTrust scams that rocked Cape Town in earlier years. With hours of the successful court application, curators Dines Gihwala - a top attorney - and one of the country's outstanding forensic accountants, George Papadakis, entered the opulent Canal Walk headquarters of Fidentia to take control. In their hands was a report of an FSB inspection team which has been trying to unravel the mess for the past six months. The report which accompanied the legal papers in the court application spells out a litany of mis-management and misappropriation of investors' money; total disregard for laws protecting investors; and significant contraventions of the financial licence conditions of Fidentia Asset Management. And the executive chairman of Fidentia Holdings, Arthur Brown, is accused in the report of using millions of rands invested with Fidentia Asset Management for himself, channelling the money through various family trusts.
Over the past two years the company has bought up a diverse group of companies, ranging from the Sante Winelands Health Centre to parts of the imploded financial services company MCubed, paying amounts which, at the time of the purchases, were considered to be excessive. The purchases raised suspicions because the source of the money used by the company, which was operating out of a rented garage at the upmarket Sunset Beach development as recently as four years ago, was not apparent.The inspection team's report indicates that the money came from two main sources: R150m from the Transport Education and Training Authority and R1,4-billion from a umbrella trust fund established to pay pensions to widows and orphans of retirement fund members.
The Cape High Court placed the financial services business of Fidentia Asset Management (Pty) Ltd, Bramber Alternative (Pty) Ltd and Fidentia Holdings (Pty) Ltd under curatorship. The curators have until March 27 to report back on what they find. At that date the court will make a further decision. Russel Michaels, FSB chief communications officer, said to-day that under the provisional order, the curators must take immediate control of, manage and investigate the business and operations of the companies, with a view to conserving the business and not alienate or dispose of any of the property of the companies. "In exercising their powers, the curators have been directed to give consideration to the best interests of investors in the companies." Michaels said members of the public should not attempt to approach the curators for information, "as their time will be fully occupied by this assignment. Progress with the curatorship will from time to time be made available through the media".
The court has ordered that the curators should, at their discretion, continue to make periodical payments to the thousands of pension fund beneficiaries whose money was invested with Fidentia Asset Management. The court has authorised the curators to conduct any investigation required to track down assets and exercise powers to take control of or freeze banking accounts of all the entities involved.
Source: Business Report
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)