Jacob Zuma's lawyer has confirmed that the ANC president is considering new legal action against cartoonist Zapiro after his controversial drawing published in a Sunday newspaper this week. The cartoon by Zapiro, whose real name is Jonathan Shapiro, featured Zuma being urged to rape a woman, representing Justice, and being egged on by four senior ANC and tripartite alliance leaders.
This morning Michael Hulley, who is representing Zuma in his corruption case, told the Cape Argus: "I have discussed it with him, but I can't say he's given me firm instructions on how to deal with it." Hulley confirmed that Zuma was still seeking recourse from the courts in a number of different matters against media institutions and individuals - although some had been resolved. "For example, after Polokwane, Mr Zuma and David Bullard met and made their peace," he said.
Zapiro confirmed this morning that previous litigation by Zuma against himself was still pending. "It started at R15-million, but after Polokwane it was changed and lessened to R2-million," he said. Zapiro said he believed Zuma was suing him for defamation and "injury to his dignity".
This was for three cartoons, all three of which Zapiro penned while Zuma was being tried for rape in early 2006 - a charge on which he was eventually acquitted. The first cartoon was the first occasion on which Zapiro featured Zuma with a shower head emerging from his glistening scalp - where it has remained in the cartoonist's work ever since.
Zapiro said the response to his most recent Zuma cartoon had been unprecedented in his personal career, with the matter being covered in international media and an interview with the BBC this morning. "I've had some pretty huge responses, but nothing has come close to this," he said.
Source: IoL
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Zuma cartoon: Worth a thousand words?
It seems a picture really is worth a thousand words after cartoonist Zapiro unleashed a storm of controversy this week for depicting Jacob Zuma and other leaders riding roughshod over the country’s justice system.
The cartoon, first published in the Sunday Times, shows African National Congress (ANC) leader Zuma unbuckling his belt -- his buttocks partially exposed -- in front of a woman who is being held down by leaders of the ANC, the South African Communist Party (SACP), the ANC Youth League and the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu). Gwede Mantashe, ANC secretary general, says: “Go for it, boss!”
The woman in the cartoon represents the justice system, so identified by a banner across her body -- implying that Zuma, together with the ANC and its alliance partners, is "raping" the judicial system. The press ombudsman's Khanye Mndaweni said on Tuesday that although the office had received two calls about the matter on Monday, no formal complaint had been laid yet.
Zapiro -- whose real name is Jonathan Shapiro -- told the Mail & Guardian Online on Monday that "there are layers in this cartoon. The primary point is that Zuma is violating the justice system and the spirit of the Constitution. That violation is depicted as a rape." On Tuesday, he said he had thought "very, very carefully" before putting pen to paper, and that he had also asked female friends for their opinion. "There is a very, very pronounced tendency in this country towards exceptionalism, as if our politicians are more sacrosanct than politicians worldwide. That I take issue with," he said. "I really feel strongly that they have to take a hard look at what they are doing and not use the red herring of racism."
His women friends, though shocked, felt that the cartoon not only showed graphically what was happening to the justice system and constitutional principles, but that it also contained a second level of criticism on violence against women in a very patriarchal society.
Zapiro said the blindfolded figure of justice was an allegorical figure going back centuries. "The fact that Jacob Zuma has this personal history is his problem," he said.
The ANC is expecting at least 5 000 supporters to converge on the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Thursday night before Friday's ruling on whether the decision to charge Zuma was lawful. Zuma faces a charge of racketeering, four charges of corruption, a charge of money laundering and 12 charges of fraud related to the multibillion-rand government arms deal.
Speaking at the University of Johannesburg on Tuesday, Zuma said although the judiciary was the final arbiter of disputes, it was not above criticism. ”It can't be said you can't criticise the judiciary. That is what is being said in South Africa. That is not right. But, the criticism should be fair and should be informed. That is very important," he said, addressing students on "access to justice". It was "only in dictatorships and autocracies that criticism is viewed with contempt". He said South Africa, as a 14-year-old democracy, was going through a learning curve and still internalising fundamental principles of democracy. Debates would help this process.
He said ANC deputy president Kgalema Motlanthe and secretary general Gwede Mantashe would never undermine the judiciary, nor the rule of law. "As the ANC we reiterate and affirm our belief in the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary to be the final arbitrator of disputes. "Motlanthe, Mantashe will never undermine these institutions. We seek to protect and strengthen them as the ANC has always done since 1912. "I believe in a free and independent judiciary that should operate without fear or favour. I believe in the right of equal access to the courts for all South Africans," he said.
Hundreds of readers of the M&G Online and its invitation-only blogging platform Thought Leader have been moved to comment on the furore, some using their real names and some using pseudonyms. Reader Tsiliso Tamasane said: “Zapiro has an insatiable hatred for Mr Zuma and will use any event to publicly humiliate him. It's no longer funny." Another reader, Joseph Sifundza, said while he has always enjoyed Zapiro's cartoons, he thought the cartoonist had gone “a bit far with this one”. “In fact, the NPA is the one raping Mr Zuma's rights with the help of the media and the opposition parties,” said Sifundza. Others thought it was fair comment. “It's called political satire and is required in any healthy democracy,” said a reader using the name Meren Gue. A reader under the name Garg Unzola said Zapiro is not a journalist. “Cartoons are not examples of investigative or informative journalism. You should view his cartoons with the same apprehension that you should read a columnist's column. Take it with a pinch of salt, accept that it is Zapiro's opinion and move on.”
Reader Rose Morrow said the cartoon, converted to text and abbreviated in journalistic speak, would probably go something like this: “Jacob Zuma, the president of the once highly respected and admired ANC, stands accused of attempting to rape the justice system of South Africa. His wholly self-serving, entirely unethical 'struggle' tactics to avoid at all costs his corruption trial are blindly supported by certain prominent leaders within that party, the ANCYL and the tripartite alliance. As one, they have launched a scathing, unabated, unfounded attack on the credentials and motive of our judges, including those from the Constitutional Court, many, if not all of whom, featured strongly in South Africa's struggle history. Added Morrow: “Printed in words, the comment would cause hardly a ripple!”
Jane Duncan, the executive director of the Freedom of Expression Institute in Johannesburg, said on Tuesday she had initially thought the cartoon to be "quite risky”. Duncan also believes that Zuma may have a case against Zapiro. “Yes, Zuma can sue Zapiro for defamation because it could evoke an association with the rape trial and depicting him as a rapist while he was not found guilty," she said. "A cartoon is a creative form of expression and it can be read in different ways. So I think the cartoonist should be given the benefit of the doubt." She added: “A cartoonist is a lot freer than a journalist”.
Fellow cartoonist and author Andy Mason told the M&G Online on Tuesday that freedom of expression is not an unlimited right, and these limits need to debated by the public. "It’s not the cartoonist who published it. The editor makes the considered decision to publish it. It’s a carefully considered risk taken in the context of the role of the newspaper. It’s not an issue of rights, it’s about responsibility," said Mason. "A cartoonist is given licence to go further than others and to push the boundaries. One of the tasks is to create public debate."
Anton Harber, journalism professor at the University of Witwatersrand, told the M&G Online: “South Africans are over-sensitive." He said he thinks it’s a powerful cartoon that “very clearly pushes the boundaries, but cartoons are satire. We give them [cartoonists] more space as journalists. You can even say this cartoon is outrageous, but that’s the function of a cartoon." He added: “Press freedom allows you to be tough and provocative." However, where to draw the line is hard to define, according to Harber. “It’s a question of judgement and taste.”
There are different possible objections to this cartoon, he said. Firstly, it could harm Zuma's dignity, and any cartoonist should be conscious of that. But, he said, “when you are a public persona you are open to more satire than normal citizens”. Another possible objection is gender violence. “But, in my opinion, the cartoon does not glorify violence against women." Thirdly, the ANC and its partners say the cartoon is referring to Zuma’s rape case, but Harber feels “those people are reading it far too literally”, saying: "It doesn’t directly refer to the rape trial.”
At a lecture at Wits in April this year, Harber said that cartoonists find themselves increasingly the target of criticism and attacks. On Tuesday he said this is because South Africans are “over-sensitive”. An important reason for this is that South Africa is still a young democracy. “In a lot of other countries this cartoon would be not that controversial," he said. “Zapiro is really pushing the boundaries and he takes it further than others. But that’s what you do as a cartoonist ... And [as a young democracy] we need it."
Source: Mail & Guardian
The woman in the cartoon represents the justice system, so identified by a banner across her body -- implying that Zuma, together with the ANC and its alliance partners, is "raping" the judicial system. The press ombudsman's Khanye Mndaweni said on Tuesday that although the office had received two calls about the matter on Monday, no formal complaint had been laid yet.
Zapiro -- whose real name is Jonathan Shapiro -- told the Mail & Guardian Online on Monday that "there are layers in this cartoon. The primary point is that Zuma is violating the justice system and the spirit of the Constitution. That violation is depicted as a rape." On Tuesday, he said he had thought "very, very carefully" before putting pen to paper, and that he had also asked female friends for their opinion. "There is a very, very pronounced tendency in this country towards exceptionalism, as if our politicians are more sacrosanct than politicians worldwide. That I take issue with," he said. "I really feel strongly that they have to take a hard look at what they are doing and not use the red herring of racism."
His women friends, though shocked, felt that the cartoon not only showed graphically what was happening to the justice system and constitutional principles, but that it also contained a second level of criticism on violence against women in a very patriarchal society.
Zapiro said the blindfolded figure of justice was an allegorical figure going back centuries. "The fact that Jacob Zuma has this personal history is his problem," he said.
The ANC is expecting at least 5 000 supporters to converge on the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Thursday night before Friday's ruling on whether the decision to charge Zuma was lawful. Zuma faces a charge of racketeering, four charges of corruption, a charge of money laundering and 12 charges of fraud related to the multibillion-rand government arms deal.
Speaking at the University of Johannesburg on Tuesday, Zuma said although the judiciary was the final arbiter of disputes, it was not above criticism. ”It can't be said you can't criticise the judiciary. That is what is being said in South Africa. That is not right. But, the criticism should be fair and should be informed. That is very important," he said, addressing students on "access to justice". It was "only in dictatorships and autocracies that criticism is viewed with contempt". He said South Africa, as a 14-year-old democracy, was going through a learning curve and still internalising fundamental principles of democracy. Debates would help this process.
He said ANC deputy president Kgalema Motlanthe and secretary general Gwede Mantashe would never undermine the judiciary, nor the rule of law. "As the ANC we reiterate and affirm our belief in the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary to be the final arbitrator of disputes. "Motlanthe, Mantashe will never undermine these institutions. We seek to protect and strengthen them as the ANC has always done since 1912. "I believe in a free and independent judiciary that should operate without fear or favour. I believe in the right of equal access to the courts for all South Africans," he said.
Hundreds of readers of the M&G Online and its invitation-only blogging platform Thought Leader have been moved to comment on the furore, some using their real names and some using pseudonyms. Reader Tsiliso Tamasane said: “Zapiro has an insatiable hatred for Mr Zuma and will use any event to publicly humiliate him. It's no longer funny." Another reader, Joseph Sifundza, said while he has always enjoyed Zapiro's cartoons, he thought the cartoonist had gone “a bit far with this one”. “In fact, the NPA is the one raping Mr Zuma's rights with the help of the media and the opposition parties,” said Sifundza. Others thought it was fair comment. “It's called political satire and is required in any healthy democracy,” said a reader using the name Meren Gue. A reader under the name Garg Unzola said Zapiro is not a journalist. “Cartoons are not examples of investigative or informative journalism. You should view his cartoons with the same apprehension that you should read a columnist's column. Take it with a pinch of salt, accept that it is Zapiro's opinion and move on.”
Reader Rose Morrow said the cartoon, converted to text and abbreviated in journalistic speak, would probably go something like this: “Jacob Zuma, the president of the once highly respected and admired ANC, stands accused of attempting to rape the justice system of South Africa. His wholly self-serving, entirely unethical 'struggle' tactics to avoid at all costs his corruption trial are blindly supported by certain prominent leaders within that party, the ANCYL and the tripartite alliance. As one, they have launched a scathing, unabated, unfounded attack on the credentials and motive of our judges, including those from the Constitutional Court, many, if not all of whom, featured strongly in South Africa's struggle history. Added Morrow: “Printed in words, the comment would cause hardly a ripple!”
Jane Duncan, the executive director of the Freedom of Expression Institute in Johannesburg, said on Tuesday she had initially thought the cartoon to be "quite risky”. Duncan also believes that Zuma may have a case against Zapiro. “Yes, Zuma can sue Zapiro for defamation because it could evoke an association with the rape trial and depicting him as a rapist while he was not found guilty," she said. "A cartoon is a creative form of expression and it can be read in different ways. So I think the cartoonist should be given the benefit of the doubt." She added: “A cartoonist is a lot freer than a journalist”.
Fellow cartoonist and author Andy Mason told the M&G Online on Tuesday that freedom of expression is not an unlimited right, and these limits need to debated by the public. "It’s not the cartoonist who published it. The editor makes the considered decision to publish it. It’s a carefully considered risk taken in the context of the role of the newspaper. It’s not an issue of rights, it’s about responsibility," said Mason. "A cartoonist is given licence to go further than others and to push the boundaries. One of the tasks is to create public debate."
Anton Harber, journalism professor at the University of Witwatersrand, told the M&G Online: “South Africans are over-sensitive." He said he thinks it’s a powerful cartoon that “very clearly pushes the boundaries, but cartoons are satire. We give them [cartoonists] more space as journalists. You can even say this cartoon is outrageous, but that’s the function of a cartoon." He added: “Press freedom allows you to be tough and provocative." However, where to draw the line is hard to define, according to Harber. “It’s a question of judgement and taste.”
There are different possible objections to this cartoon, he said. Firstly, it could harm Zuma's dignity, and any cartoonist should be conscious of that. But, he said, “when you are a public persona you are open to more satire than normal citizens”. Another possible objection is gender violence. “But, in my opinion, the cartoon does not glorify violence against women." Thirdly, the ANC and its partners say the cartoon is referring to Zuma’s rape case, but Harber feels “those people are reading it far too literally”, saying: "It doesn’t directly refer to the rape trial.”
At a lecture at Wits in April this year, Harber said that cartoonists find themselves increasingly the target of criticism and attacks. On Tuesday he said this is because South Africans are “over-sensitive”. An important reason for this is that South Africa is still a young democracy. “In a lot of other countries this cartoon would be not that controversial," he said. “Zapiro is really pushing the boundaries and he takes it further than others. But that’s what you do as a cartoonist ... And [as a young democracy] we need it."
Source: Mail & Guardian
The blindfolding of justice; allegorical going back centuries.
It seems a picture really is worth a thousand words after cartoonist Zapiro unleashed a storm of controversy this week for depicting Jacob Zuma and other leaders riding roughshod over the country’s justice system.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Zapiro
Source: Mail & Guardian
Monday, September 8, 2008
Tito gone fishing
Tito Mboweni was in the news this week because he was quitting to go fishing. Then, after chatting to ANC boss Gwede Mantashe, it seemed that Mboweni was prepared to keep his fishing part time. He would stay, if asked.
Source Mail & Guardian
Source Mail & Guardian
On Zuma, Zapiro and that cartoon….
I have always been a great fan of the cartoonist, Zapiro. He is intelligent, moral and brave – something one cannot say about too many people in South Africa. I am also not easily shocked and believe politicians generally deserve to be ridiculed and mocked. It is when people – especially politicians – start thinking they are beyond mocking and take themselves too seriously that trouble usually starts.
But when I saw his cartoon in the Sunday Times yesterday, I found myself wondering whether Zapiro had not gone too far and had perhaps not done something immoral and ethically deeply problematic.
Of course I agree with Zapiro that some of those ANC leaders who have been championing Zuma’s cause, have acted in a scandalous and despicable manner. I also agree that Zuma – through his silence – has aided and abetted some in the ANC in their very dangerous and immoral behaviour.
Perhaps one could still argue that a cartoonist may use the metaphor of rape in his cartoons to address a situation that he sees as dangerous and immoral – although I am not a woman and have never been raped, so maybe I am not the best one to judge this point. The metaphor of rape is definitely a powerful one – especially in a country like South Africa where so many woman have been and continue to be raped.
But I do wonder whether by using the metaphor of rape, Zapiro is not cheapening the horror of rape and – given our deeply patriarchal and sexist society – is not helping to desensitize us to this scourge. In a society where many men still see woman as something to be owned, I worry that this kind of cartoon might somehow send a signal to some men that rape is not such a bad thing.
In this cartoon Zapiro uses rape as a metaphor, of course, and he is using the horror that most ordinary decent people have of rape to make a very powerful point about the immorality of Zuma and his backers. But human beings are strange creatures – do we not become desensitized to a horror if we are exposed to it for long enough?
And what about the horrid sexists who might also be fans of Jacob Zuma? Is there not a danger that they will leer over this cartoon and somehow find it exciting or funny?
Lastly, the cartoon will be read in the context of Mr Zuma’s rape trial. Every single person who sees it will remember that Zuma was charged with rape and will make some connection between that charge and this cartoon.
But Zuma was acquitted in his rape trial. Although he said some very sexists and stupid things during his trial and although his supporters behaved appallingly outside the court, we have to respect the fact that he was acquitted because it shows our respect for the judiciary which, Zapiro suggests, Zuma’s supporters do not always show.
By depicting Zuma as a rapist – even in metaphoric terms – is Zapiro not disrespecting the decision by the court and planting the thought in our heads that maybe Zuma is a rapist after all? Is Zapiro in that way not undermining respect for the very judiciary he is purportedly defending by suggesting subliminally that Zuma should have been convicted?
I do not think there are easy answers to these questions. Maybe I am being prudish or overtly sensitive? I remain in two minds myself.
But perhaps we all have a duty when we engage in the public discourse to do so in a way that is not going to fan the flames of sexism, hate and violence. Maybe, just maybe, Zapiro overstepped the boundary in this case.
Source: Pierre de Vos: Constitutionally Speaking
But when I saw his cartoon in the Sunday Times yesterday, I found myself wondering whether Zapiro had not gone too far and had perhaps not done something immoral and ethically deeply problematic.
Of course I agree with Zapiro that some of those ANC leaders who have been championing Zuma’s cause, have acted in a scandalous and despicable manner. I also agree that Zuma – through his silence – has aided and abetted some in the ANC in their very dangerous and immoral behaviour.
Perhaps one could still argue that a cartoonist may use the metaphor of rape in his cartoons to address a situation that he sees as dangerous and immoral – although I am not a woman and have never been raped, so maybe I am not the best one to judge this point. The metaphor of rape is definitely a powerful one – especially in a country like South Africa where so many woman have been and continue to be raped.
But I do wonder whether by using the metaphor of rape, Zapiro is not cheapening the horror of rape and – given our deeply patriarchal and sexist society – is not helping to desensitize us to this scourge. In a society where many men still see woman as something to be owned, I worry that this kind of cartoon might somehow send a signal to some men that rape is not such a bad thing.
In this cartoon Zapiro uses rape as a metaphor, of course, and he is using the horror that most ordinary decent people have of rape to make a very powerful point about the immorality of Zuma and his backers. But human beings are strange creatures – do we not become desensitized to a horror if we are exposed to it for long enough?
And what about the horrid sexists who might also be fans of Jacob Zuma? Is there not a danger that they will leer over this cartoon and somehow find it exciting or funny?
Lastly, the cartoon will be read in the context of Mr Zuma’s rape trial. Every single person who sees it will remember that Zuma was charged with rape and will make some connection between that charge and this cartoon.
But Zuma was acquitted in his rape trial. Although he said some very sexists and stupid things during his trial and although his supporters behaved appallingly outside the court, we have to respect the fact that he was acquitted because it shows our respect for the judiciary which, Zapiro suggests, Zuma’s supporters do not always show.
By depicting Zuma as a rapist – even in metaphoric terms – is Zapiro not disrespecting the decision by the court and planting the thought in our heads that maybe Zuma is a rapist after all? Is Zapiro in that way not undermining respect for the very judiciary he is purportedly defending by suggesting subliminally that Zuma should have been convicted?
I do not think there are easy answers to these questions. Maybe I am being prudish or overtly sensitive? I remain in two minds myself.
But perhaps we all have a duty when we engage in the public discourse to do so in a way that is not going to fan the flames of sexism, hate and violence. Maybe, just maybe, Zapiro overstepped the boundary in this case.
Source: Pierre de Vos: Constitutionally Speaking
Zapiro speaks out
Cartoonist Jonathan Shapiro on Monday defended his controversial cartoon of Jacob Zuma preparing to rape justice, saying he thought "very, very carefully" before doing it. The African National Congress and its tripartite alliance partners have condemned the cartoon as disgusting, while ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe labelled it racist.
The cartoon, published in the Sunday Times under Shapiro's pen-name Zapiro, shows a blindfolded female figure labelled "justice system", being pinned down by Zuma's political allies. The ANC president is depicted in the cartoon unzipping his pants, while Mantashe urges him: "Go for it, boss!"
Shapiro said he "absolutely" refuted the racism charge, and that his record in the struggle years spoke for itself. "There is a very, very pronounced tendency in this country towards exceptionalism, as if our politicians are more sacrosanct than politicians worldwide. That I take issue with," he said. "I really feel strongly that they have to take a hard look at what they are doing and not use the red herring of racism." He said he was not surprised that the cartoon had provoked strong reaction, as the image was "outrageous", and a "very explosive thing". He had thought "very, very carefully" about how women would view it, and before publication sent it to several women friends whose opinion he trusted. Their immediate reaction was one of shock. However they all then said that the cartoon not only showed graphically what was actually happening to the justice system and constitutional principles, but that it contained a second level of criticism on violence against women in a very patriarchal society.
Shapiro said the blindfolded figure of justice was an allegorical figure going back centuries. "The fact that Jacob Zuma has this personal history is his problem," he said.
Zuma, who is president of the ANC, was charged with raping a young woman in 2006, but was found not guilty. Earlier on Monday the ANC, its youth league and the SA Communist Party said in a joint statement that the cartoon was distasteful and "borders on defamation of character". The organisations said the Sunday Times had disguised abuse as press freedom in publishing it. "The cartoon rubbishes the collective integrity of the alliance and constitutes yet another continued violation of the rights and dignity of the ANC president," they said. The organisations said they had never attacked the judiciary, but criticised unfair treatment of Zuma in the normal public discourse of a democracy. "There can, therefore, be no justification for such unwarranted insult on our leadership by the Sunday Times."
Zapiro, they said, had been "consistent in unwarranted attacks on the movement and its leadership". "In a country where we have a serious scourge of fighting violence against women and in particular rape, we need to be very careful how we use the notion and the concept of rape loosely to demonstrate any form of perceived abuse."
Cosatu also expressed disgust at the cartoon, saying it was in extremely bad taste. In his online blog Constitutionally Speaking, University of the Western Cape constitutional law academic Prof Pierre de Vos said on Monday that though he had always been a great fan of Zapiro, he wondered whether the cartoonist had now gone too far and done something "immoral and ethically deeply problematic". He said he agreed with Zapiro that some of the leaders who had been championing Zuma's cause had acted despicably, and that Zuma, through his silence, had abetted them. However he wondered whether by using the metaphor of rape, Zapiro was not "cheapening" the horror of the act and helping to desensitise people.
De Vos also asked whether Shapiro was undermining respect for the judiciary he was purportedly defending, by suggesting subliminally that Zuma should have been convicted in the rape trial. His piece drew a flood of comments from his readers, most of them disagreeing with him. "It is time someone drew attention to the shocking behaviour of these political figureheads and their most avid supporters," wrote Thea Beckman. "We cannot allow a man who believes loyalty to be above the Constitution to take the reins of our country. Well done Zapiro."
Source: IoL
The cartoon, published in the Sunday Times under Shapiro's pen-name Zapiro, shows a blindfolded female figure labelled "justice system", being pinned down by Zuma's political allies. The ANC president is depicted in the cartoon unzipping his pants, while Mantashe urges him: "Go for it, boss!"
Shapiro said he "absolutely" refuted the racism charge, and that his record in the struggle years spoke for itself. "There is a very, very pronounced tendency in this country towards exceptionalism, as if our politicians are more sacrosanct than politicians worldwide. That I take issue with," he said. "I really feel strongly that they have to take a hard look at what they are doing and not use the red herring of racism." He said he was not surprised that the cartoon had provoked strong reaction, as the image was "outrageous", and a "very explosive thing". He had thought "very, very carefully" about how women would view it, and before publication sent it to several women friends whose opinion he trusted. Their immediate reaction was one of shock. However they all then said that the cartoon not only showed graphically what was actually happening to the justice system and constitutional principles, but that it contained a second level of criticism on violence against women in a very patriarchal society.
Shapiro said the blindfolded figure of justice was an allegorical figure going back centuries. "The fact that Jacob Zuma has this personal history is his problem," he said.
Zuma, who is president of the ANC, was charged with raping a young woman in 2006, but was found not guilty. Earlier on Monday the ANC, its youth league and the SA Communist Party said in a joint statement that the cartoon was distasteful and "borders on defamation of character". The organisations said the Sunday Times had disguised abuse as press freedom in publishing it. "The cartoon rubbishes the collective integrity of the alliance and constitutes yet another continued violation of the rights and dignity of the ANC president," they said. The organisations said they had never attacked the judiciary, but criticised unfair treatment of Zuma in the normal public discourse of a democracy. "There can, therefore, be no justification for such unwarranted insult on our leadership by the Sunday Times."
Zapiro, they said, had been "consistent in unwarranted attacks on the movement and its leadership". "In a country where we have a serious scourge of fighting violence against women and in particular rape, we need to be very careful how we use the notion and the concept of rape loosely to demonstrate any form of perceived abuse."
Cosatu also expressed disgust at the cartoon, saying it was in extremely bad taste. In his online blog Constitutionally Speaking, University of the Western Cape constitutional law academic Prof Pierre de Vos said on Monday that though he had always been a great fan of Zapiro, he wondered whether the cartoonist had now gone too far and done something "immoral and ethically deeply problematic". He said he agreed with Zapiro that some of the leaders who had been championing Zuma's cause had acted despicably, and that Zuma, through his silence, had abetted them. However he wondered whether by using the metaphor of rape, Zapiro was not "cheapening" the horror of the act and helping to desensitise people.
De Vos also asked whether Shapiro was undermining respect for the judiciary he was purportedly defending, by suggesting subliminally that Zuma should have been convicted in the rape trial. His piece drew a flood of comments from his readers, most of them disagreeing with him. "It is time someone drew attention to the shocking behaviour of these political figureheads and their most avid supporters," wrote Thea Beckman. "We cannot allow a man who believes loyalty to be above the Constitution to take the reins of our country. Well done Zapiro."
Source: IoL
Sunday, September 7, 2008
South Africa's Human Rights Reputation Tarnished
As a member of the United Nations security council for two years, South Africa has had many opportunities to speak out forcefully for human rights - or to join those speaking out against them. Again and again, it has chosen the latter course. The South African government's unwillingness to confront President Robert Mugabe on his extremely abusive governance of Zimbabwe is well known to South Africans, and justly controversial. Less well known are the many other important international issues on which the South African government has sided with reactionary rather than progressive forces.
Burma is the best-known case. With Russia and China, South Africa has blocked efforts to condemn the military government's lethal crackdown on peaceful protesters last year. Perhaps the department of foreign affairs has forgotten that, when Burma was still democratic, it demanded that the evils of apartheid, including the Sharpeville massacre of 1960, should be brought before the security council.
The international solidarity movement against apartheid constantly confronted the argument that what happened inside a country's borders was none of the rest of the world's business. That is precisely the argument that the South African government now makes frequently at the security council. It narrowly defines what constitutes a "threat to international peace and security", and insists that all other matters be taken up at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Meanwhile, in Geneva, outside the limelight, South Africa has demonstrated a similar pattern - failing to support key resolutions condemning human rights abuses in countries from Iran to Uzbekistan, and aligning itself with countries whose human rights records are, by anyone's standard, abysmal.
At the UN this month, a diplomatic struggle is shaping up to be South Africa's lowest moment yet. The issue is Darfur, and more specifically the request by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) for an arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese president. The accusation: genocide and crimes against humanity, the world's most serious crimes. News of the warrant request was greeted with joy among the millions of Darfuris who have been driven from their homes by government forces acting in concert with janjaweed militias. Tens of thousands of Africans have died in this civil war, most of them civilians, and most of them as a result of Sudanese government actions.
The Sudanese government has begun a concerted campaign to evade justice for these crimes and the South African government has become its accomplice. Together with Libya, also on the security council, South Africa has been leading an effort to suspend the International Criminal Court's request for the next 12 months. Suspending the request for an arrest warrant would send a clear signal, not only to the Sudanese government, but also to tyrants everywhere that they can continue to cheat justice through international political machination. I was present at the negotiations on the treaty for the International Criminal Court 10 years ago in Rome, and listened with admiration to the speech of Dullah Omar, the South African justice minister, in ringing support of this important new human rights institution. Achieving a strong treaty at those talks was an uphill battle, but we won. Only the steadfast leadership of South Africa, along with a handful of others, overcame the opposition of major powers such as the United States, China and Israel.
The International Criminal Court is not an anti-African institution, as some have alleged. It is a pro-African institution: pro-civilians in Darfur whose villages have been burned to the ground, pro-women in the Democratic Republic of Congo who have been raped in wartime, pro-children in northern Uganda who have been abducted as child soldiers. It is opposed to government and rebel leaders responsible for such crimes, no matter where they live.
The prosecutor has also been looking into situations in Colombia and Afghanistan, as well as crimes committed in the Russian-Georgian armed conflict. It is truly heartbreaking to see South Africa preparing to abandon the court at a critical juncture in its history. Sadly, it appears to be part of a trend that is putting Pretoria's foreign policy on the wrong side of history. Perhaps only a fervent and sustained outcry from South African society can restore the country to its rightful path and begin to repair the damage that has already been done to its reputation.
Source: Human Rights Watch
Burma is the best-known case. With Russia and China, South Africa has blocked efforts to condemn the military government's lethal crackdown on peaceful protesters last year. Perhaps the department of foreign affairs has forgotten that, when Burma was still democratic, it demanded that the evils of apartheid, including the Sharpeville massacre of 1960, should be brought before the security council.
The international solidarity movement against apartheid constantly confronted the argument that what happened inside a country's borders was none of the rest of the world's business. That is precisely the argument that the South African government now makes frequently at the security council. It narrowly defines what constitutes a "threat to international peace and security", and insists that all other matters be taken up at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Meanwhile, in Geneva, outside the limelight, South Africa has demonstrated a similar pattern - failing to support key resolutions condemning human rights abuses in countries from Iran to Uzbekistan, and aligning itself with countries whose human rights records are, by anyone's standard, abysmal.
At the UN this month, a diplomatic struggle is shaping up to be South Africa's lowest moment yet. The issue is Darfur, and more specifically the request by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) for an arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese president. The accusation: genocide and crimes against humanity, the world's most serious crimes. News of the warrant request was greeted with joy among the millions of Darfuris who have been driven from their homes by government forces acting in concert with janjaweed militias. Tens of thousands of Africans have died in this civil war, most of them civilians, and most of them as a result of Sudanese government actions.
The Sudanese government has begun a concerted campaign to evade justice for these crimes and the South African government has become its accomplice. Together with Libya, also on the security council, South Africa has been leading an effort to suspend the International Criminal Court's request for the next 12 months. Suspending the request for an arrest warrant would send a clear signal, not only to the Sudanese government, but also to tyrants everywhere that they can continue to cheat justice through international political machination. I was present at the negotiations on the treaty for the International Criminal Court 10 years ago in Rome, and listened with admiration to the speech of Dullah Omar, the South African justice minister, in ringing support of this important new human rights institution. Achieving a strong treaty at those talks was an uphill battle, but we won. Only the steadfast leadership of South Africa, along with a handful of others, overcame the opposition of major powers such as the United States, China and Israel.
The International Criminal Court is not an anti-African institution, as some have alleged. It is a pro-African institution: pro-civilians in Darfur whose villages have been burned to the ground, pro-women in the Democratic Republic of Congo who have been raped in wartime, pro-children in northern Uganda who have been abducted as child soldiers. It is opposed to government and rebel leaders responsible for such crimes, no matter where they live.
The prosecutor has also been looking into situations in Colombia and Afghanistan, as well as crimes committed in the Russian-Georgian armed conflict. It is truly heartbreaking to see South Africa preparing to abandon the court at a critical juncture in its history. Sadly, it appears to be part of a trend that is putting Pretoria's foreign policy on the wrong side of history. Perhaps only a fervent and sustained outcry from South African society can restore the country to its rightful path and begin to repair the damage that has already been done to its reputation.
Source: Human Rights Watch
Friday, September 5, 2008
Zuma supporters mobilise against court case
Supporters of African National Congress (ANC) president Jacob Zuma attempted to force their way into the Pinetown Magistrate's Court on Friday, as colleagues chanted slogans and picketed outside various other courts across the greater Durban area. The protests, arranged by the ANC's eThekwini region, were to be followed by the handing over of memorandums detailing the party's demands, including that the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) drop charges against Zuma.
Pinetown police spokesperson Inspector Solomon Mbhele said a crowd of about 1 000 converged outside the court. Some, he said, were armed with sticks. "The protestors were trying to get into the court, but police with riot shields managed to stop them. Some protestors were also throwing the orange cones that were demarcating the surrounding roads," Mbhele said. "There was not too much violence," he said.
John Mchunu, ANC eThekwini general secretary, said that officials closed the door to the court building, preventing the protestors from entering. He said: "We are members of the public, and like them we have a right to enter the building." Meanwhile, a crowd of about 100 were seen picketing outside the Durban Magistrate's Court. Protestors held a big banner that read: "We shall take arms if need be to support ANC president Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma."
In KwaMashu, police spokesperson Constable Siwe Nxumalo reported that at least 300 supporters were protesting outside the Ntuzuma Magistrate's Court. At the Umlazi court, police spokesperson Superintendent Danelia Veldhuizen said there were about 100 protesters. There were unconfirmed reports of cases at the court being rolled over due to high noise levels. Captain Edmund Singh said a small group of about 50 protesters had gathered at the Chatsworth Magistrate's Court. Overall, Mchunu declared Friday's protests successful. Another protest is planned for September 10 outside the NPA's offices in Durban.
On the eve of September 12, when Zuma finds out whether Judge Chris Nicholson has ruled in his favour to have the decision to charge him declared unlawful, protesters will converge on Pietermaritzburg's Freedom Square for a night vigil. Zuma faces charges that include corruption and fraud. He was charged in 2005 but that case was struck from the roll in 2006. He was re-charged in December 2007.
Two Thint companies -- Thint Holding (Southern Africa) Pty Ltd and Thint (Pty) Ltd -- are South African subsidiaries of the French arms manufacturing giant Thales International (formerly Thomson-CFS) and they also face similar charges for allegedly paying him bribes.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Pinetown police spokesperson Inspector Solomon Mbhele said a crowd of about 1 000 converged outside the court. Some, he said, were armed with sticks. "The protestors were trying to get into the court, but police with riot shields managed to stop them. Some protestors were also throwing the orange cones that were demarcating the surrounding roads," Mbhele said. "There was not too much violence," he said.
John Mchunu, ANC eThekwini general secretary, said that officials closed the door to the court building, preventing the protestors from entering. He said: "We are members of the public, and like them we have a right to enter the building." Meanwhile, a crowd of about 100 were seen picketing outside the Durban Magistrate's Court. Protestors held a big banner that read: "We shall take arms if need be to support ANC president Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma."
In KwaMashu, police spokesperson Constable Siwe Nxumalo reported that at least 300 supporters were protesting outside the Ntuzuma Magistrate's Court. At the Umlazi court, police spokesperson Superintendent Danelia Veldhuizen said there were about 100 protesters. There were unconfirmed reports of cases at the court being rolled over due to high noise levels. Captain Edmund Singh said a small group of about 50 protesters had gathered at the Chatsworth Magistrate's Court. Overall, Mchunu declared Friday's protests successful. Another protest is planned for September 10 outside the NPA's offices in Durban.
On the eve of September 12, when Zuma finds out whether Judge Chris Nicholson has ruled in his favour to have the decision to charge him declared unlawful, protesters will converge on Pietermaritzburg's Freedom Square for a night vigil. Zuma faces charges that include corruption and fraud. He was charged in 2005 but that case was struck from the roll in 2006. He was re-charged in December 2007.
Two Thint companies -- Thint Holding (Southern Africa) Pty Ltd and Thint (Pty) Ltd -- are South African subsidiaries of the French arms manufacturing giant Thales International (formerly Thomson-CFS) and they also face similar charges for allegedly paying him bribes.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
ANCYL takes aim at Scorpions
The “grandiose” media tactics employed by the Scorpions may have influenced the judiciary into believing offences had been committed, the ANC Youth League said on Tuesday.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Source: Mail & Guardian
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Fasting not fighting as Muslims mark Ramadan
Muslims around the world this week begin the fasting and feasting month of Ramadan amid hopes of violence easing in some of the Islamic world's conflict hotspots.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Source: Mail & Guardian
Monday, September 1, 2008
Holomisa asks who is in charge of South Africa
Corruption emerged after the ruling African National Congress invested billions on arms and weaponry, said Bantu Holomisa, leader of the United Democratic Movement (UDM), on Saturday.
Holomisa said it was unclear who was in charge of the country.
"Is it the party in government or their head office outside government?" he asked.
"There have been attacks and manipulation of the Scorpions, the public broadcaster and the judiciary," he said.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Holomisa said it was unclear who was in charge of the country.
"Is it the party in government or their head office outside government?" he asked.
"There have been attacks and manipulation of the Scorpions, the public broadcaster and the judiciary," he said.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Friday, August 29, 2008
M&G Media buys back M&G Online
In a major strike for our independence, M&G Media has bought back the Mail & Guardian Online from MWeb, which has owned a stake since 1995.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Source: Mail & Guardian
A welcome voice of reason
ANC deputy president Kgalema Motlanthe stands at the Motlanthe's moderate centre, and he has the guts and integrity to stand up for what he thinks is right, even if that makes him unpopular. And although he almost certainly has his eye on high government office -- what politician doesn't -- he is not unhinged by ambition.
In this edition we publish an interview with Motlanthe in which he frankly takes on the mindless militancy of the hardliners in his party, particularly its youth wing, and among its communist and trade union allies. He defends the judiciary, pointing out that it has a decisive long-term role to play in our democracy, independently of the personalities who may happen to occupy the Bench. He has consistently claimed that Jacob Zuma is the victim of political persecution, but significantly, has not added his voice to the chorus of demands for the dropping of charges against the ANC president.
Source: Mail & Guardian
In this edition we publish an interview with Motlanthe in which he frankly takes on the mindless militancy of the hardliners in his party, particularly its youth wing, and among its communist and trade union allies. He defends the judiciary, pointing out that it has a decisive long-term role to play in our democracy, independently of the personalities who may happen to occupy the Bench. He has consistently claimed that Jacob Zuma is the victim of political persecution, but significantly, has not added his voice to the chorus of demands for the dropping of charges against the ANC president.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Court slams the incredible Mr Simelane
Justice Department Director General Menzi Simelane received a harsh rebuke from Constitutional Court judges this week for not taking seriously a challenge to the dissolution of the Scorpions by businessman Bob Glenister.
Yacoob started his questioning of government's senior counsel Tshepo Sibeko by asking him why Simelane said nothing in his affidavit about the Bills when he knew "the decision was in the pipeline".
Government must account fully in court papers and look beyond technical positions, Yacoob said.
"Government must respond fully, frankly and openly to affidavits. This is a very serious matter."
Source: Mail & Guardian
Yacoob started his questioning of government's senior counsel Tshepo Sibeko by asking him why Simelane said nothing in his affidavit about the Bills when he knew "the decision was in the pipeline".
Government must account fully in court papers and look beyond technical positions, Yacoob said.
"Government must respond fully, frankly and openly to affidavits. This is a very serious matter."
Source: Mail & Guardian
Friday, August 22, 2008
Key affidavit used to smear Scorpions
As the fate of the Scorpions hangs in the balance, an investigation by the Mail & Guardian has uncovered a key document used to discredit the unit.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Source: Mail & Guardian
Thursday, August 21, 2008
'Cabinet acted unlawfully'?
Businessman Hugh Glenister's lawyer argued hard in the Constitutional Court on Wednesday to stop the legislation that would move the Scorpions to the police.
But, the judges of the court kept expressing concerns over the ramifications of the intervention in the parliamentary processes. "This is a case where initiating the legislation gives rise to the destruction of an institution," argued Glenister's lawyer, David Unterhalter. He submitted that by initiating legislation made on a resolution made by the ruling African National Congress, Cabinet was subordinating the law so that certain ANC national executive committee members could avoid scrutiny.
Unterhalter said the separation of powers was just a doctrine of prudence and there could be cases which justified judicial intervention in parliamentary process.He said the Cabinet had acted unconstitutionally by initiating the legislation and this gave the Constitutional Court the power to intervene.
But the judges remained sceptical. Judge Sandile Ngcobo said: "These considerations should be placed before parliament. Presently there are hearings which are hearing these issues. "And, presently we are sitting as the court looking at these issues. That just can't be right... That just can't be right." Judge Kate O'Regan said it was speculative to argue that the Scorpions would be ineffective until the process was complete. She was also not convinced that staff departures during the legislative process were cataclysmic. She calculated that only about 10% of the Scorpions? staff had left. "I am not sure that is the cataclysmic kind of effect that requires interfering with parliament," she said
Source: News 24
But, the judges of the court kept expressing concerns over the ramifications of the intervention in the parliamentary processes. "This is a case where initiating the legislation gives rise to the destruction of an institution," argued Glenister's lawyer, David Unterhalter. He submitted that by initiating legislation made on a resolution made by the ruling African National Congress, Cabinet was subordinating the law so that certain ANC national executive committee members could avoid scrutiny.
Unterhalter said the separation of powers was just a doctrine of prudence and there could be cases which justified judicial intervention in parliamentary process.He said the Cabinet had acted unconstitutionally by initiating the legislation and this gave the Constitutional Court the power to intervene.
But the judges remained sceptical. Judge Sandile Ngcobo said: "These considerations should be placed before parliament. Presently there are hearings which are hearing these issues. "And, presently we are sitting as the court looking at these issues. That just can't be right... That just can't be right." Judge Kate O'Regan said it was speculative to argue that the Scorpions would be ineffective until the process was complete. She was also not convinced that staff departures during the legislative process were cataclysmic. She calculated that only about 10% of the Scorpions? staff had left. "I am not sure that is the cataclysmic kind of effect that requires interfering with parliament," she said
Source: News 24
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Scorpions battle: Concern over separation of powers
The justices of the Constitutional Court on Wednesday repeatedly expressed concern that they might be usurping the role of Parliament by deciding on the constitutionality of legislation currently under way that is aimed at disbanding the Scorpions.
Source; Mail & Guardian
Source; Mail & Guardian
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Guerrilla chief to head government in Nepal
The leader of the decade-long Maoist rebellion in Nepal was finally elected prime minister on Friday, after four months of political wrangling. His victory sets the stage for the former rebels' toughest challenge: how to uplift the lives of 27 million people in one of the poorest countries in the world, at a time of soaring food and fuel prices.
Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who goes by the nom de guerre Prachanda, or "the fierce one" in Nepali, won more than two-thirds of 577 votes cast in the Constituent Assembly. His election had been expected since April, when the Maoists won a majority in a special assembly elected both to draft a new constitution and to form a government. For four months, however, the nation's oldest party, Nepali Congress, with a long list of grievances against the Maoists, blocked their bid to lead a government of national consensus. The election of the prime minister opens the way to establish a democratically elected government in Nepal. That will be a milestone in resolving the decade-long civil war, a conflict that claimed the lives of an estimated 13,000 people before it ended with a peace accord in 2006.
The Maoists have already achieved their main goal, the ending of 239 years of Hindu monarchy. At its first session, in May, a constituent assembly declared Nepal a federal republic. The former king, Gyanendra, the world's last Hindu monarch, was forced to vacate the main palace here and live as a commoner. On Friday, Prachanda, 54, won with the support of three of four biggest parties in the 601-member assembly. Nepali Congress still refused to support his Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), accusing its youth force of brutality. It also objected that the Maoists had not returned private property seized from political opponents during the war.
Prachanda defeated Sher Bahadur Deuba, a three-time former prime minister from Nepali Congress. A senior Maoist leader, Baburam Bhattarai, said Friday that political leaders of the party would no longer hold positions in its armed wing, the People's Liberation Army. He also pledged that the party would return seized property to its owners. Since shedding his fatigues and transforming himself into a politician, Prachanda has sought to cast his organization as a political party that merits the trust of the Nepalese people and foreign donors. As they form a government, the Maoists face their biggest challenge ever. Fuel is in short supply in the cities and hunger looms in the countryside. They will also press to integrate their former fighters into the Nepal army, a demand that the army will likely resist vigorously.
The Maoists remain on the U.S. list of banned terrorist organizations, although U.S. officials, apparently pragmatic, have established contact with their political leaders, including Prachanda.
Source: New York Times
Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who goes by the nom de guerre Prachanda, or "the fierce one" in Nepali, won more than two-thirds of 577 votes cast in the Constituent Assembly. His election had been expected since April, when the Maoists won a majority in a special assembly elected both to draft a new constitution and to form a government. For four months, however, the nation's oldest party, Nepali Congress, with a long list of grievances against the Maoists, blocked their bid to lead a government of national consensus. The election of the prime minister opens the way to establish a democratically elected government in Nepal. That will be a milestone in resolving the decade-long civil war, a conflict that claimed the lives of an estimated 13,000 people before it ended with a peace accord in 2006.
The Maoists have already achieved their main goal, the ending of 239 years of Hindu monarchy. At its first session, in May, a constituent assembly declared Nepal a federal republic. The former king, Gyanendra, the world's last Hindu monarch, was forced to vacate the main palace here and live as a commoner. On Friday, Prachanda, 54, won with the support of three of four biggest parties in the 601-member assembly. Nepali Congress still refused to support his Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), accusing its youth force of brutality. It also objected that the Maoists had not returned private property seized from political opponents during the war.
Prachanda defeated Sher Bahadur Deuba, a three-time former prime minister from Nepali Congress. A senior Maoist leader, Baburam Bhattarai, said Friday that political leaders of the party would no longer hold positions in its armed wing, the People's Liberation Army. He also pledged that the party would return seized property to its owners. Since shedding his fatigues and transforming himself into a politician, Prachanda has sought to cast his organization as a political party that merits the trust of the Nepalese people and foreign donors. As they form a government, the Maoists face their biggest challenge ever. Fuel is in short supply in the cities and hunger looms in the countryside. They will also press to integrate their former fighters into the Nepal army, a demand that the army will likely resist vigorously.
The Maoists remain on the U.S. list of banned terrorist organizations, although U.S. officials, apparently pragmatic, have established contact with their political leaders, including Prachanda.
Source: New York Times
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Scorpions controlled by CIA, MI5 - Kikine
British intelligence organisation MI5 and the United States' Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) are the masters of South Africa's elite crime fighting unit, the Scorpions, a public hearing into their dissolution heard in Durban on Tuesday.
Sam Kikine, the head of the International Traditional and Medicine Research Council, accused these two organisations of controlling the Scorpions. "Why have the Scorpions not investigated [chemical warfare expert]Wouter Basson and the CIA who have created this Aids? The Scorpions are working for MI5 and the CIA and not for South Africa," he told the hearing at the Umlazi Indoor Sports Complex. Kikine claimed that the Scorpions were loaded with apartheid era "special branch" operatives, who had also been responsible for the death of activist and lawyer Griffiths Mxenge, who was assassinated in 1981. Kikine said the council was supporting the proposed legislation to replace the Directorate of Special Operations, known as the Scorpions, with a new division within the South African Police Service, known as the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation.
The hearings earlier kicked off amid singing and toyi-toying amid a heavy police presence. A crowd of about 80 Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) supporters had gathered outside the building before entering the complex singing. Many in the crowd wore shirts bearing logos of Cosatu's various member unions, while some wore shirts in support of African National Congress president Jacob Zuma. At one stage the crowd broke into Zuma's trademark "awulethu' mshini wami" song, taunting local Democratic Alliance supporters who had also turned up for the hearing. South African Communist Party (SACP) provincial secretary Themba Mthembu called for the inclusion of the Scorpions into the South African Police, because "integration would streamline and strengthen capacity in the fight against crime".
He said the SACP agreed with most of the findings of the Khampepe Commission, with the exception of keeping the unit separate from the police. The Democratic Alliance's KwaZulu-Natal safety and security spokesman Radley Keyes called for the retention of the unit, saying that it had achieved much. He said that one hearing in the province was insufficient and questioned whether the parliamentarians would take heed of the representations.
Keyes pointed to "the futility" of public representations of Matatiele where, despite residents' overwhelming support to remain in the province, the government had nevertheless supported the municipality's inclusion in the Eastern Cape. African Christian Democratic Party representative Cyril George described the Scorpions as "the sunlight that exposed crime". The South African Democratic Teachers Union secretary general Sipho "KK" Nkosi claimed that the Scorpions had been created by a political decision. "Disbanding it requires a political decision. The Scorpions chose some prime cases because they were serving the interests of their own political masters," he said. He criticised the Scorpions for highlighting their successes in the media. "Where they have not succeeded they have been mum to the media," he said.
Parliament's portfolio committees on justice and constitutional development, and safety and security were holding the hearings, which started on Monday and were expected to finish on Friday. Members of the public have until August 20 to hand in their written submissions against the disbanding.
Source: Polity
Sam Kikine, the head of the International Traditional and Medicine Research Council, accused these two organisations of controlling the Scorpions. "Why have the Scorpions not investigated [chemical warfare expert]Wouter Basson and the CIA who have created this Aids? The Scorpions are working for MI5 and the CIA and not for South Africa," he told the hearing at the Umlazi Indoor Sports Complex. Kikine claimed that the Scorpions were loaded with apartheid era "special branch" operatives, who had also been responsible for the death of activist and lawyer Griffiths Mxenge, who was assassinated in 1981. Kikine said the council was supporting the proposed legislation to replace the Directorate of Special Operations, known as the Scorpions, with a new division within the South African Police Service, known as the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation.
The hearings earlier kicked off amid singing and toyi-toying amid a heavy police presence. A crowd of about 80 Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) supporters had gathered outside the building before entering the complex singing. Many in the crowd wore shirts bearing logos of Cosatu's various member unions, while some wore shirts in support of African National Congress president Jacob Zuma. At one stage the crowd broke into Zuma's trademark "awulethu' mshini wami" song, taunting local Democratic Alliance supporters who had also turned up for the hearing. South African Communist Party (SACP) provincial secretary Themba Mthembu called for the inclusion of the Scorpions into the South African Police, because "integration would streamline and strengthen capacity in the fight against crime".
He said the SACP agreed with most of the findings of the Khampepe Commission, with the exception of keeping the unit separate from the police. The Democratic Alliance's KwaZulu-Natal safety and security spokesman Radley Keyes called for the retention of the unit, saying that it had achieved much. He said that one hearing in the province was insufficient and questioned whether the parliamentarians would take heed of the representations.
Keyes pointed to "the futility" of public representations of Matatiele where, despite residents' overwhelming support to remain in the province, the government had nevertheless supported the municipality's inclusion in the Eastern Cape. African Christian Democratic Party representative Cyril George described the Scorpions as "the sunlight that exposed crime". The South African Democratic Teachers Union secretary general Sipho "KK" Nkosi claimed that the Scorpions had been created by a political decision. "Disbanding it requires a political decision. The Scorpions chose some prime cases because they were serving the interests of their own political masters," he said. He criticised the Scorpions for highlighting their successes in the media. "Where they have not succeeded they have been mum to the media," he said.
Parliament's portfolio committees on justice and constitutional development, and safety and security were holding the hearings, which started on Monday and were expected to finish on Friday. Members of the public have until August 20 to hand in their written submissions against the disbanding.
Source: Polity
Govt eyes improved criminal justice system
The flaws in South Africa's criminal justice system need to be fixed "yesterday", Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development Johnny de Lange said on Wednesday. "We need to do this in the shortest possible time. In fact, yesterday," he told reporters in Pretoria.
De Lange said such a review will reward the country with swift, equitable and fair justice in criminal matters. A key shortcoming at the moment is that the system is being managed by different departments what have no authority over each other. "Police, driven by targets, send dockets to court; prosecutors, also driven by targets, bargain with the perpetrators when they see that the case will take them longer," he said. This is counter-productive and no one, including opposition parties, has picked it up. In the reviewed system a top detective and a prosecutor will work together to screen dockets to ensure that only trial-ready dockets are put on court rolls.
In November last year, Cabinet approved a target of seven fundamental changes aimed at achieving a dynamic and coordinated criminal justice system. The seven-point plan envisages a criminal justice system with a single set of objectives, priorities and performance measurement targets. He said the new process will ensure that courts are focused on trials, rather than administrative functions. "The outcome of these changes will be a reduction of case cycle and the number of hearings per case," he said.
A major change will be that witnesses will only be subpoenaed to appear in court once a trial has started. In the current system they have to be in court even though the case is not ready for trial. He said a number of initiatives have been identified and some of these are being tested in pilot sites or are awaiting infrastructure before they can be fully implemented. "The outcome of these will be seen over a period of time," he said.
De Lange pointed out that the review of the criminal justice system started before the discussion on the future of the Scorpions. "The Scorpion issue is a parliamentary matter, which I can not comment on," he said.
De Lange said such a review will reward the country with swift, equitable and fair justice in criminal matters. A key shortcoming at the moment is that the system is being managed by different departments what have no authority over each other. "Police, driven by targets, send dockets to court; prosecutors, also driven by targets, bargain with the perpetrators when they see that the case will take them longer," he said. This is counter-productive and no one, including opposition parties, has picked it up. In the reviewed system a top detective and a prosecutor will work together to screen dockets to ensure that only trial-ready dockets are put on court rolls.
In November last year, Cabinet approved a target of seven fundamental changes aimed at achieving a dynamic and coordinated criminal justice system. The seven-point plan envisages a criminal justice system with a single set of objectives, priorities and performance measurement targets. He said the new process will ensure that courts are focused on trials, rather than administrative functions. "The outcome of these changes will be a reduction of case cycle and the number of hearings per case," he said.
A major change will be that witnesses will only be subpoenaed to appear in court once a trial has started. In the current system they have to be in court even though the case is not ready for trial. He said a number of initiatives have been identified and some of these are being tested in pilot sites or are awaiting infrastructure before they can be fully implemented. "The outcome of these will be seen over a period of time," he said.
De Lange pointed out that the review of the criminal justice system started before the discussion on the future of the Scorpions. "The Scorpion issue is a parliamentary matter, which I can not comment on," he said.
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Irene Grootboom dies homeless and penniless
Irene Grootboom was the woman whose name became known around the world for enforcing the state's obligation to respect socio-economic rights, especially of the homeless.
Yet, when she died this week in her forties, she was still homeless and penniless.
Eight years ago the Constitutional Court ruled in Grootboom's favour, saying that she and others living in an informal settlement on Wallacedene sports ground near Kraaifontein could not be evicted without being given alternative accommodation.
Crucially, the court found that the primary failure by the state was the inadequate housing programme, which didn't make sufficient provision for people in urgent need.
"She was a true hero, a genuine leader of her people, a hero of the working class, a symbol of hope to the poor, homeless and marginalised. Her courage and commitment to the creation of a society in which all enjoy a better life will be sorely missed," Skwatsha said.
Source: Mail and Guardian
Yet, when she died this week in her forties, she was still homeless and penniless.
Eight years ago the Constitutional Court ruled in Grootboom's favour, saying that she and others living in an informal settlement on Wallacedene sports ground near Kraaifontein could not be evicted without being given alternative accommodation.
Crucially, the court found that the primary failure by the state was the inadequate housing programme, which didn't make sufficient provision for people in urgent need.
"She was a true hero, a genuine leader of her people, a hero of the working class, a symbol of hope to the poor, homeless and marginalised. Her courage and commitment to the creation of a society in which all enjoy a better life will be sorely missed," Skwatsha said.
Source: Mail and Guardian
Thursday, August 7, 2008
President detained in Mauritania coup
Troops overthrew Mauritania's president in a military coup on Wednesday after he tried to sack senior army officers accused of being behind a political crisis destabilising the country. President Sidi Ould Cheikh Abdallahi was arrested as troops rolled through the capital Nouakchott and took over the presidential palace and the prime minister's office. They chased staff from the headquarters of state radio and television, though there was no sign of fighting in the city. A statement read on public radio said the coup was led by the head of the presidential guard, General Ould Abdel Aziz, who had been sacked earlier in the morning.The coup leaders formed a Military State Council and immediately annulled the army appointments made by the president, according to an information ministry statement broadcast on the radio. "The president has just been arrested by a commando, who came to fetch him, arrested him here and took him away," the president's daughter, Amal Mint Cheikh Abdallahi, told Radio France International from the presidential palace in Nouakchott. "This is a real coup d'etat," she said.
Abdallahi said armed men had occupied the presidency and that she was being prevented from leaving the building, but that she had not heard shots fired. The president's whereabouts were unknown, while Prime Minister Yahya Ould Ahmed Waghf was taken to an army barracks near the presidency, security sources said. A spokesman for the ousted president told AFP that the coup was in response to a presidential decree several high ranking army leaders including General Abdel Aziz. The president "issued a decree naming several new officers as the head of the presidential guard, the head of the armed forces and the head of the national guard. "These officers, three generals, refused to accept the presidential decree and are rebelling against the constitutional order," the spokesman Abdoulaye Mahmadou Ba said.
The capital of the nation of 3.1 million people was reported to be calm, with little evidence of the turmoil, witnesses said. The coup came less than six months after Abdallahi came to power in elections hailed as a model of democracy for Africa, following a three-year transition after a bloodless coup in August 2005.
Mauritania has been facing a political crisis and on Monday 48 MPs walked out on the ruling party less than two weeks after a vote of no confidence in the government prompted a cabinet reshuffle. Renegade lawmakers criticised Abdallahi's exercise of "personal power", adding that he had "disappointed the hopes of Mauritanians," a spokesman for the group said on Monday. A decree read out on national radio early Wednesday replaced General Ould Cheikh Mohamed Ahmed as chief of the army, as well as sacking Abdel Aziz as head of the presidential guard. Both generals were members of the transition council which ushered in the elections which Abdallahi won in 2007. Political observers in Nouakchott said the two generals were accused of being behind the mass walkout of ruling party MPs on Monday. The breakaway MPs said they will form a new party to seek a change of direction in the country, which imports more than 70 percent of its food and has been hard hit by the global food crisis.The Mauritanian president last month threatened to dissolve parliament after MPs filed a motion of no confidence in his new government, which then resigned. A spokesman for the MPs who walked out said the president was "reaping the fruits of his bad decisions". "By his decision to oust the generals he attacked the army head on, who reacted by deposing him" deputy Sidi Mohamed Ould Maham told AFP. The largely desertified country has a history of coups since its independence from France in 1960.
Mauritania was shaken between December 2007 and February 2008 by three attacks by extremists linked to Al-Qaeda which left seven people dead including four French tourists. The attacks caused the organisers of the 2008 Dakar rally to cancel the race, which usually crosses the Mauritanian deserts.
Source: AFP
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Molewa: Poor struggle to access benefits
Weaknesses in the social security system have resulted in many children continuing to live in dire poverty, Social Development Minister Edna Molewa said on Thursday. Releasing a review of orphans' benefits in Pretoria, Molewa said the problem had become even more serious because of the recession. "The report has found that many children and families struggle to access pension funds to which they are legally entitled to, resulting in many continuing to live in poverty."
The study highlighted that communication between funds and beneficiaries had been poor, resulting in claimants failing to access their funds after the death of parents. Some claimants or their new caregivers were often not even aware that a parent had funds available for them.
Failure to investigate claims also caused frustration and lack of understanding. Hidden costs, inappropriate management, payments to foreign workers and payments to minors were also major obstacles. "It is a national disgrace that today there are hundreds of millions of rands still lying unclaimed in funds while intended beneficiaries live in dire poverty," said Molewa. She said the experience had shown that the current system was unsustainable and should not be allowed to continue.
The study showed where particular emphasis needed to be placed and where certain laws were left wanting. "We can be able to look at the laws and go to Parliament if need be." For the purpose of the study three statutory social insurance schemes and eight major pension funds were selected. This was augmented by individual case studies of claimants.
Source: Mail & Guardian
The study highlighted that communication between funds and beneficiaries had been poor, resulting in claimants failing to access their funds after the death of parents. Some claimants or their new caregivers were often not even aware that a parent had funds available for them.
Failure to investigate claims also caused frustration and lack of understanding. Hidden costs, inappropriate management, payments to foreign workers and payments to minors were also major obstacles. "It is a national disgrace that today there are hundreds of millions of rands still lying unclaimed in funds while intended beneficiaries live in dire poverty," said Molewa. She said the experience had shown that the current system was unsustainable and should not be allowed to continue.
The study showed where particular emphasis needed to be placed and where certain laws were left wanting. "We can be able to look at the laws and go to Parliament if need be." For the purpose of the study three statutory social insurance schemes and eight major pension funds were selected. This was augmented by individual case studies of claimants.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Why is Zuma's trial 'political'?
The claim that criminal prosecutions involving ANC president Jacob Zuma amount to political trials is nothing new.
Monday, August 4, 2008
The questionable company Jacob Zuma keeps
We are currently witnessing a series of reckless assaults on the Constitution, the independence of the judiciary, and the basic rule of law by members of the tripartite alliance leadership - namely, ANC Secretary-General, Gwede Mantashe, his COSATU counterpart, Zwelinzima Vavi, and ANCYL president, Julius Malema - in their frenzied rush to pledge allegiance to corruption-accused ANC president, Jacob Zuma.
Many have rightly questioned Zuma's silence on the matter; why, they ask, does he not publicly repudiate these remarks? If, according to the old adage, a man may be known by the company he keeps, then Zuma's refusal to censure Mantashe, Vavi, and Malema's remarks is an indication not only of the lengths to which his loyalty towards his political benefactors will drive him, but - coupled with his infamous declaration that he believes the ANC is more important than the Constitution - also indicates that he is in complete agreement with their sentiments.
As a would-be head of state, Jacob Zuma should be eager to represent all that is best about South Africa; he should surround himself with people who are committed to seeing this country succeed. As an aspirant leader of the executive and principal driver of policy, he should demonstrate impeccable judgement, which should manifest itself in the calibre of the friends and backers with whom he associates.
Yet an alarming number of Zuma's political benefactors are dubious to say the least, and, for the coterie of a presidential hopeful, point to a problematic trend towards the questionable in the company that Jacob Zuma keeps. The more vociferous of Zuma's friends are well known; but there remains a relatively unknown set of people amongst the ANC president's associates, who may arguably hold more sway in his political decision-making - particularly because of the material debt which he owes them for helping to facilitate his path to high office.
Jacob Zuma's benefactors - like those of most politicians - fall into two neat categories: the first comprises local and international businesspeople who have provided him with crucial financial support, chiefly through the Friends of Jacob Zuma Trust. His so-called "investment facilitator", Don Mkhwanazi, for example, is chairperson of the Trust, and a key driver in the process of selling the business community on Zuma. Their friendship dates back to Zuma's return from exile, when he stayed at Mkhwanazi's home in Umlazi.
As Zuma's apparent point-man in amassing financial favours from businesspeople (such as the fraud trial-implicated Vivian Reddy, who allegedly acted as Schaik's middle-man by delivering bribes to Zuma through the Development Africa Trust; and South African-born but London-based entrepreneur, Paul Ekon, who left the country in the mid-1990s under a cloud of speculation about his alleged involvement in the smuggling of a R4.8 million consignment of unwrought gold, and who facilitated Zuma's recent trip to the UK to meet with investors and company executives), Mkhwanazi arranges meetings between Zuma and potential donors, and fundraises for him. Almost every cent that is donated to Zuma reportedly passes through his hands.
Mkhwanazi is himself no stranger to scandal; he resigned from the Central Energy Fund when a commission of inquiry revealed that he had appointed corrupt Liberian businessman Emmanuel Shaw, who was on the UN Security Council Travel Ban List, as a consultant, without following the correct employment procedures. The enquiry also exposed the fact that Mkwanazi had failed to disclose his friendship with Shaw when the appointment was made.
The Schabir Schaik fraud trial exposed the chaotic state of Zuma's personal finances, hence the need for large amounts of money to help finance his lifestyle. It is unlikely, given Zuma's political ambitions, that his financial backers have chosen to fund this lifestyle charitably - a theory which was also rejected by Judge Hilary Squires during the trial.
If, as compensation for their generosity, Jacob Zuma's financial backers are able to exert even a small amount of influence on a Zuma-led administration, his possible presidency could well set in motion South Africa's descent into what Robert Guest calls the "vampire state".
The second group in Zuma's coterie are the kingmakers, who have rallied behind Zuma ever since his dismissal from the cabinet by President Mbeki. They are one of the major factors behind his ascent to the ANC presidency; they have stood by Zuma's side throughout both his rape and corruption trials, and mobilised supporters to fill the courtrooms every time he made a trial appearance. Several members of this group however, have questionable public records which suggest that they may be prepared to hijack state processes to further their own aims - be they financial or political:
KZN Transport MEC Bheki Cele, for example, is likely to be a key member of Zuma's inner circle in government. He is widely regarded as driving the campaign to have Zuma's pending corruption trial scrapped and all the charges dropped. In April 2007, Cele was named alongside Nathi Mthethwa, and brothers, John Mchunu - the ANC's eThekwini Regional Secretary, and Senzo Mchunu - ANC KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Secretary, as part of the group behind a campaign to make KwaZulu-Natal a no-go zone for Thabo Mbeki.
The same group is alleged to have lobbied the crowd to boo President Mbeki in front of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at a government event to celebrate the reburial of ANC struggle icon Moses Mabhida in KwaZulu-Natal in 2006. Together with the Mchunu brothers and Zet Luzipho, the secretary-general of COSATU in KwaZulu-Natal, Cele also organised the chaotic demonstrations by Jacob Zuma's supporters outside the courts whenever he appeared for trial. Their failure to repudiate the irresponsible behaviour of Zuma's supporters during these demonstrations suggests a readiness to tolerate such behaviour in order to further their political interests, which is unsettling at best. Who can forget the chanting of the slogan "burn the bitch" outside the courts during Zuma's rape trial?
Powerful politicians will always be surrounded by those who seek to capitalise on their influence for their own ends; indeed, this is part and parcel of politics. Jacob Zuma, however, appears to be amassing favour from a range of supporters who have made careers out of, or developed reputations for involvement in alleged corrupt activities, a willingness to skirt the edges of the law, and an alarming readiness to threaten violence. The implications of these favours being called in under a Zuma presidency are potentially dire. We could see the emergence of a state driven by special interests, with little respect for the due processes of democratic governance or public accountability; and one in which the rule of law is rapidly supplanted by the rule of force. Zuma's backers could also demand special treatment in the allocation of government business, in terms of tenders and contracts. This would have serious implications for service delivery, as priorities other than the meeting of performance criteria begin to dominate the processes for conducting state business.
In the DA's vision of an Open Opportunity Society for ALL, there is no space for back-room deals and political quid pro quo, because transparency and accountability are keystones of such a society. Every government transaction would be subject to public scrutiny, and there would be no escaping the consequences for anyone guilty of manipulating the process in favour of themselves or their connections.
The upshot: first, leaders chosen purely on the basis of their ability to lead and not on the basis of what they might be able to do for the well-connected; and, second, service providers and suppliers would be chosen purely on the basis of their merits, and not on the basis of who they know. This opens up opportunities for a much broader group to compete for state contracts, and taxpayers and citizens benefit from better service and a more efficient state.
Source: Politicsweb
Many have rightly questioned Zuma's silence on the matter; why, they ask, does he not publicly repudiate these remarks? If, according to the old adage, a man may be known by the company he keeps, then Zuma's refusal to censure Mantashe, Vavi, and Malema's remarks is an indication not only of the lengths to which his loyalty towards his political benefactors will drive him, but - coupled with his infamous declaration that he believes the ANC is more important than the Constitution - also indicates that he is in complete agreement with their sentiments.
As a would-be head of state, Jacob Zuma should be eager to represent all that is best about South Africa; he should surround himself with people who are committed to seeing this country succeed. As an aspirant leader of the executive and principal driver of policy, he should demonstrate impeccable judgement, which should manifest itself in the calibre of the friends and backers with whom he associates.
Yet an alarming number of Zuma's political benefactors are dubious to say the least, and, for the coterie of a presidential hopeful, point to a problematic trend towards the questionable in the company that Jacob Zuma keeps. The more vociferous of Zuma's friends are well known; but there remains a relatively unknown set of people amongst the ANC president's associates, who may arguably hold more sway in his political decision-making - particularly because of the material debt which he owes them for helping to facilitate his path to high office.
Jacob Zuma's benefactors - like those of most politicians - fall into two neat categories: the first comprises local and international businesspeople who have provided him with crucial financial support, chiefly through the Friends of Jacob Zuma Trust. His so-called "investment facilitator", Don Mkhwanazi, for example, is chairperson of the Trust, and a key driver in the process of selling the business community on Zuma. Their friendship dates back to Zuma's return from exile, when he stayed at Mkhwanazi's home in Umlazi.
As Zuma's apparent point-man in amassing financial favours from businesspeople (such as the fraud trial-implicated Vivian Reddy, who allegedly acted as Schaik's middle-man by delivering bribes to Zuma through the Development Africa Trust; and South African-born but London-based entrepreneur, Paul Ekon, who left the country in the mid-1990s under a cloud of speculation about his alleged involvement in the smuggling of a R4.8 million consignment of unwrought gold, and who facilitated Zuma's recent trip to the UK to meet with investors and company executives), Mkhwanazi arranges meetings between Zuma and potential donors, and fundraises for him. Almost every cent that is donated to Zuma reportedly passes through his hands.
Mkhwanazi is himself no stranger to scandal; he resigned from the Central Energy Fund when a commission of inquiry revealed that he had appointed corrupt Liberian businessman Emmanuel Shaw, who was on the UN Security Council Travel Ban List, as a consultant, without following the correct employment procedures. The enquiry also exposed the fact that Mkwanazi had failed to disclose his friendship with Shaw when the appointment was made.
The Schabir Schaik fraud trial exposed the chaotic state of Zuma's personal finances, hence the need for large amounts of money to help finance his lifestyle. It is unlikely, given Zuma's political ambitions, that his financial backers have chosen to fund this lifestyle charitably - a theory which was also rejected by Judge Hilary Squires during the trial.
If, as compensation for their generosity, Jacob Zuma's financial backers are able to exert even a small amount of influence on a Zuma-led administration, his possible presidency could well set in motion South Africa's descent into what Robert Guest calls the "vampire state".
The second group in Zuma's coterie are the kingmakers, who have rallied behind Zuma ever since his dismissal from the cabinet by President Mbeki. They are one of the major factors behind his ascent to the ANC presidency; they have stood by Zuma's side throughout both his rape and corruption trials, and mobilised supporters to fill the courtrooms every time he made a trial appearance. Several members of this group however, have questionable public records which suggest that they may be prepared to hijack state processes to further their own aims - be they financial or political:
KZN Transport MEC Bheki Cele, for example, is likely to be a key member of Zuma's inner circle in government. He is widely regarded as driving the campaign to have Zuma's pending corruption trial scrapped and all the charges dropped. In April 2007, Cele was named alongside Nathi Mthethwa, and brothers, John Mchunu - the ANC's eThekwini Regional Secretary, and Senzo Mchunu - ANC KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Secretary, as part of the group behind a campaign to make KwaZulu-Natal a no-go zone for Thabo Mbeki.
The same group is alleged to have lobbied the crowd to boo President Mbeki in front of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at a government event to celebrate the reburial of ANC struggle icon Moses Mabhida in KwaZulu-Natal in 2006. Together with the Mchunu brothers and Zet Luzipho, the secretary-general of COSATU in KwaZulu-Natal, Cele also organised the chaotic demonstrations by Jacob Zuma's supporters outside the courts whenever he appeared for trial. Their failure to repudiate the irresponsible behaviour of Zuma's supporters during these demonstrations suggests a readiness to tolerate such behaviour in order to further their political interests, which is unsettling at best. Who can forget the chanting of the slogan "burn the bitch" outside the courts during Zuma's rape trial?
Powerful politicians will always be surrounded by those who seek to capitalise on their influence for their own ends; indeed, this is part and parcel of politics. Jacob Zuma, however, appears to be amassing favour from a range of supporters who have made careers out of, or developed reputations for involvement in alleged corrupt activities, a willingness to skirt the edges of the law, and an alarming readiness to threaten violence. The implications of these favours being called in under a Zuma presidency are potentially dire. We could see the emergence of a state driven by special interests, with little respect for the due processes of democratic governance or public accountability; and one in which the rule of law is rapidly supplanted by the rule of force. Zuma's backers could also demand special treatment in the allocation of government business, in terms of tenders and contracts. This would have serious implications for service delivery, as priorities other than the meeting of performance criteria begin to dominate the processes for conducting state business.
In the DA's vision of an Open Opportunity Society for ALL, there is no space for back-room deals and political quid pro quo, because transparency and accountability are keystones of such a society. Every government transaction would be subject to public scrutiny, and there would be no escaping the consequences for anyone guilty of manipulating the process in favour of themselves or their connections.
The upshot: first, leaders chosen purely on the basis of their ability to lead and not on the basis of what they might be able to do for the well-connected; and, second, service providers and suppliers would be chosen purely on the basis of their merits, and not on the basis of who they know. This opens up opportunities for a much broader group to compete for state contracts, and taxpayers and citizens benefit from better service and a more efficient state.
Source: Politicsweb
Attempts to control media mount - Sanef
There are increasing attempts to control media via legislation, said Durban-based journalist Mary Papayya, who was recently re-elected secretary-general of the South African National Editors Forum (Sanef). Papayya, who will serve her third term in the position at Sanef, said the press needed to be more wary about developments such as the media tribunal. "We need to be wary of how political control encroaches on reporting," she said.
Papayya said if there was to be control, the first thing to come under pressure would be the press. "We are worried about political pressure by any party," she said. Here she referred to the media appeals tribunal touted by the government.
The tribunal has been proposed by the ANC, under which print media would be held accountable to parliament. Media institutions said the tribunal threatened the right to press freedom as well as the individual's rights to free expression. "The tribunal is not necessary, as we have an appeals panel and are self regulated. It threatens press freedom and contradicts the Constitution," she said. Papayya said Sanef had noted with concern the arrests of journalists and photographers, but attributed this to "lack of knowledge" by police.
In February, Durban journalist Mhlaba Memela, of the Sowetan newspaper, was arrested by a Metro police officer while taking pictures at an accident scene. Although his case was later dropped, Memela was charged with failing to comply with police instructions, resisting arrest and inciting a crowd.
In September last year, Daily News photographer Puri Devjee, who was at a crime scene, was arrested by a police officer from the collision unit. Devjee was handcuffed and taken to Berea Police Station, but later released on a warning. "Journalists have been unlawfully arrested and Sanef has called for a meeting with the SAPS as a joint initiative to resolve the problems," Papayya said. "We have the systems in place and it just needs to be made use of, because if there are contraventions there will be dire consequences," she said.
Papayya is a former editor, news editor, executive producer and bureau chief. Since 1987, she has worked across a range of media and is also a news trainer and consultant. She is the longest serving secretary-general in Sanef to date. She has served on the Sanef council since its inception in 1996.
Source: IoL
Papayya said if there was to be control, the first thing to come under pressure would be the press. "We are worried about political pressure by any party," she said. Here she referred to the media appeals tribunal touted by the government.
The tribunal has been proposed by the ANC, under which print media would be held accountable to parliament. Media institutions said the tribunal threatened the right to press freedom as well as the individual's rights to free expression. "The tribunal is not necessary, as we have an appeals panel and are self regulated. It threatens press freedom and contradicts the Constitution," she said. Papayya said Sanef had noted with concern the arrests of journalists and photographers, but attributed this to "lack of knowledge" by police.
In February, Durban journalist Mhlaba Memela, of the Sowetan newspaper, was arrested by a Metro police officer while taking pictures at an accident scene. Although his case was later dropped, Memela was charged with failing to comply with police instructions, resisting arrest and inciting a crowd.
In September last year, Daily News photographer Puri Devjee, who was at a crime scene, was arrested by a police officer from the collision unit. Devjee was handcuffed and taken to Berea Police Station, but later released on a warning. "Journalists have been unlawfully arrested and Sanef has called for a meeting with the SAPS as a joint initiative to resolve the problems," Papayya said. "We have the systems in place and it just needs to be made use of, because if there are contraventions there will be dire consequences," she said.
Papayya is a former editor, news editor, executive producer and bureau chief. Since 1987, she has worked across a range of media and is also a news trainer and consultant. She is the longest serving secretary-general in Sanef to date. She has served on the Sanef council since its inception in 1996.
Source: IoL
Friday, August 1, 2008
Mabandla instruction 'unlawful'
Justice Minister Brigitte Mabandla's order that prosecutions boss Vusi Pikoli not proceed with the prosecution of National Police Commissioner Jackie Selebi so that she can get more information on the matter was a criminal instruction, Pikoli's lawyer Wim Trengove said on Friday.
"That is an unexplained event. It is unconstitutional and unlawful. It is in fact a criminal instruction in terms of the NPA (National Prosecuting Authority) Act," said Trengove.
In the closing argument of the hearing into Pikoli's fitness to hold office, Trengove said there had never been a complaint against Pikoli since he took office in early 2005.
Trengove said that after Pikoli informed President Thabo Mbeki that he had secured a search and arrest warrant against Selebi, the two parted without any discord, except they had not agreed on when Pikoli would execute the warrant.
Mbeki then wrote to Mabandla asking for further details of the plans to arrest and prosecute so that he could create an enabling national security environment, given Selebi's position.
Mabandla asked for all the evidence against Selebi over the last 18 months and told Pikoli not to proceed with the prosecution of Selebi, he said, recapping on information presented at the inquiry. Pikoli wrote back to her saying this would be in breach of the NPA Act and, argued Trengove, this is when a "rupture" occurred.
In a subsequent letter to Pikoli, she did not clarify or retract any of those requests, said Trengove. "We simply don't know how this came about because the minister has never explained it to us, only she can," he said. "What we do know is that this was the beginning of the end."
Trengove said it was clear from the timeline of events that the Selebi investigation was why Pikoli was suspended. He said the government then went on to put out a "false" statement on Pikoli's suspension, saying it was due to an irretrievable breakdown in their relationship.
On his suspension, Pikoli told Mabandla this it was not true that there was no trust between them and she did not contradict him, Trengove submitted. Firing Pikoli would create "a great injustice and incalculable damage," he argued.
The complaint that he did not consider national security by disagreeing about the two weeks Mbeki needed before the planned Selebi action was mentioned for the first time at the start of hearing, he said. He submitted that the charges were unfounded and said the only person who could clarify matters and prove that there was a case was Mabandla. "Where is she?" he asked.
Source: News 24.com
"That is an unexplained event. It is unconstitutional and unlawful. It is in fact a criminal instruction in terms of the NPA (National Prosecuting Authority) Act," said Trengove.
In the closing argument of the hearing into Pikoli's fitness to hold office, Trengove said there had never been a complaint against Pikoli since he took office in early 2005.
Trengove said that after Pikoli informed President Thabo Mbeki that he had secured a search and arrest warrant against Selebi, the two parted without any discord, except they had not agreed on when Pikoli would execute the warrant.
Mbeki then wrote to Mabandla asking for further details of the plans to arrest and prosecute so that he could create an enabling national security environment, given Selebi's position.
Mabandla asked for all the evidence against Selebi over the last 18 months and told Pikoli not to proceed with the prosecution of Selebi, he said, recapping on information presented at the inquiry. Pikoli wrote back to her saying this would be in breach of the NPA Act and, argued Trengove, this is when a "rupture" occurred.
In a subsequent letter to Pikoli, she did not clarify or retract any of those requests, said Trengove. "We simply don't know how this came about because the minister has never explained it to us, only she can," he said. "What we do know is that this was the beginning of the end."
Trengove said it was clear from the timeline of events that the Selebi investigation was why Pikoli was suspended. He said the government then went on to put out a "false" statement on Pikoli's suspension, saying it was due to an irretrievable breakdown in their relationship.
On his suspension, Pikoli told Mabandla this it was not true that there was no trust between them and she did not contradict him, Trengove submitted. Firing Pikoli would create "a great injustice and incalculable damage," he argued.
The complaint that he did not consider national security by disagreeing about the two weeks Mbeki needed before the planned Selebi action was mentioned for the first time at the start of hearing, he said. He submitted that the charges were unfounded and said the only person who could clarify matters and prove that there was a case was Mabandla. "Where is she?" he asked.
Source: News 24.com
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Erosion Of Public Trust In Leaders Set To Undermine 2009 Elections In South Afric
As South Africa prepares for its fourth national and provincial elections in 2009 it is vital that leaders embrace the ‘politics of principle’ that underpin South Africa’s constitutional democracy. Without clear commitments by the new ANC leadership towards ethical conduct in public office, levels of trust in politicians are likely to decrease, further alienating voters.
Source: Institute for Security Studies
Source: Institute for Security Studies
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Families out in the cold after farm eviction
Barely two metres from the busy R512 road leading to Lanseria Airport and Hartbeespoort dam, eight families have braved the inclement weather after they were evicted from the farm on which some had lived for more than 60 years.
The group ranges from the elderly to small children.
On Sunday night when the Pretoria News visited the evictees,65-year-old Priscilla Masilo and Jeremiah Mokoena, 73, sat on plastic chairs with the others, huddled around a fire to keep warm.
Scattered around them were their only belongings - blankets, mattresses and a few pots and pans. They remembered the many years they worked on the nearby Botesdal from early morning until late. Masilo was born on the farm in 1943. Her father worked there until he died in 1954 and Masilo and her grand-daughter had lived in a house their father built shortly before he died. Mokoena, who was born in 1935 took over from Masilo's father and took care of the pigs on the farm.
The group includes 63-year-old Louisa Sibeko, who is now confined to a wheelchair and who worked on the farm as a tomato picker. She had to stop work 10 years ago following a stroke. The families were evicted from the farm about a week ago and the City of Johannesburg wanted to relocate them to Adelaide Tambo Emergency settlement next to sewerage works.
But Masilo and her group refused to be relocated to a place where the stench is so pungent that they can barely eat their meals. "We will stay here until they say we can go back to the farm. That is our home and we worked on the farm for most of our lives,"Masilo said. An eviction order was sought against Masilo and the group as thefarm is earmarked for further development. The issue went to court in 2007 and the lawyer representing the group agreed to the eviction order without their consent .
Masilo said nobody would listen to their objections and their lawyer at the time merely told them to keep quiet. Masilo said they were told afterwards that they had to vacate the farm, but were able to remain there until when they were evicted with the help of Jumbo Security. Lawyers for Human Rights turned to the Land Claims Court in Randburg on Monday where they sought an urgent order to allow the people to return to the farm until the matter was resolved. The matter was however postponed for a week.
Louise du Plessis, the lawyer acting on their behalf, said these people have been living on the farm for years - some even for decades - and qualified as long-term occupiers under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act. The act gives occupiers a number of rights, including that if a tenant is older than 60 years and had been living on the particular property for longer than 10 years, he or she cannot be evicted, or in the alternative, must be suitably compensated. Du Plessis said the situation whereby the people were now living next to the road,was a disaster waiting to happen.
Source: Pretoria News
Scattered around them were their only belongings - blankets, mattresses and a few pots and pans. They remembered the many years they worked on the nearby Botesdal from early morning until late. Masilo was born on the farm in 1943. Her father worked there until he died in 1954 and Masilo and her grand-daughter had lived in a house their father built shortly before he died. Mokoena, who was born in 1935 took over from Masilo's father and took care of the pigs on the farm.
The group includes 63-year-old Louisa Sibeko, who is now confined to a wheelchair and who worked on the farm as a tomato picker. She had to stop work 10 years ago following a stroke. The families were evicted from the farm about a week ago and the City of Johannesburg wanted to relocate them to Adelaide Tambo Emergency settlement next to sewerage works.
But Masilo and her group refused to be relocated to a place where the stench is so pungent that they can barely eat their meals. "We will stay here until they say we can go back to the farm. That is our home and we worked on the farm for most of our lives,"Masilo said. An eviction order was sought against Masilo and the group as thefarm is earmarked for further development. The issue went to court in 2007 and the lawyer representing the group agreed to the eviction order without their consent .
Masilo said nobody would listen to their objections and their lawyer at the time merely told them to keep quiet. Masilo said they were told afterwards that they had to vacate the farm, but were able to remain there until when they were evicted with the help of Jumbo Security. Lawyers for Human Rights turned to the Land Claims Court in Randburg on Monday where they sought an urgent order to allow the people to return to the farm until the matter was resolved. The matter was however postponed for a week.
Louise du Plessis, the lawyer acting on their behalf, said these people have been living on the farm for years - some even for decades - and qualified as long-term occupiers under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act. The act gives occupiers a number of rights, including that if a tenant is older than 60 years and had been living on the particular property for longer than 10 years, he or she cannot be evicted, or in the alternative, must be suitably compensated. Du Plessis said the situation whereby the people were now living next to the road,was a disaster waiting to happen.
Source: Pretoria News
Monday, July 28, 2008
Al-Qaeda chemical expert 'killed'
Reports from Pakistan say a leading al-Qaeda chemical weapons expert, Midhat Mursi al-Sayid Umar, has been killed in a missile strike. Taleban officials in the tribal area of South Waziristan confirmed to the BBC that he was killed in a missile strike that left at least six people dead. The US, which has a reward of $5m on his head, said it had no information. He was wrongly reported to have been killed in 2006 in a strike aimed at al-Qaeda deputy head Ayman al-Zawahiri. The pre-dawn strike targeted a house near a mosque in the village of Azam Warsak, 20km (12 miles) west of the main town in South Waziristan, Wana. It was suspected to be a strike by US forces, with residents saying they had heard US drones, but this has not been confirmed. Pakistani military spokesman Maj Gen Athar Abbas told the AFP news agency it was still awaiting "authentic information" from the area.
Midhat Mursi al-Sayid Umar, 55, also known as Abu Khabab al-Masri, is an Egyptian national. The US government's Rewards for Justice website says he is "an explosives expert and poisons trainer working on behalf of al-Qaeda". It says he trained hundreds of militants in chemical and explosives operations at a camp at Derunta in Afghanistan.
The BBC's Syed Shoaib Hasan in Islamabad says the militant was considered part of Osama Bin Laden's inner circle and was said to be in charge of efforts to gain access to, or develop, weapons of mass destruction. Local residents said the house targeted belonged to a local tribesman and suspected militants used to stay there. The US is reported to have carried out a number of drone missile attacks in the tribal regions. Pakistan has complained the attacks could damage bilateral relations. The latest strike came shortly before Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani was due to meet US President George W Bush in Washington.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said she had no information about the incident. In recent months the US and its allies have pledged hundreds of millions of dollars in military and other forms of assistance to help Pakistan's new government tackle militancy in border tribal areas.
Source: BBC
Midhat Mursi al-Sayid Umar, 55, also known as Abu Khabab al-Masri, is an Egyptian national. The US government's Rewards for Justice website says he is "an explosives expert and poisons trainer working on behalf of al-Qaeda". It says he trained hundreds of militants in chemical and explosives operations at a camp at Derunta in Afghanistan.
The BBC's Syed Shoaib Hasan in Islamabad says the militant was considered part of Osama Bin Laden's inner circle and was said to be in charge of efforts to gain access to, or develop, weapons of mass destruction. Local residents said the house targeted belonged to a local tribesman and suspected militants used to stay there. The US is reported to have carried out a number of drone missile attacks in the tribal regions. Pakistan has complained the attacks could damage bilateral relations. The latest strike came shortly before Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani was due to meet US President George W Bush in Washington.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said she had no information about the incident. In recent months the US and its allies have pledged hundreds of millions of dollars in military and other forms of assistance to help Pakistan's new government tackle militancy in border tribal areas.
Source: BBC
Editors decide to fight moves to muzzle media
Any attempt by the government to control the media would be opposed, the SA National Editors' Forum has said. In a statement on Sunday, Sanef reiterated its firm opposition to any attempt by the government to control the media, such as the statutory media tribunal proposed by the ANC. The decision was taken at Sanef's annual general meeting in Joburg. "The industry's editorial self-regulatory system, the Press Council with its Press Ombudsman and Appeals Panel, dealt effectively with public complaints in the way similar institutions acted in 60 democracies throughout the world," Sanef said.
Any control would restrict media freedom and contravene the freedom of expression rights in the constitution. The forum also expressed concerns about unsubstantiated complaints by senior ANC members about the Press Council, as well as attempts to discredit the judiciary.
It deplored the increasing attempts by the government to exercise control over the media through legislation such as the Films and Publications Amendment Bill, the Protection of Information Bill and the National Key Points Act.
Source: IoL
Any control would restrict media freedom and contravene the freedom of expression rights in the constitution. The forum also expressed concerns about unsubstantiated complaints by senior ANC members about the Press Council, as well as attempts to discredit the judiciary.
It deplored the increasing attempts by the government to exercise control over the media through legislation such as the Films and Publications Amendment Bill, the Protection of Information Bill and the National Key Points Act.
Source: IoL
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Fear the wrath of the poor -- Cosatu
Cosatu leaders who spearheaded protest marches against rising food, fuel and electricity prices have sent a clear message to the new ANC leadership that they will not be spared the workers' wrath if they do not implement "pro-poor" policies.
"ANC must be on the forefront when the masses are rising. We expect the ANC to sit down and talk to us. We expect the leadership we have campaigned for in Polokwane to sit down with us.
"This is why Cosatu worked so hard to ensure [that] the leadership of the ANC is strongly biased towards the workers."
Source: Mail & Guardian
"ANC must be on the forefront when the masses are rising. We expect the ANC to sit down and talk to us. We expect the leadership we have campaigned for in Polokwane to sit down with us.
"This is why Cosatu worked so hard to ensure [that] the leadership of the ANC is strongly biased towards the workers."
Source: Mail & Guardian
Friday, July 25, 2008
How climate change threatens Africa's food security
Climate change has a profound and unavoidable effect on food security in Africa, as increasing temperatures and shifting rain patterns reduce access to food across the continent.
This transpired at a conference on global warming and climate change that started in Cape Town on July 21 and ended on Thursday. The discussion was organised by South Africa’s Fynbos Foundation, which aims to realise investment in the media, publishing, arts and culture sectors, and the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University in the United States.
The relationship between climate change and food security is complex. Many factors influence food security, which means that often "the link is not even made between failed crops and changing weather patterns", Dr Gina Ziervogel, senior researcher at the Climate Systems Analysis Group at the University of Cape Town, told the conference.
Source: Mail & Guardian
This transpired at a conference on global warming and climate change that started in Cape Town on July 21 and ended on Thursday. The discussion was organised by South Africa’s Fynbos Foundation, which aims to realise investment in the media, publishing, arts and culture sectors, and the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University in the United States.
The relationship between climate change and food security is complex. Many factors influence food security, which means that often "the link is not even made between failed crops and changing weather patterns", Dr Gina Ziervogel, senior researcher at the Climate Systems Analysis Group at the University of Cape Town, told the conference.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Mbeki withdraws from Scorpions case
President Thabo Mbeki has withdrawn his opposition against a Constitutional Court bid to stop the disbanding of the Scorpions, Business Day reported on Friday.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Source: Mail & Guardian
Cops 'sabotaged Kebble probe'
The police deliberately tried to sabotage their investigation into the murder of mining magnate Brett Kebble, former judge Willem Heath was quoted as saying in Friday's Mail and Guardian.
Heath, who was hired by Kebble's father to investigate his death, drafted the previously unpublished report in December 2006, more than a year after Kebble was gunned down.
In the report, Heath points out a number of examples of inadequate police work, including their failure to secure the crime site, only interviewing witnesses a year after the murder and failing to do a thorough forensic investigation of the car in which Kebble was shot.
"If the Saps [South African Police Service] behaviour during the investigation... is examined, it is our contention that the Saps either deliberately or negligently failed to secure, destroyed or attempted to destroy evidence...
"Considering the links between [suspended police chief Jackie] Selebi and [convicted drug trafficker Glenn] Agliotti, and the alleged financial links between Selebi and [security consultant Clinton] Nassif, it is highly plausible that the Saps deliberately stalled and attempted to sabotage the murder investigation," quoted the Mail and Guardian from Heath's report.
Kebble was shot in his car in Johannesburg in 2005. Agliotti had been charged with the murder and was out on bail.
South African authorities were also seeking John Stratton's extradition from Australia to stand trial alongside Agliotti. Stratton was a co-director with Brett Kebble of mining company JCI.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Heath, who was hired by Kebble's father to investigate his death, drafted the previously unpublished report in December 2006, more than a year after Kebble was gunned down.
In the report, Heath points out a number of examples of inadequate police work, including their failure to secure the crime site, only interviewing witnesses a year after the murder and failing to do a thorough forensic investigation of the car in which Kebble was shot.
"If the Saps [South African Police Service] behaviour during the investigation... is examined, it is our contention that the Saps either deliberately or negligently failed to secure, destroyed or attempted to destroy evidence...
"Considering the links between [suspended police chief Jackie] Selebi and [convicted drug trafficker Glenn] Agliotti, and the alleged financial links between Selebi and [security consultant Clinton] Nassif, it is highly plausible that the Saps deliberately stalled and attempted to sabotage the murder investigation," quoted the Mail and Guardian from Heath's report.
Kebble was shot in his car in Johannesburg in 2005. Agliotti had been charged with the murder and was out on bail.
South African authorities were also seeking John Stratton's extradition from Australia to stand trial alongside Agliotti. Stratton was a co-director with Brett Kebble of mining company JCI.
Source: Mail & Guardian
ANC: No link between Zuma and arms-deal processes
There is "no link" between African National Congress (ANC) president Jacob Zuma and the arms-deal processes, an ANC task team has found.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Source: Mail & Guardian
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Perjury charge laid against Vodacom executive
The Competition Commission has laid charges with the police against a Vodacom executive for committing an offence in terms of section 73 of the Competition Act. "Section 73 provides that it is an offence to knowingly provide false information to the commission," the commission said in a statement on Thursday. The charges were laid on Wednesday at the Sunnyside police station in Pretoria.
The commission believes that the executive committed a criminal offence by intentionally provided false information to mislead the commission, in contravention of the Competition Act. "The penalty for these offences is a maximum prison sentence of six months or a fine of R2 000 or both," it said.
The commission was informed in December last year of the merger between Vodacom Service Provider Company (VSPC), a subsidiary of Vodacom, and Global Telematics SA and Glocell Service Provider Company. In terms of the structure of the transaction, VSPC was to acquire the business of Glocell. As part of the merger filing, the executive signed a certificate of accuracy on behalf of Vodacom, declaring that the information submitted to the commission in respect of the merger was "true and correct".
During its investigation of the transaction Vodacom had failed to provide the commission with board minutes -- despite requests for it to do so. The commission was led to believe that these documents did not exist. It then referred the matter to the Competition Tribunal for unconditional approval. The tribunal ordered Vodacom to provide the board minutes on March 6 -- and they were submitted on March 10. The merger was subsequently approved by the tribunal, but the tribunal expressed "misgivings about Vodacom's truthfulness during the investigation of the transaction". The tribunal said it believed that information was deliberately withheld from the commission. "In particular, the tribunal noted that the strategic rationale as contained in the board minutes of Vodacom differed substantially with the rationale submitted to the commission."
The commission subsequently investigated the matter and found that the rationale for the transaction was to eliminate Glocell because it was "providing discounts to customers in competition with Vodacom and other Vodacom service providers". Contrary to this, the rationale submitted by Vodacom to the commission "was primarily driven by the declining growth of the service provider market and the desire by Vodacom to consolidate its service delivery chains" in line with worldwide trends to have management over the delivery of a more uniform consistent service to its customers.
Comment from Vodacom could not immediately be obtained.
Source" Mail & Guardian -- Sapa
The commission believes that the executive committed a criminal offence by intentionally provided false information to mislead the commission, in contravention of the Competition Act. "The penalty for these offences is a maximum prison sentence of six months or a fine of R2 000 or both," it said.
The commission was informed in December last year of the merger between Vodacom Service Provider Company (VSPC), a subsidiary of Vodacom, and Global Telematics SA and Glocell Service Provider Company. In terms of the structure of the transaction, VSPC was to acquire the business of Glocell. As part of the merger filing, the executive signed a certificate of accuracy on behalf of Vodacom, declaring that the information submitted to the commission in respect of the merger was "true and correct".
During its investigation of the transaction Vodacom had failed to provide the commission with board minutes -- despite requests for it to do so. The commission was led to believe that these documents did not exist. It then referred the matter to the Competition Tribunal for unconditional approval. The tribunal ordered Vodacom to provide the board minutes on March 6 -- and they were submitted on March 10. The merger was subsequently approved by the tribunal, but the tribunal expressed "misgivings about Vodacom's truthfulness during the investigation of the transaction". The tribunal said it believed that information was deliberately withheld from the commission. "In particular, the tribunal noted that the strategic rationale as contained in the board minutes of Vodacom differed substantially with the rationale submitted to the commission."
The commission subsequently investigated the matter and found that the rationale for the transaction was to eliminate Glocell because it was "providing discounts to customers in competition with Vodacom and other Vodacom service providers". Contrary to this, the rationale submitted by Vodacom to the commission "was primarily driven by the declining growth of the service provider market and the desire by Vodacom to consolidate its service delivery chains" in line with worldwide trends to have management over the delivery of a more uniform consistent service to its customers.
Comment from Vodacom could not immediately be obtained.
Source" Mail & Guardian -- Sapa
Saturday, July 19, 2008
THE LEGAL SERVICES CHARTER: BLACK SKILLS DEVELOPMENT AND PROCUREMENT
What is there to say about the Legal Services Charter apart from – well – that it’s a Charter? I think the world has seen more than its fair share of Charters. A motley of United Nations Charters is gathering dust in libraries around the round, only to be dusted off once in a while when a poor sod somewhere in what is euphemistically termed the developing world becomes too smart for his own good.
Our own Freedom Charter promised the world and delivered – well – nothing for the vast majority of South Africans. All you need do is go and live in the township (for those of you who have not had the privilege) for a week and look around you.
My thesis is simple. Charters do not deliver anything. People do. People who are committed to the good cause. People who have a clear vision as regards what that cause is. People who have the integrity and resolve to see things through.
In unpacking my thesis, I shall do so in a tradition resembling that of an Anglican church sermon. The scripture comes from two books (Book 2 and Book 3) of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s seminal work, The Social Contract (Maurice Cranston’s translation). Book 2 chapter 8 deals with the nature of human beings from which I believe we can learn in our quest for developing black skills in the midst of misplaced and misinformed resistance. The short excerpt to which I want to draw your attention is this:
“Nations, like men, are teachable only in their youth; with age they become incorrigible. Once customs are established and prejudices rooted, reform is a dangerous and fruitless enterprise; a people cannot bear to see its evils touched, even if only to be eradicated; it is like a stupid, pusillanimous invalid who trembles at the sight of a physician.”
It is in the nature of human beings to resist measures designed to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number if such measures are perceived by the minority that has for generations been enjoying the greatest good to the exclusion of the greatest number, to disturb generations of comfortable oligopoly. That, in truth, is why the Bar keeps talking about transformation without anything being done. It is time for decisive action, not for putting measures in place. The Bar has reached an inflection point where its evils must be eradicated so that, at last, black will progressively become synonymous with enterprise and less so with unfounded perceptions of incompetence.
Established customs and prejudices wrought by apartheid (such as the belief that black lawyers are by reason only of their blackness less capable than their white counter-parts), will forever stand in the way of transformation until black skills are developed, put to work and suitably rewarded. The Bar and government must lead by example in this regard.
Black skills in the legal services sector are not altogether absent. I know of many black advocates who are exceedingly capable. What is needed is the cultivation of more black skills and putting those that are already there to work. I can think of no plausible reason why the largest consumer of legal services (namely, government in all its manifestations) should continue to avoid putting to work in large matters the skills lying dormant in black commercial firms across the country, resulting in those firms closing shop or being gormandised by larger white firms. Many senior practitioners in these black firms honed their skills in large white firms where they were put to use and generated enormous fees. Why then should those same skills now be found wanting when offered from Gugulethu, Zola or Soshanguve?
Many black advocates have left practice for salaried employment where none of their litigation skills are put to use, while a handful of white advocates are belching from government and state-owned enterprise briefs. The Bar is hugely to blame for this. Recently, I had occasion to ask a chairman of the Bar Council about the achievements of his Council and Bar on the transformation front, from which we here in JHB can learn. He told me about “measures” they have put in place. The measures to which he pointed were there in 1998 when I was serving on that Council. Yet we act surprised that black lawyers do not come to the Bar in droves.
The reasons for this are not hard to find. We have a bizarre rule that requires members to wait 90 days for payment of their fee in JHB. In Cape Town the peremptory waiting period is 60 days. This is absolutely inexplicable and the black Bar bears the brunt of this wretched rule. Yes, the black Bar! Why would the profession impose such financial strictures on its members? I have heard the arguments advanced for this and, quite frankly, it’s all rubbish. How can you claim to be protecting the junior Bar by forbidding juniors’ entitlement to their fee until 90 days have lapsed? Bertelsmann v Per does not justify this madness.
In commerce, 30 days is the norm, whereafter interest accrues. Members of the Bar cannot even charge interest. Now even the defaulters rule has been cynically emasculated to allow members who are not owed any fee by the defaulting attorney to accept briefs from that attorney. This is utter madness! No Charter can cure that. The 90-day rule must go. The mischief it was intended to address, if it ever did address it at some point, clearly still persists.
Albert Eistein is said to have defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The Bar is not insane, surely. Otherwise, God help us all! So why do we persist with a rule that is clearly not addressing the mischief it was intended to meet?
By comparison, the Rules of the Bar for England and Wales do not impose any time period before the expiry of which members are not entitled to fees for services rendered. So why is it necessary for the Bar in South Africa to prescribe how long members should wait for their fee?
There is also no reason why the Bar cannot influence briefing patterns to accelerate black skills development. Silks could pair themselves with black juniors who would do the research and the first draft. Silks would then have to sit down with the junior and discuss his work, pointing out areas in need of improvement and imparting skills. This achieves two things at once: the junior has work from which to learn, and he earns a fee. No Charter will ever achieve that. Commitment by senior members of the Bar to transforming the Bar will. I am sure Silks can persuade their attorneys to see the value of this exercise.
The English Bar allows barristers to obtain briefs from “Licensed Access Clients” without the intervention of an attorney. These are typically professional clients like accountants, engineering firms, regulatory authorities, auditing firms et cetera. These professional clients obtain a license from the Bar to brief counsel directly. The arrangement is then governed by a set of rules and regulations. This has the effect of lowering the cost of access to justice in a regulated form.
It appears the GCB was trying to follow this route with the introduction in 2002 of Rule 5.12.3. It, however, stopped short of the required standard in its excoriation of some of the desirable aspects of the English rules. The result is a half-baked croissant that is neither palatable nor objectively workable. The GCB rule leaves the conduct of relationships between counsel and “licensed access clients” to considerations of “public interest” in the opinion of the GCB on a case by case basis. That leaves room for subjectivity. For example, why is it in the public interest for counsel to obtain a brief directly from a Patent Agent without the intervention of an attorney, but not so to obtain a brief directly from the Competition Commission, or SARS, or the Asset Forfeiture Unit, or the Financial Services Board, or the FAIS Ombud, or the Banking Ombudsman, or a legal adviser at a government department?
The Legal Services Charter is a futile exercise – an act in circumnavigation that will do nothing but generate litigation. What is required, not only to develop black skills but also to put them to use, is decisive and definitive action from the top. The charter serves not only to delay the process of black skills development and use; it is also a distraction from what needs to be done.
Now we fight about whether Chinese people are Black, and whether white women were truly disadvantaged. The profession knows what needs to be done. Government knows what needs to be done. We all know who is black and do not need a court to tell us that.
That serves as a segue for the learning that Rousseau offers in Book 3 chapter 1 of The Social Contract. In a short treatise on the nature of government and how it can work best, Rousseau offers the following learning:
“Every free action has two causes which concur to produce it, one moral – the will which determines the act, the other physical – the strength which executes it. When I walk towards an object, it is necessary first that I should resolve to go that way and secondly that my feet should carry me. When a paralytic resolves to run and when a fit man resolves not to move, both stay where they are. The body politic has the same two motive powers – and we can make the same distinction between will and strength, the former is legislative power and the latter executive power. Nothing can be, or should be, done in the body politic without the concurrence of both.”
In simple terms, the executive has the duty and strength to do what the legislature wills. The Bar has a duty, strength and ability to ensure that what parliament wills is done. Armed with that information, let us consider what has happened in the past 12 or so years.
In October 1996, the Constitutional Assembly adopted a constitution that decreed black skills development and preferential procurement thereof. The Constitutional Assembly comprised not only representatives of black South Africans who have for generations been denied skills; it also comprised representatives of white thought, fears and insecurities. Both sides saw the necessity and wisdom of decreeing black skills development and procurement. In February 1997, the will of the Constitutional Assembly (broadly constituted) was certified by the constitutional court and later given effect to by Parliament in the form of various legislation including the Employment Equity Act by which Parliament expressed its categorical intention that black skills must not only be developed but also put to use commensurate therewith. Section 217 of the Constitution was given life by the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, 2000. So, why are we still lamenting black skills at the Bar some 12 years later?
I’ll tell you why. The Bar is intent on doing nothing decisive about it. Since the Bar is not a “paralytic” the only explanation is that it has resolved not to move an inch on transforming itself. And the finger is pointed firmly at Silks – particularly white Silks – and people in leadership positions at the Bar. When we all consider this dispassionately and with due regard to the facts, then it becomes clear that the GCB and its constituent Bars have failed black members miserably.
The fight about whether Chinese is Black or not, and about whether the applicable targets are those of the DTI’s Generic Codes or the sector Charter should never have occurred. We know what needs to be done. The Bar knows what needs to be done. So does government. So does industry. Charters are a feel-good factor – a conscience-soother – nothing more, nothing less. History has shown us that. Why should we expect any different from the Legal Services Charter?
V Ngalwana
Address to the Fifth Young Leaders Symposium
Kievitskroon Country Estate
Pretoria
19 July 2008
Source: Duma Nokwe Group
Our own Freedom Charter promised the world and delivered – well – nothing for the vast majority of South Africans. All you need do is go and live in the township (for those of you who have not had the privilege) for a week and look around you.
My thesis is simple. Charters do not deliver anything. People do. People who are committed to the good cause. People who have a clear vision as regards what that cause is. People who have the integrity and resolve to see things through.
In unpacking my thesis, I shall do so in a tradition resembling that of an Anglican church sermon. The scripture comes from two books (Book 2 and Book 3) of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s seminal work, The Social Contract (Maurice Cranston’s translation). Book 2 chapter 8 deals with the nature of human beings from which I believe we can learn in our quest for developing black skills in the midst of misplaced and misinformed resistance. The short excerpt to which I want to draw your attention is this:
“Nations, like men, are teachable only in their youth; with age they become incorrigible. Once customs are established and prejudices rooted, reform is a dangerous and fruitless enterprise; a people cannot bear to see its evils touched, even if only to be eradicated; it is like a stupid, pusillanimous invalid who trembles at the sight of a physician.”
It is in the nature of human beings to resist measures designed to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number if such measures are perceived by the minority that has for generations been enjoying the greatest good to the exclusion of the greatest number, to disturb generations of comfortable oligopoly. That, in truth, is why the Bar keeps talking about transformation without anything being done. It is time for decisive action, not for putting measures in place. The Bar has reached an inflection point where its evils must be eradicated so that, at last, black will progressively become synonymous with enterprise and less so with unfounded perceptions of incompetence.
Established customs and prejudices wrought by apartheid (such as the belief that black lawyers are by reason only of their blackness less capable than their white counter-parts), will forever stand in the way of transformation until black skills are developed, put to work and suitably rewarded. The Bar and government must lead by example in this regard.
Black skills in the legal services sector are not altogether absent. I know of many black advocates who are exceedingly capable. What is needed is the cultivation of more black skills and putting those that are already there to work. I can think of no plausible reason why the largest consumer of legal services (namely, government in all its manifestations) should continue to avoid putting to work in large matters the skills lying dormant in black commercial firms across the country, resulting in those firms closing shop or being gormandised by larger white firms. Many senior practitioners in these black firms honed their skills in large white firms where they were put to use and generated enormous fees. Why then should those same skills now be found wanting when offered from Gugulethu, Zola or Soshanguve?
Many black advocates have left practice for salaried employment where none of their litigation skills are put to use, while a handful of white advocates are belching from government and state-owned enterprise briefs. The Bar is hugely to blame for this. Recently, I had occasion to ask a chairman of the Bar Council about the achievements of his Council and Bar on the transformation front, from which we here in JHB can learn. He told me about “measures” they have put in place. The measures to which he pointed were there in 1998 when I was serving on that Council. Yet we act surprised that black lawyers do not come to the Bar in droves.
The reasons for this are not hard to find. We have a bizarre rule that requires members to wait 90 days for payment of their fee in JHB. In Cape Town the peremptory waiting period is 60 days. This is absolutely inexplicable and the black Bar bears the brunt of this wretched rule. Yes, the black Bar! Why would the profession impose such financial strictures on its members? I have heard the arguments advanced for this and, quite frankly, it’s all rubbish. How can you claim to be protecting the junior Bar by forbidding juniors’ entitlement to their fee until 90 days have lapsed? Bertelsmann v Per does not justify this madness.
In commerce, 30 days is the norm, whereafter interest accrues. Members of the Bar cannot even charge interest. Now even the defaulters rule has been cynically emasculated to allow members who are not owed any fee by the defaulting attorney to accept briefs from that attorney. This is utter madness! No Charter can cure that. The 90-day rule must go. The mischief it was intended to address, if it ever did address it at some point, clearly still persists.
Albert Eistein is said to have defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The Bar is not insane, surely. Otherwise, God help us all! So why do we persist with a rule that is clearly not addressing the mischief it was intended to meet?
By comparison, the Rules of the Bar for England and Wales do not impose any time period before the expiry of which members are not entitled to fees for services rendered. So why is it necessary for the Bar in South Africa to prescribe how long members should wait for their fee?
There is also no reason why the Bar cannot influence briefing patterns to accelerate black skills development. Silks could pair themselves with black juniors who would do the research and the first draft. Silks would then have to sit down with the junior and discuss his work, pointing out areas in need of improvement and imparting skills. This achieves two things at once: the junior has work from which to learn, and he earns a fee. No Charter will ever achieve that. Commitment by senior members of the Bar to transforming the Bar will. I am sure Silks can persuade their attorneys to see the value of this exercise.
The English Bar allows barristers to obtain briefs from “Licensed Access Clients” without the intervention of an attorney. These are typically professional clients like accountants, engineering firms, regulatory authorities, auditing firms et cetera. These professional clients obtain a license from the Bar to brief counsel directly. The arrangement is then governed by a set of rules and regulations. This has the effect of lowering the cost of access to justice in a regulated form.
It appears the GCB was trying to follow this route with the introduction in 2002 of Rule 5.12.3. It, however, stopped short of the required standard in its excoriation of some of the desirable aspects of the English rules. The result is a half-baked croissant that is neither palatable nor objectively workable. The GCB rule leaves the conduct of relationships between counsel and “licensed access clients” to considerations of “public interest” in the opinion of the GCB on a case by case basis. That leaves room for subjectivity. For example, why is it in the public interest for counsel to obtain a brief directly from a Patent Agent without the intervention of an attorney, but not so to obtain a brief directly from the Competition Commission, or SARS, or the Asset Forfeiture Unit, or the Financial Services Board, or the FAIS Ombud, or the Banking Ombudsman, or a legal adviser at a government department?
The Legal Services Charter is a futile exercise – an act in circumnavigation that will do nothing but generate litigation. What is required, not only to develop black skills but also to put them to use, is decisive and definitive action from the top. The charter serves not only to delay the process of black skills development and use; it is also a distraction from what needs to be done.
Now we fight about whether Chinese people are Black, and whether white women were truly disadvantaged. The profession knows what needs to be done. Government knows what needs to be done. We all know who is black and do not need a court to tell us that.
That serves as a segue for the learning that Rousseau offers in Book 3 chapter 1 of The Social Contract. In a short treatise on the nature of government and how it can work best, Rousseau offers the following learning:
“Every free action has two causes which concur to produce it, one moral – the will which determines the act, the other physical – the strength which executes it. When I walk towards an object, it is necessary first that I should resolve to go that way and secondly that my feet should carry me. When a paralytic resolves to run and when a fit man resolves not to move, both stay where they are. The body politic has the same two motive powers – and we can make the same distinction between will and strength, the former is legislative power and the latter executive power. Nothing can be, or should be, done in the body politic without the concurrence of both.”
In simple terms, the executive has the duty and strength to do what the legislature wills. The Bar has a duty, strength and ability to ensure that what parliament wills is done. Armed with that information, let us consider what has happened in the past 12 or so years.
In October 1996, the Constitutional Assembly adopted a constitution that decreed black skills development and preferential procurement thereof. The Constitutional Assembly comprised not only representatives of black South Africans who have for generations been denied skills; it also comprised representatives of white thought, fears and insecurities. Both sides saw the necessity and wisdom of decreeing black skills development and procurement. In February 1997, the will of the Constitutional Assembly (broadly constituted) was certified by the constitutional court and later given effect to by Parliament in the form of various legislation including the Employment Equity Act by which Parliament expressed its categorical intention that black skills must not only be developed but also put to use commensurate therewith. Section 217 of the Constitution was given life by the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, 2000. So, why are we still lamenting black skills at the Bar some 12 years later?
I’ll tell you why. The Bar is intent on doing nothing decisive about it. Since the Bar is not a “paralytic” the only explanation is that it has resolved not to move an inch on transforming itself. And the finger is pointed firmly at Silks – particularly white Silks – and people in leadership positions at the Bar. When we all consider this dispassionately and with due regard to the facts, then it becomes clear that the GCB and its constituent Bars have failed black members miserably.
The fight about whether Chinese is Black or not, and about whether the applicable targets are those of the DTI’s Generic Codes or the sector Charter should never have occurred. We know what needs to be done. The Bar knows what needs to be done. So does government. So does industry. Charters are a feel-good factor – a conscience-soother – nothing more, nothing less. History has shown us that. Why should we expect any different from the Legal Services Charter?
V Ngalwana
Address to the Fifth Young Leaders Symposium
Kievitskroon Country Estate
Pretoria
19 July 2008
Source: Duma Nokwe Group
Thursday, July 17, 2008
COSATU on arrest of David Masondo
The Congress of South African Trade Unions has learned with anger of the bloody assault by officers from Sandringham Police Station on David Masondo, National Chairperson of the Young Communist League of South Africa, and a member of the Central Committee of the South African Communist Party, both organisations which are among COSATU's working-class allies within the tripartite alliance.
Cde Masondo was stopped at a roadblock while jogging in his tracksuit in the suburb where he lives. When addressed by two police officers he answered in his first language, Shangaan (a language spoken both in South Africa and in Mozambique), whereupon the officers called him a "(swearword) foreigner". While the first two officers were harassing him in this way, a third more senior one intervened to say that they should calm down and search Cde David.
As one was searching him, and while Cde David consequently had his hands up in the air, the other one suddenly and without any provocation punched him in the face, starting a fracas during which several other officers assaulted him. They then took him to the police station, trumped up a charge against him, and continued to mistreat him until eventually, later, and with the assistance of his fellow SACP Central Committee members, Solly Mapaila and YCL National Secretary Buti Manamela, he was released from custody. In the process, Cdes Mapaila and Manamela were also threatened with arrest.
David Masondo is a distinguished and respected South African national leader who is also a renowned university lecturer, who will shortly be going to work at New York University for a year with the internationally famous academic David Harvey and others. He was prominent among those who spoke on public platforms condemning the xenophobic pogroms that began on 11 May 2008 in Alexandra Township, not more than two kilometres from where he lives, and where he has now himself been beaten up in a xenophobic attack - by the police!
COSATU is particularly shocked that this should have happened to a gentle person whom we know and love, and who is a valued part of the national leadership of the movement. We are determined to defend our leaders. The federation has consistently denounced xenophobia and are well aware that it most often affects the most vulnerable people in our country, including members of our affiliated unions and others who have few friends at all to defend them.
COSATU therefore backs the YCL's demand that the xenophobic officers who assaulted Cde David Masondo should be subjected to an exemplary, rigorous, and speedy disciplinary process to demonstrate to the country that the South African Police Service intends to mend its ways and purge xenophobia from its own ranks, not just in Sandringham and Alexandra, but everywhere in South Africa.
It is intolerable to COSATU that the very force that is supposed to protect everyone in the country, of whatever origin, should be continuing to prove in incidents like this, of which we believe there are many every single day, that it is itself riddled with xenophobia.
Source: Politicsweb
Cde Masondo was stopped at a roadblock while jogging in his tracksuit in the suburb where he lives. When addressed by two police officers he answered in his first language, Shangaan (a language spoken both in South Africa and in Mozambique), whereupon the officers called him a "(swearword) foreigner". While the first two officers were harassing him in this way, a third more senior one intervened to say that they should calm down and search Cde David.
As one was searching him, and while Cde David consequently had his hands up in the air, the other one suddenly and without any provocation punched him in the face, starting a fracas during which several other officers assaulted him. They then took him to the police station, trumped up a charge against him, and continued to mistreat him until eventually, later, and with the assistance of his fellow SACP Central Committee members, Solly Mapaila and YCL National Secretary Buti Manamela, he was released from custody. In the process, Cdes Mapaila and Manamela were also threatened with arrest.
David Masondo is a distinguished and respected South African national leader who is also a renowned university lecturer, who will shortly be going to work at New York University for a year with the internationally famous academic David Harvey and others. He was prominent among those who spoke on public platforms condemning the xenophobic pogroms that began on 11 May 2008 in Alexandra Township, not more than two kilometres from where he lives, and where he has now himself been beaten up in a xenophobic attack - by the police!
COSATU is particularly shocked that this should have happened to a gentle person whom we know and love, and who is a valued part of the national leadership of the movement. We are determined to defend our leaders. The federation has consistently denounced xenophobia and are well aware that it most often affects the most vulnerable people in our country, including members of our affiliated unions and others who have few friends at all to defend them.
COSATU therefore backs the YCL's demand that the xenophobic officers who assaulted Cde David Masondo should be subjected to an exemplary, rigorous, and speedy disciplinary process to demonstrate to the country that the South African Police Service intends to mend its ways and purge xenophobia from its own ranks, not just in Sandringham and Alexandra, but everywhere in South Africa.
It is intolerable to COSATU that the very force that is supposed to protect everyone in the country, of whatever origin, should be continuing to prove in incidents like this, of which we believe there are many every single day, that it is itself riddled with xenophobia.
Source: Politicsweb
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Arms watchdog turns on its owner
South African citizens can be proud of the legislation that is supposed to govern the National Conventional Arms Control Committee (NCACC). It has flaws in that, for example, it fails to outlaw arms transfers to undemocratic countries.
But it also outlaws the sale of arms to countries that systematically abuse human rights and the need for reduced military expenditure in the interests of development and human security must be heeded.
Furthermore, the legislation demands transparency and lays down strict reporting requirements. While the functions of the NCACC may be delegated, applications for arms-sales permits must be considered case by case.
When it comes to the implementation of this legislation, South African citizens must hang their heads in shame.
It transpires that, in contravention of the case-by-case requirement, the NCACC has given carte blanche to defence secretary January Masilela to grant permits for arms sales and conveyance of arms, to Zimbabwe. The argument by Masilela that there was no problem in selling or conveying arms to Zimbabwe because there is no arms embargo against that country is either disingenuous or a display of absolute ignorance of the requirements of the legislation.
In general the impression created by the NCACC is that it will sell arms to virtually any regime, regardless of the legislation. The only criteria that it appears to take seriously are arms embargoes to which South Africa is party and the interests of the South African military.
The NCACC also failed to present to Parliament and release to the public its annual reports for the years 2005 to 2007. This should have been done within three months after the end of those years.
It also failed to make quarterly reports to Parliament.
Slurce: Mail & Guardian
But it also outlaws the sale of arms to countries that systematically abuse human rights and the need for reduced military expenditure in the interests of development and human security must be heeded.
Furthermore, the legislation demands transparency and lays down strict reporting requirements. While the functions of the NCACC may be delegated, applications for arms-sales permits must be considered case by case.
When it comes to the implementation of this legislation, South African citizens must hang their heads in shame.
It transpires that, in contravention of the case-by-case requirement, the NCACC has given carte blanche to defence secretary January Masilela to grant permits for arms sales and conveyance of arms, to Zimbabwe. The argument by Masilela that there was no problem in selling or conveying arms to Zimbabwe because there is no arms embargo against that country is either disingenuous or a display of absolute ignorance of the requirements of the legislation.
In general the impression created by the NCACC is that it will sell arms to virtually any regime, regardless of the legislation. The only criteria that it appears to take seriously are arms embargoes to which South Africa is party and the interests of the South African military.
The NCACC also failed to present to Parliament and release to the public its annual reports for the years 2005 to 2007. This should have been done within three months after the end of those years.
It also failed to make quarterly reports to Parliament.
Slurce: Mail & Guardian
Friday, July 11, 2008
Pieter Uys announced as new CEO of Vodacom
Pieter Uys has been announced as the new CEO of mobile services provider Vodacom. Uys, a 15-year veteran of the group and the current chief operating officer, will take over from Alan Knott-Craig on October 1 2008.
Uys joined the company in 1993 and was a founder member of Vodacom's engineering management team. Uys played a major role in the first phase of the planning and roll-out of Vodacom's GSM network, which at the time was the fastest roll-out in the world. Uys was then responsible for the successful launch of the Vodacom internet company, which quickly became a leading service provider. Uys has also held the post of the general manager responsible for the company's South African operations.
Source: Mail & Guardian - I-Net Bridge
Uys joined the company in 1993 and was a founder member of Vodacom's engineering management team. Uys played a major role in the first phase of the planning and roll-out of Vodacom's GSM network, which at the time was the fastest roll-out in the world. Uys was then responsible for the successful launch of the Vodacom internet company, which quickly became a leading service provider. Uys has also held the post of the general manager responsible for the company's South African operations.
Source: Mail & Guardian - I-Net Bridge
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Marxist Festival London
With every day that passes the capitalist system sinks deeper and deeper into crisis. The politicians, bankers and bosses want us to pay for this mess - by slashing jobs, pensions and wages while poverty and war stalk the globe.
But millions are beginning to question the logic of a capitalist system that puts profits before people.
The annual Marxism festival will take place from 2-6 July in central London. Thousands of people from around the world will gather to debate these issues and talk about the way forward.
http://www.marxismfestival.org.uk/
But millions are beginning to question the logic of a capitalist system that puts profits before people.
The annual Marxism festival will take place from 2-6 July in central London. Thousands of people from around the world will gather to debate these issues and talk about the way forward.
http://www.marxismfestival.org.uk/
Saturday, July 5, 2008
Will Browse Mole nail Pikoli?
Ten years after an intelligence report cost the defence force chief Georg Meiring his job government is pushing hard for suspended prosecutions boss Vusi Pikoli to be sacked in a similar way.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Source: Mail & Guardian
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
XXIII Congress of the Socialist International, Athens
Global Solidarity: The courage to make a difference
The Socialist International held its XXIII Congress in Athens, Greece from 30 June to 2 July with close to 700 participants from 150 parties and organisations from 120 countries attending. (List of participants)
With the theme Global Solidarity: The courage to make a difference, the Congress, the highest decision-making body of the organisation, adopted statements on each of the four key issues under discussion: climate change, peace and the resolution of conflicts, the world economy, including the current food crisis and the question of migration.
The morning session continued with discussions on the first main theme ACTING NOW ON CLIMATE CHANGE: To achieve a sustainable world society introduced by Co-Chairs of the Socialist International Commission for a Sustainable World Society, Ricardo Lagos, former President of Chile and a Special Envoy of the United Nations Secretary-General on climate change and Goran Persson, former Prime Minister of Sweden. They were followed by wide-ranging contributions from members of the Commission, leaders and party representatives from different regions of the world, including the Chancellor of Austria, Alfred Gusenbauer. (Speakers on climate change)
The climate change debate also included two panel discussions, the first How to arrive successfully at a post-2012 regime? and the second How do we strengthen the multilateral architecture for a sustainable future? featuring speakers from the Spain, India, the United States, Russia and China.
Continuing its efforts to provide a platform to advance peace, the International brought together key actors from the Middle East, Lebanon, Asia and the Balkans for the discussions on the second day of the Congress - WORKING FOR A WORLD IN PEACE: To resolve conflicts and overcome instability.
SETTING THE GLOBAL ECONOMY ON A NEW PATH: To bring growth and development with opportunities for all, was the third theme of the Congress with keynote speeches from the Prime Minister of Hungary, Ferenc Gyurcszany, and leader of the Hungarian Socialist Party, MSzP; the Chair of the SI Committee on the Economy, Social Cohesion and the Environment, Christoph Zopel, Social Democratic Party, SPD, Germany; Chantal Kambiwa of the Social Democratic Front of Cameroon; the President of the DS, Italy, Massimo D’Alema; the leader of the Czech Social Democratic Party, CSSD, Jiri Paroubek; the President of the Labour Party, Ireland, Michael Higgins; and, the President of the Dominican Revolutionary Party, PRD, Dominican Republic, Ramon Alburquerque.(Speakers on the global economy)
A debate followed on the issue of food shortages and hike in prices, under the title Dealing with the food crisis: the long-term view, with panellists from Haiti, India, Australia and Senegal.
Lastly, the Congress tackled the impact of migration globally, with the theme GIVING MIGRATION A HUMAN FACE: To build a new migration agenda placing people first, introduced by the Chair of the SI Committee on Migrations, Amalia Garcia, Governor of the State of Zacatecas, Party of Democratic Revolution, PRD, Mexico, on the Committee’s work dealing with the issues arising due to this phenomenon in all regions around the world. Also taking part in this debate were Nouzha Chekrouni, Socialist Union of Popular Forces, USFP, Morocco, former Minister for Moroccans Abroad, Juan Fernando Lopez Aguilar, former minister of Justice, PSOE, Spain; and Sigfrido Reyes, Member of Parliament, FMLN, El Salvador, amongst others.
Source: Socialist International
The Socialist International held its XXIII Congress in Athens, Greece from 30 June to 2 July with close to 700 participants from 150 parties and organisations from 120 countries attending. (List of participants)
With the theme Global Solidarity: The courage to make a difference, the Congress, the highest decision-making body of the organisation, adopted statements on each of the four key issues under discussion: climate change, peace and the resolution of conflicts, the world economy, including the current food crisis and the question of migration.
The morning session continued with discussions on the first main theme ACTING NOW ON CLIMATE CHANGE: To achieve a sustainable world society introduced by Co-Chairs of the Socialist International Commission for a Sustainable World Society, Ricardo Lagos, former President of Chile and a Special Envoy of the United Nations Secretary-General on climate change and Goran Persson, former Prime Minister of Sweden. They were followed by wide-ranging contributions from members of the Commission, leaders and party representatives from different regions of the world, including the Chancellor of Austria, Alfred Gusenbauer. (Speakers on climate change)
The climate change debate also included two panel discussions, the first How to arrive successfully at a post-2012 regime? and the second How do we strengthen the multilateral architecture for a sustainable future? featuring speakers from the Spain, India, the United States, Russia and China.
Continuing its efforts to provide a platform to advance peace, the International brought together key actors from the Middle East, Lebanon, Asia and the Balkans for the discussions on the second day of the Congress - WORKING FOR A WORLD IN PEACE: To resolve conflicts and overcome instability.
SETTING THE GLOBAL ECONOMY ON A NEW PATH: To bring growth and development with opportunities for all, was the third theme of the Congress with keynote speeches from the Prime Minister of Hungary, Ferenc Gyurcszany, and leader of the Hungarian Socialist Party, MSzP; the Chair of the SI Committee on the Economy, Social Cohesion and the Environment, Christoph Zopel, Social Democratic Party, SPD, Germany; Chantal Kambiwa of the Social Democratic Front of Cameroon; the President of the DS, Italy, Massimo D’Alema; the leader of the Czech Social Democratic Party, CSSD, Jiri Paroubek; the President of the Labour Party, Ireland, Michael Higgins; and, the President of the Dominican Revolutionary Party, PRD, Dominican Republic, Ramon Alburquerque.
A debate followed on the issue of food shortages and hike in prices, under the title Dealing with the food crisis: the long-term view, with panellists from Haiti, India, Australia and Senegal.
Lastly, the Congress tackled the impact of migration globally, with the theme GIVING MIGRATION A HUMAN FACE: To build a new migration agenda placing people first, introduced by the Chair of the SI Committee on Migrations, Amalia Garcia, Governor of the State of Zacatecas, Party of Democratic Revolution, PRD, Mexico, on the Committee’s work dealing with the issues arising due to this phenomenon in all regions around the world. Also taking part in this debate were Nouzha Chekrouni, Socialist Union of Popular Forces, USFP, Morocco, former Minister for Moroccans Abroad, Juan Fernando Lopez Aguilar, former minister of Justice, PSOE, Spain; and Sigfrido Reyes, Member of Parliament, FMLN, El Salvador, amongst others.
Source: Socialist International
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Mandela taken off US terror list
US President George W Bush has signed a bill removing Nelson Mandela and South African leaders from the US terror watch list, officials say. Mr Mandela and ANC party members will now be able to visit the US without a waiver from the secretary of state.
The African National Congress (ANC) was designated as a terrorist organisation by South Africa's old apartheid regime. A US senator said the new legislation was a step towards removing the "shame of dishonouring this great leader".
'Rather embarrassing'
Under the legislation, members of the ANC could travel to the United Nations headquarters in New York but not to Washington DC or other parts of the United States. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had called the restrictions a "rather embarrassing matter that I still have to waive in my own counterpart, the foreign minister of South Africa, not to mention the great leader Nelson Mandela."
South Africa's apartheid government banned the ANC in 1960, imprisoning or forcing into exile its leaders. Mr Mandela, who turns 90 this month, was released in 1990 after spending 27 years in prison. He then became the country's first post-apartheid-era president, before retiring after serving one term in office.
Source: BBC News
The African National Congress (ANC) was designated as a terrorist organisation by South Africa's old apartheid regime. A US senator said the new legislation was a step towards removing the "shame of dishonouring this great leader".
'Rather embarrassing'
Under the legislation, members of the ANC could travel to the United Nations headquarters in New York but not to Washington DC or other parts of the United States. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had called the restrictions a "rather embarrassing matter that I still have to waive in my own counterpart, the foreign minister of South Africa, not to mention the great leader Nelson Mandela."
South Africa's apartheid government banned the ANC in 1960, imprisoning or forcing into exile its leaders. Mr Mandela, who turns 90 this month, was released in 1990 after spending 27 years in prison. He then became the country's first post-apartheid-era president, before retiring after serving one term in office.
Source: BBC News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)