Many of Africa’s leaders have spent part of their summer shuttling between capitals, congratulating one another on 50 years of independence. One capital they will not be visiting together is Washington.
President Obama convened a forum this week to celebrate the 50th anniversaries of 17 African nations, but he did not invite a single African leader to help him do so. Was this, as the African news media and independent commentators see it, an expression of distaste for abusive rulers? Was it an extension of Mr. Obama’s own conviction — already enunciated — that bad government is at the heart of the continent’s woes and that “Africa doesn’t need strongmen, it needs strong institutions”?
The State Department denies such an intent behind the forum, noting that American officials meet with African leaders in other settings. Nonetheless, commentators on the continent and in the West note a sharp contrast between this week’s event in Washington and the summer’s other major 50th anniversary observance in a Western capital: Paris.
At a celebration on July 14, Bastille Day in France, President Nicolas Sarkozy was flanked by the leaders of Cameroon and Burkina Faso, Paul Biya and Blaise Compaore, who have been sharply criticized on human rights and governance, while 11 other African heads of state, some with equally dubious records, joined him on the reviewing stand.
There, they surveyed a parade of uniformed troops from African armies, some of which had taken part in large-scale abuses over the previous decade. The Senegalese press, for one, was roundly critical of the event. Not only did it dress down the African leaders for heeding the call of the ex-colonial ruler (the irony of celebrating African independence in the seat of a former colonial power was lost on few observers), but it also criticized Mr. Sarkozy for hosting presidents who mistreat their citizens.
Unlike the French president, Mr. Obama stands no risk of being photographed in the company of rulers accused of flouting democracy and human rights. By contrast, he summoned 115 under-35s from civil society, journalism and business to a “President’s Forum With Young African Leaders” this week to help him in “looking forward,” as a State Department official put it. “We’ve got to look for the next generation of leaders,” said Bruce Wharton, deputy assistant secretary for public diplomacy.
On Tuesday, Mr. Obama bluntly addressed issues of corruption and press freedom in speaking to the group at the White House, saying that “sometimes the older leaders get into old habits, and those old habits are hard to break.” When asked about President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, Mr. Obama told the young people at the forum, “I’ll be honest with you — I’m heartbroken when I see what’s happened in Zimbabwe. I think Mugabe is an example of a leader who came in as a liberation fighter and — I’m just going to be very blunt — I do not see him serving his people well. And the abuses, the human rights abuses, the violence that’s been perpetrated against opposition leaders I think is terrible.”
African news organizations read the president’s forum as having more to do with the current generation of leaders than with those he invited, seeing it as a rebuke to the older generation. “50th Anniversary of African Independences: Barack Obama snubs the African dictators,” read a headline in the Cameroonian newspaper Le Messager. Mr. Obama is giving a “kick in the nose to African leaders, whom he seems to be royally snubbing,” said the Fasozine of Burkina Faso.
Here in Senegal, the newspaper Walfadjri ran a headline saying, “Obama snubs Wade and company and unrolls the red carpet for civil society,” referring to President Abdoulaye Wade of Senegal. So desirable is the association with Mr. Obama that Mr. Wade’s government once put a notice on the front page of a local newspaper saying merely that the Senegalese president had spoken with the American president on the telephone, without divulging the conversation’s contents. “The American president is extremely sensitive on the subject of democracy,” said another Senegalese paper, Kotch. “Proof: he’s going to celebrate the 50th anniversaries of African nations without inviting a single head of state.”
Mr. Obama has made an overt pitch for the more widespread diffusion of democracy on the continent before, a gesture often recalled in the African media. In a speech to the Ghanaian Parliament in July 2009, the president said it was a “fundamental truth” that “development depends on good governance. That is the ingredient which has been missing in far too many places, for far too long.” Mr. Obama added that it was up to Africans themselves to add this “ingredient.”
Mr. Obama’s choice has been met with frosty silence, mostly, in African presidential palaces. But it clearly has the potential to sting. Governments lacking internal legitimacy on the continent often derive their credibility from international recognition, from going to conferences, and being met and greeted by other heads of state, as scholars are increasingly pointing out. “International recognition endows African state actors with a domestic power of command,” wrote Pierre Englebert, a professor of politics at Pomona College, in his recent book “Africa: Unity, Sovereignty & Sorrow.”
The absence of presidents and their retinues at the Washington gathering is thus seen as no accident. “By refusing to invite them, and welcoming them in Washington, Obama is clearly telling them, ‘If you want to engage with us, you have to behave,’ ” said Mamadou Diouf, director of the Institute of African Studies at Columbia University. “It’s a way of questioning the choice made by Sarkozy.” Other analysts agreed. “You take one look at Sarkozy and his buddies, that’s not the picture Obama wants to convey,” said J. Stephen Morrison, an Africa expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
A French Foreign Ministry official rejected the widespread criticism of Mr. Sarkozy, calling it “a sterile polemic.” “The two initiatives are complementary,” the official, who was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter, said of the two approaches taken by Mr. Sarkozy and Mr. Obama. “A country can’t be reduced just to its leaders and civil society. For a democracy to function, you need both.”
As for the general populace, though, Mr. Obama’s choice has been “saluted by African public opinion,” said a Senegalese opposition leader, Abdoulaye Bathily, “because the emerging forces are not to be found in the leadership, but in the civil society movement.” Mr. Bathily added: “The leaders have failed the African people.”
Source: New York Times
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Deadly threat to all
The collapse of the Soviet Union two decades ago exposed not only the bankruptcy of its ideology but the rich and obscene lifestyle of its leaders — the dachas where they romped and lolled and the extravagantly furnished bunkers where they would have safely repaired in the event of a nuclear attack. Meanwhile ordinary people were constantly exhorted to put their faith in the revolution. It was dachas for the cream of society and gulags for dissenters.
Communism is an ideology conceived in a lie. Leaders say one thing while doing the other. They live a life of deception. They don’t seem prepared to live the life or reality they often romanticise, or to which their policies condemn ordinary people. And because the media and other forms of communication are controlled by the state, the so-called working class are kept in the dark and therefore meekly accept their lot.
That is the nirvana that Blade Nzimande has in mind for us. The general secretary of the SA Communist Party, who works as minister for higher education when he feels like it, wants the media shackled because it has shown him up to be a hypocrite. This champion of the working class drives posh cars and lives it up in fancy hotels — at our expense. Now he wants a tribunal to stop or frustrate the media from telling the truth.
But that’s par for the course, I suppose. After all it was Vladimir Lenin who blurted: “Telling the truth is a bourgeois prejudice. Deception, on the other hand, is often justified by the goal.”
It’s revealing that the two men leading the campaign against the media have been in the news for the wrong reasons : Nzimande and communications minister Siphiwe Nyanda. Nyanda, the man with a fine taste for tenders, has seen his name crop up in many an unsavoury scrap as a result of his business dealings. He got a tender that got Siyabonga Gama fired at Transnet. He’s currently embroiled in a messy fight with his director- general, and tenders are at the heart of the dispute. On Sunday he wrote a long, rambling article in favour of a media tribunal. The logic was difficult to follow. He should stick to tenders.
There are those who may think the media is obsessed with gazing at its own navel. This is not a war waged against the media only, but against democracy itself. It challenges the very essence of our constitution. As the FM argued recently, it is a battle that should involve all strands of society — business, civil society — against those who are intent on imposing darkness on us, so that they can loot and plunder at will.
This is by no means an isolated attack. In the eyes of Jacob Zuma’s supporters, the media forms part of that axis of evil — to borrow a phrase — which almost denied their hero what he was due ; the other axis members being the Scorpions and the judiciary. Zuma’s triumph in Polokwane sounded the death knell for the Scorpions, who were immediately consigned to the scrapheap. The judiciary has been shouted down and almost cowed. Which leaves the media, with its enormous power to influence public opinion and to expose, shame and embarrass those in authority.
As Lenin once posed the question, what then is to be done? The media tribunal and the Protection of Information Bill seem to be the answer. The notion of “protecting” information from the public in a democracy is, frankly, bizarre.
It’s not the first time government has tried to rein in the media. The Nats tried several times, and failed each time . This lot, which seem keen to learn from their predecessors, will also fail. But that would demand concerted action from all sectors of society, including the business community. For once, business needs to raise its voice against what is arguably the biggest threat to our democracy since the fall of apartheid.
Source: Financial Mail: Barney Mthombothi
Communism is an ideology conceived in a lie. Leaders say one thing while doing the other. They live a life of deception. They don’t seem prepared to live the life or reality they often romanticise, or to which their policies condemn ordinary people. And because the media and other forms of communication are controlled by the state, the so-called working class are kept in the dark and therefore meekly accept their lot.
That is the nirvana that Blade Nzimande has in mind for us. The general secretary of the SA Communist Party, who works as minister for higher education when he feels like it, wants the media shackled because it has shown him up to be a hypocrite. This champion of the working class drives posh cars and lives it up in fancy hotels — at our expense. Now he wants a tribunal to stop or frustrate the media from telling the truth.
But that’s par for the course, I suppose. After all it was Vladimir Lenin who blurted: “Telling the truth is a bourgeois prejudice. Deception, on the other hand, is often justified by the goal.”
It’s revealing that the two men leading the campaign against the media have been in the news for the wrong reasons : Nzimande and communications minister Siphiwe Nyanda. Nyanda, the man with a fine taste for tenders, has seen his name crop up in many an unsavoury scrap as a result of his business dealings. He got a tender that got Siyabonga Gama fired at Transnet. He’s currently embroiled in a messy fight with his director- general, and tenders are at the heart of the dispute. On Sunday he wrote a long, rambling article in favour of a media tribunal. The logic was difficult to follow. He should stick to tenders.
There are those who may think the media is obsessed with gazing at its own navel. This is not a war waged against the media only, but against democracy itself. It challenges the very essence of our constitution. As the FM argued recently, it is a battle that should involve all strands of society — business, civil society — against those who are intent on imposing darkness on us, so that they can loot and plunder at will.
This is by no means an isolated attack. In the eyes of Jacob Zuma’s supporters, the media forms part of that axis of evil — to borrow a phrase — which almost denied their hero what he was due ; the other axis members being the Scorpions and the judiciary. Zuma’s triumph in Polokwane sounded the death knell for the Scorpions, who were immediately consigned to the scrapheap. The judiciary has been shouted down and almost cowed. Which leaves the media, with its enormous power to influence public opinion and to expose, shame and embarrass those in authority.
As Lenin once posed the question, what then is to be done? The media tribunal and the Protection of Information Bill seem to be the answer. The notion of “protecting” information from the public in a democracy is, frankly, bizarre.
It’s not the first time government has tried to rein in the media. The Nats tried several times, and failed each time . This lot, which seem keen to learn from their predecessors, will also fail. But that would demand concerted action from all sectors of society, including the business community. For once, business needs to raise its voice against what is arguably the biggest threat to our democracy since the fall of apartheid.
Source: Financial Mail: Barney Mthombothi
Prosecutor drops case against Sunday Times reporter
The prosecutor in the case against Sunday Times journalist Mzilikazi wa Afrika on Thursday said there was no case against him, the newspaper's lawyer said. "The prosecutor has said he [Wa Afrika] has no case to answer and that they can't prosecute," Sunday Times lawyer Eric van den Berg told the South African Press Association (Sapa) by phone.
This was said at a meeting between Van den Berg, two prosecutors from the Hawks police unit and the control prosecutor from Nelspruit that took place around lunchtime. "He should be released immediately but the police refused to release him," said Van den Berg. "I don't quite know how they are going to carry on, but they are going to carry on."
TheTimesLive website quoted a prosecutor, Mr Erwee, as saying he had declined to prosecute Wa Afrika "on the grounds that he has no case to answer". Van den Berg said Wa Afrika was currently at the office of the Organised Crime Unit in Nelspruit. "We saw him this morning, he was fine. He is just feeling very tired. We are going to a meeting with the Organised Crime Unit now and we'll see what comes from that," said Van den Berg. He said it was not clear what the charges against Wa Afrika would have stemmed from.
Hawks spokesperson Musa Zondi said on Wednesday he would face charges of fraud and defeating the ends of justice. Reports suggested this could be related to his being in possession of a fraudulent resignation letter by Mpumalanga premier David Mabuza. "I'm not sure if the charges were him being in possession [of the letter] or him being the author," said Van den Berg. Zondi said he had no knowledge of the latest development. "I don't know about that," he told Sapa.
Wa Afrika was arrested outside the Sunday Times office on Wednesday by members of the Hawks special police unit. He was the author of a report critical of national police chief General Bheki Cele on Sunday.
Source: Mail & Guardian
This was said at a meeting between Van den Berg, two prosecutors from the Hawks police unit and the control prosecutor from Nelspruit that took place around lunchtime. "He should be released immediately but the police refused to release him," said Van den Berg. "I don't quite know how they are going to carry on, but they are going to carry on."
TheTimesLive website quoted a prosecutor, Mr Erwee, as saying he had declined to prosecute Wa Afrika "on the grounds that he has no case to answer". Van den Berg said Wa Afrika was currently at the office of the Organised Crime Unit in Nelspruit. "We saw him this morning, he was fine. He is just feeling very tired. We are going to a meeting with the Organised Crime Unit now and we'll see what comes from that," said Van den Berg. He said it was not clear what the charges against Wa Afrika would have stemmed from.
Hawks spokesperson Musa Zondi said on Wednesday he would face charges of fraud and defeating the ends of justice. Reports suggested this could be related to his being in possession of a fraudulent resignation letter by Mpumalanga premier David Mabuza. "I'm not sure if the charges were him being in possession [of the letter] or him being the author," said Van den Berg. Zondi said he had no knowledge of the latest development. "I don't know about that," he told Sapa.
Wa Afrika was arrested outside the Sunday Times office on Wednesday by members of the Hawks special police unit. He was the author of a report critical of national police chief General Bheki Cele on Sunday.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Arrest a boorish scare tactic
JOURNALISTS are not above the law, but the media as an institution plays a special role in a healthy democracy and this should be taken into account even when the authorities believe they have a prima facie case of criminality to investigate.
It is premature to pronounce on the merits of the case against Sunday Times reporter Mzilikazi wa Afrika, who was roughly arrested at Avusa ’s Rosebank headquarters yesterday, apparently on suspicion of fraud and defeating the ends of justice. If such charges can be proven, then justice should be allowed to take its course.
However, the timing and manner of the arrest are disturbing. Mr wa Afrika is in the bad books of police commissioner Bheki Cele after writing an article that raised questions about his involvement in the awarding of a lease agreement for police headquarters. On Tuesday, Gen Cele referred to Mr wa Afrika as a “very shady journalist”; yesterday he was bundled into a police vehicle and taken away, and his employers refused information on where he was being held or when he would appear in court.
The charges Mr wa Afrika faces are not, at face value, related to the Sunday Times’s dispute with Gen Cele. But the timing is suspicious, especially in the broader context of the ruling party’s attack on media freedom through the introduction of a draconian bill that would allow officials to keep more information away from prying eyes, a bid to subject the media to a tribunal under the control of politicians, and proposed amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act that would force journalists to reveal their sources.
It is probably coincidental that the South African National Editors’ Forum was meeting in the same building to discuss the threat to media freedom at the time that Mr wa Afrika was arrested. But it is stretching credulity to accept without question that the highly public nature of the arrest and sheer number of officers dispatched to do the deed, as well as their aggressive attitude towards photographers exercising their right to cover the event, was anything other than a crude attempt at intimidation.
Source: Business Day
It is premature to pronounce on the merits of the case against Sunday Times reporter Mzilikazi wa Afrika, who was roughly arrested at Avusa ’s Rosebank headquarters yesterday, apparently on suspicion of fraud and defeating the ends of justice. If such charges can be proven, then justice should be allowed to take its course.
However, the timing and manner of the arrest are disturbing. Mr wa Afrika is in the bad books of police commissioner Bheki Cele after writing an article that raised questions about his involvement in the awarding of a lease agreement for police headquarters. On Tuesday, Gen Cele referred to Mr wa Afrika as a “very shady journalist”; yesterday he was bundled into a police vehicle and taken away, and his employers refused information on where he was being held or when he would appear in court.
The charges Mr wa Afrika faces are not, at face value, related to the Sunday Times’s dispute with Gen Cele. But the timing is suspicious, especially in the broader context of the ruling party’s attack on media freedom through the introduction of a draconian bill that would allow officials to keep more information away from prying eyes, a bid to subject the media to a tribunal under the control of politicians, and proposed amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act that would force journalists to reveal their sources.
It is probably coincidental that the South African National Editors’ Forum was meeting in the same building to discuss the threat to media freedom at the time that Mr wa Afrika was arrested. But it is stretching credulity to accept without question that the highly public nature of the arrest and sheer number of officers dispatched to do the deed, as well as their aggressive attitude towards photographers exercising their right to cover the event, was anything other than a crude attempt at intimidation.
Source: Business Day
Mapungubwe Action Group take aim at mining firm
Environmentalists served an application to controversial mining house Coal of Africa, as well as the minister of mineral resources, Susan Shabangu, to stop activities at a proposed coalmine near Mapungubwe immediately. The application served on Limpopo Coal, the subsidiary of Coal of Africa, is an attempt by the environmentalists to limit what has already been described an irreversible environmental damage.
The Australian-owned company received a permit earlier this year for its Vele Colliery project next to the Mapungubwe National Park, where the world-famous 800-year-old gold rhino statuette was unearthed in 1933, raising concerns about the threat to a prime heritage spot and environmentally sensitive area. The Mapungubwe Action Group, an umbrella group consisting out of the Endangered Wildlife Trust, the Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists, Peace Parks Foundation, WWF, Birdlife of South Africa and the Wilderness Foundation of South Africa, is driving the court action.
Coal of Africa chairperson Riaan van der Merwe was unavailable for comment while Shabangu's spokesperson did not return the M&G's calls. The action group has brought out the heavy batters in their fight against the mine. It has appointed legal advisors were from the Centre for Applied Legal Studies at Wits and has also secured top-notch advocate Wim Trengove's services. The action group has lodged internal appeals against both the decision to grant the mining right and the decision to approve the environmental management programme, "These appeals are pending and the applicants have at this stage not yet received any answering papers," said Nick Hilterman, Mapungubwe Action Group chairperson. "In the meantime, construction on the mine site is proceeding at pace and we are worried about the environmental damage. We have launched the interdict application in an attempt to prevent further destruction of the area while the legal disputes are pending,' he said. "The interdict application is thus an interim measure that seeks to prevent the mine from carrying on any mining or related operations at Vele." He said the interdict application also seeks to question the commencement of mining or related operations in the absence of a water use license and on private nature reserves. It is due to be heard in the next month in the North Gauteng High Court.
The interdict comes amid comments environment minister Buyelwa Sonjica made to Reuters this week. "We are concerned about the illegal activities that the company embarked on when this matter was still under discussion,” she said. In addition, the Department of Environmental Affairs has cracked the whip at the mine in the past month and is preparing for a major operation in law enforcement compliance. Sonjica has rallied behind the environmental department, while her other department, Department of Water Affairs, is also resisting the mine's application for a water licence.
In reaction to Sonjica's comments, Coal of Africa issued a statement that all its activities undertaken at the Vele Colliery have been carried out lawfully. "We have not undertaken any activities for which authorisation has not been given," said Simon Farrell, Coal's executive deputy chairperson from Australia. He said the company would oppose the application vigorously. The mining order rate, executed in March this year together with the approved environmental management, permit Coal to start development activities on site, Farrell argued. "The company is unaware of the alleged 'illegal activities' referred to and is therefore seeking an immediate meeting with the minister to identify and address any issues and concerns," said Farrell. He said Coal had been served with two pre-compliance notices from the environmental department alleging various matters, including that the Vele Colliery has proceeded with the construction of the access road and storage facilities. "But we have not undertaken any activities for which authority has not been granted," he said.
With the department's action, the interdict and the looming court battle of the Mapungubwe Action Group, the Australian mine group's argument will most certainly be tested in court. "Coal of Africa interprets the new mining order right as overriding national environmental management legislation and regulations," said Johan Verhoef, Peace Parks Foundation chief. "Therefore they believe that Department of Water Affairs cannot refuse them a water licence. This will all be tested in court and the Vele court case could very well be a watershed case for mining rights in sensitive areas."
Source: Mail & Guardian
The Australian-owned company received a permit earlier this year for its Vele Colliery project next to the Mapungubwe National Park, where the world-famous 800-year-old gold rhino statuette was unearthed in 1933, raising concerns about the threat to a prime heritage spot and environmentally sensitive area. The Mapungubwe Action Group, an umbrella group consisting out of the Endangered Wildlife Trust, the Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists, Peace Parks Foundation, WWF, Birdlife of South Africa and the Wilderness Foundation of South Africa, is driving the court action.
Coal of Africa chairperson Riaan van der Merwe was unavailable for comment while Shabangu's spokesperson did not return the M&G's calls. The action group has brought out the heavy batters in their fight against the mine. It has appointed legal advisors were from the Centre for Applied Legal Studies at Wits and has also secured top-notch advocate Wim Trengove's services. The action group has lodged internal appeals against both the decision to grant the mining right and the decision to approve the environmental management programme, "These appeals are pending and the applicants have at this stage not yet received any answering papers," said Nick Hilterman, Mapungubwe Action Group chairperson. "In the meantime, construction on the mine site is proceeding at pace and we are worried about the environmental damage. We have launched the interdict application in an attempt to prevent further destruction of the area while the legal disputes are pending,' he said. "The interdict application is thus an interim measure that seeks to prevent the mine from carrying on any mining or related operations at Vele." He said the interdict application also seeks to question the commencement of mining or related operations in the absence of a water use license and on private nature reserves. It is due to be heard in the next month in the North Gauteng High Court.
The interdict comes amid comments environment minister Buyelwa Sonjica made to Reuters this week. "We are concerned about the illegal activities that the company embarked on when this matter was still under discussion,” she said. In addition, the Department of Environmental Affairs has cracked the whip at the mine in the past month and is preparing for a major operation in law enforcement compliance. Sonjica has rallied behind the environmental department, while her other department, Department of Water Affairs, is also resisting the mine's application for a water licence.
In reaction to Sonjica's comments, Coal of Africa issued a statement that all its activities undertaken at the Vele Colliery have been carried out lawfully. "We have not undertaken any activities for which authorisation has not been given," said Simon Farrell, Coal's executive deputy chairperson from Australia. He said the company would oppose the application vigorously. The mining order rate, executed in March this year together with the approved environmental management, permit Coal to start development activities on site, Farrell argued. "The company is unaware of the alleged 'illegal activities' referred to and is therefore seeking an immediate meeting with the minister to identify and address any issues and concerns," said Farrell. He said Coal had been served with two pre-compliance notices from the environmental department alleging various matters, including that the Vele Colliery has proceeded with the construction of the access road and storage facilities. "But we have not undertaken any activities for which authority has not been granted," he said.
With the department's action, the interdict and the looming court battle of the Mapungubwe Action Group, the Australian mine group's argument will most certainly be tested in court. "Coal of Africa interprets the new mining order right as overriding national environmental management legislation and regulations," said Johan Verhoef, Peace Parks Foundation chief. "Therefore they believe that Department of Water Affairs cannot refuse them a water licence. This will all be tested in court and the Vele court case could very well be a watershed case for mining rights in sensitive areas."
Source: Mail & Guardian
More questions for Mbeki on Selebi
These are observations by Pierre De Vos, on his blog "Contitutionally Speaking"
Selebi has now been convicted and sentenced for corruption. However, it is unclear whether the full truth about the events surrounding the Selebi case - including the events that led to the suspension of former National Director of Public Prosecutions, Vusi Pikoli after he issued an arrest warrant for Selebi – has been told.
On 9 November 2006, then President Mbeki wrote a letter to Pieter Groenewald, an MP in the National Assembly. Groenewald had written a letter on 7 November 2006, requesting President Mbeki to appoint a Judicial Commission of Inquiry to investigate various allegations of corruption leveled against Selebi. In the letter, Mbeki declined to appoint such a commission and wrote:
The conviction and sentencing of Jackie Selebi demonstrates that the confidence expresssed in Selebi in the second paragraph of the letter quoted above turned out to be misplaced. It has now also emerged that the claim made in the first paragraph of Mbeki’s letter is difficult (if not impossible) to square with the known facts. In paragraph 257 and 258 of the Ginwala Inquiry Report, Ginwala made the following findings:
President Mbeki was therefore briefed about the investigation against Selebi on at least two occasions before he wrote the letter to Groenewald in which he claimed that no one “in state structures” had informed him about any investigation (or pending investigation) against Selebi. In fact, Mbeki met Pikoli for a third time to discuss the investigation against Selebi on the very same day that he wrote the letter to Groenewald. As this was a letter and not a national televised speech, one will never know if Mbeki’s bottom lip quivered while he was writing this letter.
Source: Constitutionally Speaking: Pierre De Vos
Selebi has now been convicted and sentenced for corruption. However, it is unclear whether the full truth about the events surrounding the Selebi case - including the events that led to the suspension of former National Director of Public Prosecutions, Vusi Pikoli after he issued an arrest warrant for Selebi – has been told.
On 9 November 2006, then President Mbeki wrote a letter to Pieter Groenewald, an MP in the National Assembly. Groenewald had written a letter on 7 November 2006, requesting President Mbeki to appoint a Judicial Commission of Inquiry to investigate various allegations of corruption leveled against Selebi. In the letter, Mbeki declined to appoint such a commission and wrote:
Up to now nobody within the state structures has informed me that there are any investigations affecting National Commissioner Selebi that are being conducted by anybody, including the DSO, (the Scorpions). I am certain that if there was such an investigation, or such an investigation was contemplated, I would have been informed accordingly. In this regard. I must emphasise that if any of our law enforcement or intelligence agencies felt that they had information that justified such an investigation, I would encourage them to do their work without let or hindrance, in keeping with their legal mandate….
I have the greatest confidence in National Commissioner Selebi. I am certain that whatever the rumour mill is saying about him, he will continue to do his critically important work with the same diligence, dedication and selflessness he has shown ever since we appointed him as National Commissioner of the SAPS.
The conviction and sentencing of Jackie Selebi demonstrates that the confidence expresssed in Selebi in the second paragraph of the letter quoted above turned out to be misplaced. It has now also emerged that the claim made in the first paragraph of Mbeki’s letter is difficult (if not impossible) to square with the known facts. In paragraph 257 and 258 of the Ginwala Inquiry Report, Ginwala made the following findings:
It is not disputed that Adv Pikoli met with the Minister and briefed her on the investigation into the National Commissioner of Police on 13 separate occasions: In March 2006, in August 2006, on 9 November 2006, on 16 November 2006, on 11 March 2007, on 13 March 2007, on 17 March 2007, on 28 March 2007, on 8 May 2007, on 25 June 2007, on 11 September 2007, on 18 September 2007 and on 23 September 2007. Following these meetings he furnished the Minister with two written reports on 19 March 2007 and 19 September 2007.
It is also common cause that Adv Pikoli met and briefed the President on the investigation against the National Commissioner of Police on 10 occasions: In March 2006, in August 2006, on 9 or 10 November 2006, on 14 November 2006, on 20 November 2006, on 11 March 2007, on 9 May 2007, on 20 May 2007, on 15 September 2007 and on 16 September 2007. The evidence is that he gave the President written reports on 7 May 2007 and 16 September 2007.
President Mbeki was therefore briefed about the investigation against Selebi on at least two occasions before he wrote the letter to Groenewald in which he claimed that no one “in state structures” had informed him about any investigation (or pending investigation) against Selebi. In fact, Mbeki met Pikoli for a third time to discuss the investigation against Selebi on the very same day that he wrote the letter to Groenewald. As this was a letter and not a national televised speech, one will never know if Mbeki’s bottom lip quivered while he was writing this letter.
Source: Constitutionally Speaking: Pierre De Vos
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
'Don't be too hard on Selebi'
People shouldn’t be too hard on Jackie Selebi. He is actually just a metaphor of what has become of the ANC.
Just as tragic as it is that a man with such a proud history in the struggle for freedom and democracy became a cheap braggart, a charlatan and a crook, so is it heart-breaking that the movement of Albert Luthuli, Oliver Tambo, Walter Sisulu and Nelson Mandela has become a party dominated by greed, a lust for personal power, corruption and petty factionalism. Cynics, Afro-pessimists and right wingers say this was to be expected: most of the other liberation movements on our continent went the same way, Zanu-PF and the MPLA of Angola being prime examples.
I did not expect it. I am shocked every day at new manifestations of the rot in our ruling party. Yes, there were always elements in the ANC during the exile years whom one wouldn’t exactly call democrats and human rights activists. They fought for power, not democracy. But the decent men and women, people who really cared about human dignity and freedom, always dominated the ANC. Most of the best sons and daughters of our country during the last half century were products of the ANC.
This was why I thought our liberation movement would be different. I was wrong. Those decent people, those progressive leaders with whom I associated myself politically for many years, have disappeared into the quicksands of power and greed. The party is now dominated by cheap, lying populists who enrich themselves at the expense of the poor; by opportunists pushing their own interests; by Stalinists and reactionaries. The harder these types try to drive our country towards a bankrupt dictatorship, the more credibility some of the conspiracy theories are getting. Such as: the reason why the ANC is manipulating the judiciary and the National Prosecuting Authority and why it is now pushing two draconian measures to severely limit press freedom, is to make it possible for them to steal more from the people and to hide their own scandals.
Even the theory that the ANC is deliberately sabotaging land reform and redistribution is gaining credibility: they want to pull a Robert Mugabe when it’s popularity among the masses is waning; blame the whites as the common enemy and use land as an emotive issue to unite blacks behind them. I have no doubt in my mind that those ANC leaders who are pushing the proposals for a statutory media tribunal do not believe for one moment that it would improve our newspapers one iota. They know, as we should all know, that it’s only result will be an end to the free flow of information to the voters.
I have been waiting in vain for my comrades of yesteryear to stand up and stop this assault on our democracy. Evil happens when good men remain silent. The vast majority of South Africans have proved that they deserve better than the present leadership of the ANC. But when will this majority start realising that it is their democratic right to show this dangerous clique the red card?
Source: News 24: Max du Preez
Just as tragic as it is that a man with such a proud history in the struggle for freedom and democracy became a cheap braggart, a charlatan and a crook, so is it heart-breaking that the movement of Albert Luthuli, Oliver Tambo, Walter Sisulu and Nelson Mandela has become a party dominated by greed, a lust for personal power, corruption and petty factionalism. Cynics, Afro-pessimists and right wingers say this was to be expected: most of the other liberation movements on our continent went the same way, Zanu-PF and the MPLA of Angola being prime examples.
I did not expect it. I am shocked every day at new manifestations of the rot in our ruling party. Yes, there were always elements in the ANC during the exile years whom one wouldn’t exactly call democrats and human rights activists. They fought for power, not democracy. But the decent men and women, people who really cared about human dignity and freedom, always dominated the ANC. Most of the best sons and daughters of our country during the last half century were products of the ANC.
This was why I thought our liberation movement would be different. I was wrong. Those decent people, those progressive leaders with whom I associated myself politically for many years, have disappeared into the quicksands of power and greed. The party is now dominated by cheap, lying populists who enrich themselves at the expense of the poor; by opportunists pushing their own interests; by Stalinists and reactionaries. The harder these types try to drive our country towards a bankrupt dictatorship, the more credibility some of the conspiracy theories are getting. Such as: the reason why the ANC is manipulating the judiciary and the National Prosecuting Authority and why it is now pushing two draconian measures to severely limit press freedom, is to make it possible for them to steal more from the people and to hide their own scandals.
Even the theory that the ANC is deliberately sabotaging land reform and redistribution is gaining credibility: they want to pull a Robert Mugabe when it’s popularity among the masses is waning; blame the whites as the common enemy and use land as an emotive issue to unite blacks behind them. I have no doubt in my mind that those ANC leaders who are pushing the proposals for a statutory media tribunal do not believe for one moment that it would improve our newspapers one iota. They know, as we should all know, that it’s only result will be an end to the free flow of information to the voters.
I have been waiting in vain for my comrades of yesteryear to stand up and stop this assault on our democracy. Evil happens when good men remain silent. The vast majority of South Africans have proved that they deserve better than the present leadership of the ANC. But when will this majority start realising that it is their democratic right to show this dangerous clique the red card?
Source: News 24: Max du Preez
Police arrest Sunday Times journalist
A Sunday Times journalist was arrested for fraud and defeating the ends of justice on Wednesday. Hawks spokesperson Musa Zondi confirmed the journalist had been arrested and would appear in court within 48 hours. Zondi would not name the journalist or give further details of the alleged offence. "You'll get to hear the case when he appears in court," he said.
Times Live has identified the journalist as Mzilikazi wa Afrika. Times Live reported that Wa Afrika was arrested for the possession of what police claim is a fraudulent letter of resignation from Mpumalanga Premier David Mabuza to President Jacob Zuma. "Wa Afrika was seized by police, who became involved in a screaming match with senior editors about whether photographers could take pictures or not," reported Times Live.
Wa Afrika recently published an article that alleged that police commissioner General Bheki Cele had improperly purchased a new building for police headquarters at a cost of R500-million.
In a statement posted on the Times Live site, Sunday Times editor Ray Hartley said the paper was trying to get clarity on the charges, and find out where Wa Afrika was being held. "I am deeply concerned at the fact that a journalist can be arrested and held at an undisclosed location in a country where the rule of law ought to apply," read the statement. "He was arrested by a large number of policemen in an operation which was clearly designed to intimidate, and I can only conclude that this was the true motive for what took place today. "Mzilikazi was one of the authors of the story which we published on Sunday about the rental of new police headquarters at the cost of R500m without following the usual tender proceedings. I hope, for the sake of our country, that he was not arrested on spurious charges in order to punish him for what he wrote."
Source: Mail & Guadian
Times Live has identified the journalist as Mzilikazi wa Afrika. Times Live reported that Wa Afrika was arrested for the possession of what police claim is a fraudulent letter of resignation from Mpumalanga Premier David Mabuza to President Jacob Zuma. "Wa Afrika was seized by police, who became involved in a screaming match with senior editors about whether photographers could take pictures or not," reported Times Live.
Wa Afrika recently published an article that alleged that police commissioner General Bheki Cele had improperly purchased a new building for police headquarters at a cost of R500-million.
In a statement posted on the Times Live site, Sunday Times editor Ray Hartley said the paper was trying to get clarity on the charges, and find out where Wa Afrika was being held. "I am deeply concerned at the fact that a journalist can be arrested and held at an undisclosed location in a country where the rule of law ought to apply," read the statement. "He was arrested by a large number of policemen in an operation which was clearly designed to intimidate, and I can only conclude that this was the true motive for what took place today. "Mzilikazi was one of the authors of the story which we published on Sunday about the rental of new police headquarters at the cost of R500m without following the usual tender proceedings. I hope, for the sake of our country, that he was not arrested on spurious charges in order to punish him for what he wrote."
Source: Mail & Guadian
Pikoli to join forensic unit
Former national director of public prosecutions Vusi Pikoli has been appointed to head the Gobodo Incorporated forensics unit, the company said on Wednesday. Gobodo's CEO Nonkululeko Gobodo said Pikoli's appointment had come as the firm was expanding its forensics unit. "Good governance and transparency have become increasingly crucial in this era that has witnessed an increase in corporate fraud and corruption," she said.
Pikoli, who has been working in the legal field for more than 20 years, was suspended by former president Thabo Mbeki for not backing down on the prosecution of former national police commissioner Jackie Selebi. Selebi was on Tuesday sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment for corruption. Gobodo was established in 1996 by a group of black chartered accountants.
Pikoli took the helm of the unit at the beginning of this month.
Source: Iol
Pikoli, who has been working in the legal field for more than 20 years, was suspended by former president Thabo Mbeki for not backing down on the prosecution of former national police commissioner Jackie Selebi. Selebi was on Tuesday sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment for corruption. Gobodo was established in 1996 by a group of black chartered accountants.
Pikoli took the helm of the unit at the beginning of this month.
Source: Iol
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Sisulu lid on reports ‘may spark conflict’
MORE conflict might arise over Defence Minister Lindiwe Sisulu ’s refusal to furnish interim reports on the state of the military, the Democratic Alliance (DA) said yesterday. This came as the chairman of Parliament’s portfolio committee on defence, Nyami Booi, called on Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe and Speaker Max Sisulu to intervene in the row between Ms Sisulu and MPs.DA MP David Maynier said Ms Sisulu’s reluctance to allow MPs to view the reports could be proof of the “damning contents of the reports”. “The DA’s position is clear. The interim reports should be furnished to the portfolio committee. I think those reports contain damning information on the state of the military, particularly on issues of morale,” Mr Maynier said. He said it was strange that Ms Sisulu could refuse to release the reports, while she had already implemented their recommendations. “These interim reports have already resulted in action by government,” he said.
Ms Sisulu last week conceded that she had acted on interim findings of the commission, notably by adjusting the pay of lower ranks in the defence force. Mr Maynier also accused Ms Sisulu of “consistently refusing to be accountable to Parliament” and said she appeared intent on keeping the interim reports under wraps for good, as she had only undertaken to release the final version to the committee. Ms Sisulu continued to insist that she could not release interim reports because they were “work(s) in progress”. She said she was only obliged to release the final findings of the Interim National Defence Force Service Commission and, even then, only after its report had been endorsed by the Cabinet.
It was reported that Mr Booi forwarded legal opinion, indicating MPs had a right to view the reports, to Mr Motlanthe in his capacity as head of government business in Parliament and to the speaker. “It has been given to those offices,” Mr Booi said. However, yesterday the offices of Mr Motlanthe and Ms Sisulu said that they had not been formally approached to intervene in the impasse.
Interim findings by the commission were leaked to the Sunday Times and painted a damning picture of service conditions in the military. It warned that this undermined morale and potentially even national security.
Source: Business Day
Also see commentary by Pierre De Vos, in his article entitled "The Princess and the Moon"
South Africa’s Ex-Police Chief Sentenced to 15 Years
A South African court on Tuesday sentenced the country's former police chief to 15 years imprisonment after he was convicted of graft and became one of the most senior officials brought to justice for corruption.
Jackie Selebi, formerly a leading anti-apartheid activist and well-connected in the ruling African National Congress (ANC) party, had been found guilty last month of receiving bribes from a drug kingpin.
Judge Meyer Joffe said in handing down the sentence that Selebi had embarrassed the state, the police force and the court. "At no stage during the trial did the accused display any indication of remorse. The accused lied and fabricated evidence in an endeavor to escape the consequences of his conduct," Joffe said. Selebi remains free on bail on condition that he submits an application for leave to appeal against the sentence within 14 days.
Analysts said the conviction of Selebi -- a former president of the international police body Interpol -- was a positive development for the country, showing it was ready to tackle its growing corruption problem. Prosecutors were seeking more than the possible minimum sentence of 15 years in prison. Selebi's lawyers were seeking a suspended sentence and a fine. Last month, Judge Joffe said in his decision that Selebi had received at least 120,000 rand ($16,500) from Glenn Agliotti, a convicted drug trafficker who was one of the main prosecution witnesses. Joffe had found Selebi not guilty of defeating the ends of justice but said he did not find the former national commissioner of the South African Police Service (SAPS) a credible witness.
Prosecutors had contended that Selebi had links to organized crime figures and received about 1.2 million rand to ignore their drug trafficking. Selebi was a close ally of former President Thabo Mbeki and analysts did not expect his conviction to harm current President Jacob Zuma. The ANC has said the guilty verdict showed no-one was above the law in South Africa.
Source: New York Times
Jackie Selebi, formerly a leading anti-apartheid activist and well-connected in the ruling African National Congress (ANC) party, had been found guilty last month of receiving bribes from a drug kingpin.
Judge Meyer Joffe said in handing down the sentence that Selebi had embarrassed the state, the police force and the court. "At no stage during the trial did the accused display any indication of remorse. The accused lied and fabricated evidence in an endeavor to escape the consequences of his conduct," Joffe said. Selebi remains free on bail on condition that he submits an application for leave to appeal against the sentence within 14 days.
Analysts said the conviction of Selebi -- a former president of the international police body Interpol -- was a positive development for the country, showing it was ready to tackle its growing corruption problem. Prosecutors were seeking more than the possible minimum sentence of 15 years in prison. Selebi's lawyers were seeking a suspended sentence and a fine. Last month, Judge Joffe said in his decision that Selebi had received at least 120,000 rand ($16,500) from Glenn Agliotti, a convicted drug trafficker who was one of the main prosecution witnesses. Joffe had found Selebi not guilty of defeating the ends of justice but said he did not find the former national commissioner of the South African Police Service (SAPS) a credible witness.
Prosecutors had contended that Selebi had links to organized crime figures and received about 1.2 million rand to ignore their drug trafficking. Selebi was a close ally of former President Thabo Mbeki and analysts did not expect his conviction to harm current President Jacob Zuma. The ANC has said the guilty verdict showed no-one was above the law in South Africa.
Source: New York Times
KZN cop arrested after burglar killed
A policeman was arrested on Monday for allegedly being part of a group that killed and burnt a suspected burglar in Nanda, KwaZulu-Natal police said. "The policeman was arrested at work at the Nanda police station today [Monday]. He is facing a murder, attempted murder and assault charge," spokeswoman Brigadier Phindile Radebe said.
On July 18 local residents attacked three people they suspected of breaking into a house. "One person escaped, another was injured the third person was killed and his body was set alight."
Eight people were arrested last Friday and due to appear in court again on August 10. The group implicated the police officer in the crime. He was expected to appear in the Ntuzuma Magistrate's Court on Wednesday.
Source: Mail & Guardian
On July 18 local residents attacked three people they suspected of breaking into a house. "One person escaped, another was injured the third person was killed and his body was set alight."
Eight people were arrested last Friday and due to appear in court again on August 10. The group implicated the police officer in the crime. He was expected to appear in the Ntuzuma Magistrate's Court on Wednesday.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Former Rwandan official gets 25 years for genocide
A former administrator accused of transporting soldiers to kill thousands of people during Rwanda's 1994 genocide received a 25-year sentence on Tuesday, a United Nations court said. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in Arusha, Tanzania, found Dominique Ntawukulilyayo (68) guilty of genocide. "The Trial Chamber ... convicted Dominique Ntawukulilyayo, sub-prefect of Gisagara sub-prefecture in Butare, of genocide and sentenced him to 25 years of imprisonment," the tribunal said on its website.
Ntawukulilyayo, who was the deputy administrator of Rwanda's southern Gisagara district, was acquitted of other charges of complicity in genocide and direct and public incitement to commit genocide. He was arrested in France in October 2007 and transferred to the UN detention facility in the northern Tanzanian town of Arusha a year later.
In their indictment, prosecutors said Ntawukulilyayo transported soldiers to a hill where thousands of refugee Tutsis had gathered after he promised to feed and protect them. "Ntawukulilyayo transported soldiers to Kabuye hill, who joined other assailants in an extensive attack, leaving possibly thousands of Tutsis dead," the tribunal said.
Ethnic Hutu militia and soldiers butchered 800 000 minority Tutsis and politically moderate Hutus in just 100 days between April and June 1994.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Ntawukulilyayo, who was the deputy administrator of Rwanda's southern Gisagara district, was acquitted of other charges of complicity in genocide and direct and public incitement to commit genocide. He was arrested in France in October 2007 and transferred to the UN detention facility in the northern Tanzanian town of Arusha a year later.
In their indictment, prosecutors said Ntawukulilyayo transported soldiers to a hill where thousands of refugee Tutsis had gathered after he promised to feed and protect them. "Ntawukulilyayo transported soldiers to Kabuye hill, who joined other assailants in an extensive attack, leaving possibly thousands of Tutsis dead," the tribunal said.
Ethnic Hutu militia and soldiers butchered 800 000 minority Tutsis and politically moderate Hutus in just 100 days between April and June 1994.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Selebi sentenced to 15 years
Special report: The Selebi saga
Former police chief Jackie Selebi was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment by Judge Meyer Joffe in the South Gauteng High Court on Tuesday, who called him an "embarrassment to South Africa and the police". Joffe compared corruption to a cancer, saying it destroys the moral fibre of a nation. "The damage has already been done. Just as a malignancy may be removed, society is not what it was prior to the corrupt act. The moral fibre of society has to be rebuilt."
Selebi was released on bail of R20 000 pending his application for leave to appeal his conviction and sentence. His advocate, Jaap Cilliers, indicated he would apply for leave to appeal within the next 14 days. This means Selebi will not be incarcerated until this application and his subsequent appeal, if leave is granted by Joffe, are finalised.
In a hard-hitting judgement, Joffe said there were no compelling and substantial reasons why Selebi should be sentenced for less than the minimum 15 years prescribed for law-enforcement officers convicted of corruption. During his judgement, Joffe addressed Selebi directly about his performance in the witness box. "Mr Selebi, you were an embarrassment in the witness box. You were an embarrassment to the office you occupied ... You must be an embarrassment to those who appointed you; you must have been an embarrassment to members of the SAPS you served." According to Joffe, policemen and women work in harsh conditions and deserve better than a corrupt national commissioner. "You must have been an embarrassment to all right-thinking citizens of this country. They deserve more than what they got ... There can be no doubt that all the people of South Africa would join in rejecting a national commissioner found to be an untruthful witness."
Joffe also slammed Selebi for lying to the court and manufacturing evidence. "You embarrassed the court," a visibly upset Joffe said. The judge criticised Selebi's "flagrant mendacity". At no stage did Selebi display "any indication of remorse. But it goes further than remorse; he [Selebi] lied and fabricated evidence to escape the consequences. He eroded much of the sympathy for him."
National Prosecuting Authority spokesperson Mthunzi Mhaga afterward congratulated the prosecutors, saying the sentencing was an appropriate warning to all police officers "to fight any temptation to carry out corruption".
Earlier, Selebi came into court alone, looked relaxed and joking with a photographer who took pictures of him sitting in the dock. Selebi was followed by his wife, Anne, brother George and other family members. Joffe convicted Selebi of corruption on July 2. On Monday, chief state prosecutor Gerrie Nel asked Joffe to sentence Selebi for more than the prescribed minimum sentence of 15 years. Selebi, according to Nel, was no "fallen angel". He never showed remorse or admitted acting unlawfully. He was the head of the police service and betrayed his own legacy.
Selebi's counsel, Jaap Cilliers, argued that Selebi had already suffered enough through all the negative media coverage since 2006, that he was disgraced in the eyes of the public and was "financially destroyed", having to pay the state back millions of rands in legal fees.
Joffe convicted Selebi of accepting bribes worth R166 000 from drug dealer Glenn Agliotti in exchange for showing him top secret police reports. Shortly after being found guilty, the Asset Forfeiture Unit successfully applied for the confiscation of Selebi's assets worth R230 000, which included the R166 000 he received from Agliotti plus interest.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Former police chief Jackie Selebi was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment by Judge Meyer Joffe in the South Gauteng High Court on Tuesday, who called him an "embarrassment to South Africa and the police". Joffe compared corruption to a cancer, saying it destroys the moral fibre of a nation. "The damage has already been done. Just as a malignancy may be removed, society is not what it was prior to the corrupt act. The moral fibre of society has to be rebuilt."
Selebi was released on bail of R20 000 pending his application for leave to appeal his conviction and sentence. His advocate, Jaap Cilliers, indicated he would apply for leave to appeal within the next 14 days. This means Selebi will not be incarcerated until this application and his subsequent appeal, if leave is granted by Joffe, are finalised.
In a hard-hitting judgement, Joffe said there were no compelling and substantial reasons why Selebi should be sentenced for less than the minimum 15 years prescribed for law-enforcement officers convicted of corruption. During his judgement, Joffe addressed Selebi directly about his performance in the witness box. "Mr Selebi, you were an embarrassment in the witness box. You were an embarrassment to the office you occupied ... You must be an embarrassment to those who appointed you; you must have been an embarrassment to members of the SAPS you served." According to Joffe, policemen and women work in harsh conditions and deserve better than a corrupt national commissioner. "You must have been an embarrassment to all right-thinking citizens of this country. They deserve more than what they got ... There can be no doubt that all the people of South Africa would join in rejecting a national commissioner found to be an untruthful witness."
Joffe also slammed Selebi for lying to the court and manufacturing evidence. "You embarrassed the court," a visibly upset Joffe said. The judge criticised Selebi's "flagrant mendacity". At no stage did Selebi display "any indication of remorse. But it goes further than remorse; he [Selebi] lied and fabricated evidence to escape the consequences. He eroded much of the sympathy for him."
National Prosecuting Authority spokesperson Mthunzi Mhaga afterward congratulated the prosecutors, saying the sentencing was an appropriate warning to all police officers "to fight any temptation to carry out corruption".
Earlier, Selebi came into court alone, looked relaxed and joking with a photographer who took pictures of him sitting in the dock. Selebi was followed by his wife, Anne, brother George and other family members. Joffe convicted Selebi of corruption on July 2. On Monday, chief state prosecutor Gerrie Nel asked Joffe to sentence Selebi for more than the prescribed minimum sentence of 15 years. Selebi, according to Nel, was no "fallen angel". He never showed remorse or admitted acting unlawfully. He was the head of the police service and betrayed his own legacy.
Selebi's counsel, Jaap Cilliers, argued that Selebi had already suffered enough through all the negative media coverage since 2006, that he was disgraced in the eyes of the public and was "financially destroyed", having to pay the state back millions of rands in legal fees.
Joffe convicted Selebi of accepting bribes worth R166 000 from drug dealer Glenn Agliotti in exchange for showing him top secret police reports. Shortly after being found guilty, the Asset Forfeiture Unit successfully applied for the confiscation of Selebi's assets worth R230 000, which included the R166 000 he received from Agliotti plus interest.
Source: Mail & Guardian
The Protection of Corruption Bill
After much critical comment from civil society on the Protection of Information Bill, last week the Chief State Law Adviser Enver Daniels chose to respond. This response does not look good for the future of freedom of expression and access to information in this country. Mr Daniels has chosen to simply dismiss the mass national and international protest submitted against the Bill. Apparently civil society is being "hysterical". I have to disagree. His attempts to diminish the impact of the mass of criticism are not going to be enough to silence the protests if all they essentially consist of is a position that can be summarised as: "I'm about 40% sure it should turn out alright".
The three chief areas of concern are simple enough: the wide powers for classification, and two of the penalty clauses against the release of classified information. Apparently, "...read in its entirety, the Bill would withstand scrutiny". This is in spite of the fact, putting aside these broader principled concerns of civil society, the drafters have failed to even consider the more pedantic contradictions within the Bill itself which reveal a strange level of scrutiny by the lawmakers. For instance, there are fundamental contradictions in application between section 19 and 24(2) which have not practicably been analysed.
According to Mr Daniels, "[w]e don't think the provisions are too wide". This in spite of the fact that any public official, if so delegated, can classify any document if it "may be harmful [or endanger or cause serious or irreparable harm] to the security or national interest of the Republic or could prejudice the Republic in its international relation" [Emphasis added]. The first concern here is the inclusion of "may". A decision-maker doesn't even need to be sure - if he has a suspicion, classification commences. And then it moves to those slippery terms of national interest and security - would bad publicity from another corruption scandal prejudice our international relations? And are delegated officials truly able to assess what my national interest would be, with no need to reference this against anything? Further, does national interest translate to government interest, or essentially ANC interest? These are not the kind of ‘finer details' which we should leave for time to solve: the fact that government is resistant to clearing up these definitions and applications before the Bill is passed should be making everyone uncomfortable.
Mr Daniels also said that lawmakers could not add in a caveat on allowing for the release of classified documents if it was in the public interest, which would be a caveat to protect journalists and activists from the draconian criminal penalties created. He noted that this was because he had no policy directive to do so. Perhaps he could have turned to Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000 (PAIA), a piece of constitutional legislation that should inform the construction of the Bill anyway, which also speaks of public interest waivers and could give the lawmakers some guidance in navigating these treacherous waters.
Mr Daniels did however note his own trepidation and was quoted as saying: "I hope people of integrity are going to perform these functions". However, hoping people will perform with integrity when there is no accountability mechanism put in place is a kind of hopefulness not appropriate for lawmakers who should be creating laws that, according to the rule of law, are certain and implementable. You cannot hope that checks and balances work, that do not in fact exist...even more disturbing is the fact that, once classified, public officials needn't even acknowledge the existence of the document. This allowance for bare denial makes the already somewhat toothless internal appeal mechanisms useless. The internal appeals mechanisms also provide for an inordinately delayed decision-making period and would add even more costs into the fray for activists.
There can be no way that the broad power given to officials with absolutely no effective accountability measures can ever be viewed as a constitutionally viable exercise of discretion. We as civil society do not need to have faith, and bare faith alone, in our decision-makers - this is why checks and balances, as well as guidance in decision-making, usually exist with the creation of new laws. Faith without evidence is religion rather than governance and is probably not a sound basis for informed public participation. And herein lies the rub - diminishing the information which the public sees about what its government is doing not only disempowers them, but makes the supposed representation of the publics' interest by their elected government farcical.
The solution is not as Mr Daniels proposes in the PAIA. An additional problem with the Bill is that - though not expressly conflicting - the conflicting priorities each law will have the effect of making PAIA a toothless tiger. My experience from working as an elected member on the National Coordinating Committee of the Deputy Information Officers Forum has taught me that the greatest inhibiter to Information Officers performing their function, which is to release as much information as possible, is their fear of reprisal by superiors. Let's turn now then to section 38 - the offences section that criminalises the disclosure of classified and related information. Although the section says "except where such disclosure is for a purpose and a manner authorised by law", which would include a release through PAIA, I am fairly sure that it won't take Information Officers very long to do their utilitarian calculation: comply with the PAIA Act which tells them to lean towards openness because it's the right thing to do, or take caution of the Bill which says proceed in secrecy or face imprisonment if you mess something up. They would have to be pretty masochistic to get this choice wrong, especially when there is no accountability once the document has been classified.
Another consideration to be had in analysing civil society's supposed hysteria is the concerted effort in the last few weeks of government to encroach on media freedom in all areas. The proposal of a Media Appeals Tribunal subject to parliament - which would obviously deprive the entity of the kind of independence needed to fairly monitor media - marks a trend of behaviour which everyone should be disturbed by.
Perhaps an analogy would assist Mr Daniels to understand civil society's position. Hysteria is when I am swimming in the ocean and then faint and drown because a piece of seaweed floats past. In contrast, it is not what is happening here: yelling to those around us to watch out when there is a great white shark swimming at speed towards us, jaws open but wearing a badge saying "Trust me". Until you tranquilise it or tie it down, I think the best move for civil society is to keep shouting. It is not just media and freedom of information law advocates who will have less to do on the weekends if this Bill is passed. The promotion of a government environment that can even better foster corruption affects us all. And we thought the Arms Scandal was bad - at least we knew about it.
Source: The South African History Archive
The three chief areas of concern are simple enough: the wide powers for classification, and two of the penalty clauses against the release of classified information. Apparently, "...read in its entirety, the Bill would withstand scrutiny". This is in spite of the fact, putting aside these broader principled concerns of civil society, the drafters have failed to even consider the more pedantic contradictions within the Bill itself which reveal a strange level of scrutiny by the lawmakers. For instance, there are fundamental contradictions in application between section 19 and 24(2) which have not practicably been analysed.
According to Mr Daniels, "[w]e don't think the provisions are too wide". This in spite of the fact that any public official, if so delegated, can classify any document if it "may be harmful [or endanger or cause serious or irreparable harm] to the security or national interest of the Republic or could prejudice the Republic in its international relation" [Emphasis added]. The first concern here is the inclusion of "may". A decision-maker doesn't even need to be sure - if he has a suspicion, classification commences. And then it moves to those slippery terms of national interest and security - would bad publicity from another corruption scandal prejudice our international relations? And are delegated officials truly able to assess what my national interest would be, with no need to reference this against anything? Further, does national interest translate to government interest, or essentially ANC interest? These are not the kind of ‘finer details' which we should leave for time to solve: the fact that government is resistant to clearing up these definitions and applications before the Bill is passed should be making everyone uncomfortable.
Mr Daniels also said that lawmakers could not add in a caveat on allowing for the release of classified documents if it was in the public interest, which would be a caveat to protect journalists and activists from the draconian criminal penalties created. He noted that this was because he had no policy directive to do so. Perhaps he could have turned to Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000 (PAIA), a piece of constitutional legislation that should inform the construction of the Bill anyway, which also speaks of public interest waivers and could give the lawmakers some guidance in navigating these treacherous waters.
Mr Daniels did however note his own trepidation and was quoted as saying: "I hope people of integrity are going to perform these functions". However, hoping people will perform with integrity when there is no accountability mechanism put in place is a kind of hopefulness not appropriate for lawmakers who should be creating laws that, according to the rule of law, are certain and implementable. You cannot hope that checks and balances work, that do not in fact exist...even more disturbing is the fact that, once classified, public officials needn't even acknowledge the existence of the document. This allowance for bare denial makes the already somewhat toothless internal appeal mechanisms useless. The internal appeals mechanisms also provide for an inordinately delayed decision-making period and would add even more costs into the fray for activists.
There can be no way that the broad power given to officials with absolutely no effective accountability measures can ever be viewed as a constitutionally viable exercise of discretion. We as civil society do not need to have faith, and bare faith alone, in our decision-makers - this is why checks and balances, as well as guidance in decision-making, usually exist with the creation of new laws. Faith without evidence is religion rather than governance and is probably not a sound basis for informed public participation. And herein lies the rub - diminishing the information which the public sees about what its government is doing not only disempowers them, but makes the supposed representation of the publics' interest by their elected government farcical.
The solution is not as Mr Daniels proposes in the PAIA. An additional problem with the Bill is that - though not expressly conflicting - the conflicting priorities each law will have the effect of making PAIA a toothless tiger. My experience from working as an elected member on the National Coordinating Committee of the Deputy Information Officers Forum has taught me that the greatest inhibiter to Information Officers performing their function, which is to release as much information as possible, is their fear of reprisal by superiors. Let's turn now then to section 38 - the offences section that criminalises the disclosure of classified and related information. Although the section says "except where such disclosure is for a purpose and a manner authorised by law", which would include a release through PAIA, I am fairly sure that it won't take Information Officers very long to do their utilitarian calculation: comply with the PAIA Act which tells them to lean towards openness because it's the right thing to do, or take caution of the Bill which says proceed in secrecy or face imprisonment if you mess something up. They would have to be pretty masochistic to get this choice wrong, especially when there is no accountability once the document has been classified.
Another consideration to be had in analysing civil society's supposed hysteria is the concerted effort in the last few weeks of government to encroach on media freedom in all areas. The proposal of a Media Appeals Tribunal subject to parliament - which would obviously deprive the entity of the kind of independence needed to fairly monitor media - marks a trend of behaviour which everyone should be disturbed by.
Perhaps an analogy would assist Mr Daniels to understand civil society's position. Hysteria is when I am swimming in the ocean and then faint and drown because a piece of seaweed floats past. In contrast, it is not what is happening here: yelling to those around us to watch out when there is a great white shark swimming at speed towards us, jaws open but wearing a badge saying "Trust me". Until you tranquilise it or tie it down, I think the best move for civil society is to keep shouting. It is not just media and freedom of information law advocates who will have less to do on the weekends if this Bill is passed. The promotion of a government environment that can even better foster corruption affects us all. And we thought the Arms Scandal was bad - at least we knew about it.
Source: The South African History Archive
KZN cop held for murder
A Durban police spokesman has been arrested in connection with allegations of murder, attempted murder and assault. He had been implicated by eight men who were arrested last week and who were facing the same charges, police said this morning. Police have vowed to deal with corruption in their ranks.
Police claimed the captain travelled with the eight in a police vehicle to confront a group of people in Durban. "The victims were allegedly beaten up by the gang, including the police officer. One of the victims died at the scene and his body was thrown into a bush, which was set alight," said police spokeswoman, Brigadier Phindile Radebe.
Radebe could not say where the incident took place, the reason for the confrontation, whether the captain was on duty or what the motive for the attack could have been. The suspect, whose job is to alert the media of criminal activities in the city, was arrested yesterday and is expected to appear at the Inanda Magistrate's Court tomorrow.
Radebe promised that the department would do everything to get rid of rogue individuals in the service. "If you are found guilty of corruption, or any other criminal activities, you will face the full might of the law, whether you are a police officer or not. "The department is doing everything possible to root out corrupt officials. If a police officer is found guilty of a criminal offence they will be dismissed," she said.
Opposition parties have strongly condemned the incident, with the DA saying such incidents were a near daily occurrence in the province. DA KZN community safety and liaison spokesman, Sizwe Mchunu, said police were supposed to be custodians of peace and stability in the country, but were often found to be involved in criminal activities. "It is a concern when our very own police are perpetrators and criminals. It has become a trend for police officers to be involved in fraudulent activities," he said.
The IFP's Lionel Mtshali said: "This is a very serious matter because law officers are expected to protect citizens, not be involved in criminal activities. We want to see the law take its course."
Last week, six members of the police's Tactical Response Team were arrested and charged with armed robbery and dealing in illegal firearms after they allegedly robbed a woman twice. In May, an Inanda police station exhibit clerk who sold guns to policemen and to the public was sentenced to 20 years. Thulisani Trevor Mfeka, 29, of KwaMashu had pleaded guilty to stealing and trading in 98 firearms, which he stole from the station's exhibit room. It was reported that he made a profit of R90 000 selling the weapons, including R-5-rifles, in just eight months.
In February, five KZN police officers were arrested for corruption and a cash-in-transit robbery. In the same month, three policemen of the Mayville SAPS were charged with corruption. The trio were alleged to have extorted money from a suspect on a car theft case.
A report by the Independent Complaints Directorate (ICD) early this year revealed that it received 2 289 allegations of criminal activities involving SAPS members. Most of the complaints (406, or 18 percent) were reported in Gauteng, followed by the Western Cape with 356 (16 percent). KwaZulu-Natal had 208 (9 percent). ICD spokesman, Moses Dlamini, said 72 percent of complaints had an element of aggression (these include dog attacks, rape and robbery). He added that police brutality accounted for 36 percent of criminal offences reported.
Cases of attempted murder accounted for 16 percent, while assault amounted to 53 percent of all criminal cases reported.
Source: IoL
Police claimed the captain travelled with the eight in a police vehicle to confront a group of people in Durban. "The victims were allegedly beaten up by the gang, including the police officer. One of the victims died at the scene and his body was thrown into a bush, which was set alight," said police spokeswoman, Brigadier Phindile Radebe.
Radebe could not say where the incident took place, the reason for the confrontation, whether the captain was on duty or what the motive for the attack could have been. The suspect, whose job is to alert the media of criminal activities in the city, was arrested yesterday and is expected to appear at the Inanda Magistrate's Court tomorrow.
Radebe promised that the department would do everything to get rid of rogue individuals in the service. "If you are found guilty of corruption, or any other criminal activities, you will face the full might of the law, whether you are a police officer or not. "The department is doing everything possible to root out corrupt officials. If a police officer is found guilty of a criminal offence they will be dismissed," she said.
Opposition parties have strongly condemned the incident, with the DA saying such incidents were a near daily occurrence in the province. DA KZN community safety and liaison spokesman, Sizwe Mchunu, said police were supposed to be custodians of peace and stability in the country, but were often found to be involved in criminal activities. "It is a concern when our very own police are perpetrators and criminals. It has become a trend for police officers to be involved in fraudulent activities," he said.
The IFP's Lionel Mtshali said: "This is a very serious matter because law officers are expected to protect citizens, not be involved in criminal activities. We want to see the law take its course."
Last week, six members of the police's Tactical Response Team were arrested and charged with armed robbery and dealing in illegal firearms after they allegedly robbed a woman twice. In May, an Inanda police station exhibit clerk who sold guns to policemen and to the public was sentenced to 20 years. Thulisani Trevor Mfeka, 29, of KwaMashu had pleaded guilty to stealing and trading in 98 firearms, which he stole from the station's exhibit room. It was reported that he made a profit of R90 000 selling the weapons, including R-5-rifles, in just eight months.
In February, five KZN police officers were arrested for corruption and a cash-in-transit robbery. In the same month, three policemen of the Mayville SAPS were charged with corruption. The trio were alleged to have extorted money from a suspect on a car theft case.
A report by the Independent Complaints Directorate (ICD) early this year revealed that it received 2 289 allegations of criminal activities involving SAPS members. Most of the complaints (406, or 18 percent) were reported in Gauteng, followed by the Western Cape with 356 (16 percent). KwaZulu-Natal had 208 (9 percent). ICD spokesman, Moses Dlamini, said 72 percent of complaints had an element of aggression (these include dog attacks, rape and robbery). He added that police brutality accounted for 36 percent of criminal offences reported.
Cases of attempted murder accounted for 16 percent, while assault amounted to 53 percent of all criminal cases reported.
Source: IoL
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Corruption and the different faces of the ANC
Deputy-President Kgalema Motlanthe made a clarion call to ANC branch leaders in Gauteng saying that “the fight against crime and corruption must first start within the ANC”. It is the duty of every decent ANC member to take up this call. The ANC National Executive Committee has to set the example.Two major corruption scandals have emerged last week within state institutions. The ANC NEC and President Jacob Zuma must act on it immediately otherwise we must call into doubt the seriousness of the leadership in dealing with corruption. First, Minister Siphiwe Nyanda was again implicated in attempts to influence tenders in his department when his dismissed Director-General Mamodupi Mohlala approached the Labour Court for reinstatement. This follows the Transnet tender scandal and a new one that is emerging in the Gauteng government. Second, General Bheki Cele appears to be involved in an irregular tender award to the tune of R500 million. Apparently, the police Ministry and Department need new headquarters. Would the money not be better spent on equipment for the police or after-school care for children?
The big business faction of the ANC and their cohorts in the state apparatus must be challenged otherwise the ANC will always have two-faces — a face of social justice for elections and a face of corruption when in power. ANC Ministers and Directors-General must face justice when corruption is alleged.
Source: Writing Rights - Zackie Achmat
Cele in 'dodgy' deal
The police department intends to brief media this week on a press report that national police commissioner General Bheki Cele allegedly signed a "dodgy" multi-million rand property deal, a spokesman said on Sunday. "The police have taken a position to deal with the matter through a form of an inclusive media briefing," his spokesman Lindela Mashigo told Sapa in an SMS.
The Sunday Times reported that Cele had signed a R500-million property rental deal that would see police headquarters move to the 18-storey Middestad Sanlam centre in Pretoria, which was owned by billionaire businessman Roux Shabangu. According to the report the deal was not treated as a tender, violating Treasury regulations that all government contracts worth over R500 000 go through a bid process.
Shabangu allegedly signed the R500-million rental lease, which would apparently run for 10 years, with Cele on June 1, but only purchased the building on Wednesday for R220-million. The police's current headquarters was the Wachthuis building around the corner.
Democratic Alliance MP Dianne Kohler Barnard said the party intended to write to the Auditor General asking him to investigate the deal. "The National Police Commissioner has been disingenuous when questioned about the details of the deal and seems to fail to grasp that the principle of transparency is one that SAPS must strive to maintain at all times... And that the procedure of having open tender bids is there to ensure that public finances are responsibly managed."
Source: IoL
The Sunday Times reported that Cele had signed a R500-million property rental deal that would see police headquarters move to the 18-storey Middestad Sanlam centre in Pretoria, which was owned by billionaire businessman Roux Shabangu. According to the report the deal was not treated as a tender, violating Treasury regulations that all government contracts worth over R500 000 go through a bid process.
Shabangu allegedly signed the R500-million rental lease, which would apparently run for 10 years, with Cele on June 1, but only purchased the building on Wednesday for R220-million. The police's current headquarters was the Wachthuis building around the corner.
Democratic Alliance MP Dianne Kohler Barnard said the party intended to write to the Auditor General asking him to investigate the deal. "The National Police Commissioner has been disingenuous when questioned about the details of the deal and seems to fail to grasp that the principle of transparency is one that SAPS must strive to maintain at all times... And that the procedure of having open tender bids is there to ensure that public finances are responsibly managed."
Source: IoL
Friday, July 30, 2010
Kebble's dirty empire laid bare
Brett Kebble's former strongman described in vivid detail this week the violence and deceit that lay beneath the surface of Kebble's opulent life.
Clinton Nassif, former owner of the Central National Security Group, is the state's key witness in its case against convicted drug-dealer Glenn Agliotti, the only person charged with Kebble's murder on September 27 2005. Nassif took the stand in the South Gauteng High Court on Thursday.
He testified that he met Agliotti on the golf course in 2003, where they "started discussing business". Nassif told Agliotti he was "doing security, investigations". Agliotti told him he was working for Brett Kebble. A week later Agliotti invited Nassif to a breakfast meeting in Sandton. "He spoke about what he did for the Kebbles. I gave him advice about the things they were doing. He told me he was working with Palto, a team under [former police boss] Jackie Selebi. He told me he was friends with Jackie [Selebi]; they worked on investigations."
Nassif said Agliotti suggested that he should start working for Kebble and his business partner, Australian John Stratton, who they flew down to Cape Town to meet. It was agreed that Nassif and his security firm would do work for the Kebbles, but Agliotti told him: "I handle the Kebbles and Stratton. Any meetings with them go through me." At a meeting with Stratton -- at that stage a director of JCI, of which Kebble was chief executive -- he was told about the company's interests and where JCI's "problems were coming from".
Nassif was contracted to "get information and do surveillance", including "bugging people's motor vehicles" and tapping "many people's phones" for Kebble and Stratton. In one case child pornography was planted on a JCI employee's computer. According to Nassif, he was given a list of people to spy on, including former Durban Roodepoort Deep boss Mark Wellesley-Wood, Uranium One chief executive Jean Nortier and Randgold Resources chief executive Mark Bristow. "We had to get bank statements, keep tabs on everyone [who was] against them [Kebble and Stratton]," Nassif testified. He also told the Kebbles he could bribe prosecutors and magistrates. One case against Roger Kebble, Brett's father, "fell away and we got favoured".
Kebble and Stratton's alleged methods were at their crudest in the shooting of former Allan Gray chief investment officer Stephen Mildenhall, who flew from London on Wednesday to testify in the trial. Mildenhall stood in the way of a large Investec loan to JCI. Nassif said that in mid-2005 Agliotti and Stratton gave him names of people "who ... had to be taken care of". "In one meeting Mildenhall came up. I was informed by Agliotti and Stratton that Mildenhall was the real, real problem. Something had to be done." At a meeting at Stratton's Cape Town house, "Stratton said he wanted this thing done" and pointed a sushi knife at Nassif. Nassif said: "I wasn't willing to take on the job of killing Mildenhall." They renegotiated with Stratton and Agliotti, who agreed that Mildenhall should be "taken out of the system for three to six months".
Nassif also revealed for the first time that Brett Kebble's father, Roger, knew about his son's plans to die. After Nassif was asked by Brett Kebble and Stratton to find a pill that could induce a heart attack, Nassif went to Roger's house at night and told him his son had "crazy" plans. "He [Roger Kebble] freaked out, saying since he [Brett] was a teenager, when things got hard, he always threatened this [suicide] ... we left it at that." When Brett Kebble found out Nassif had told his father, "he blasted me from a dizzy height". Meanwhile, the M&G has learned that charges of tax evasion and tax fraud were laid against Agliotti at the Brooklyn police station in Pretoria this week. They are understood to flow from a confidential inquiry by the South African Revenue Service into Agliotti's tax affairs, which the M&G revealed in late 2008.
The Kebble trial this week gave a glimpse into the world of South Africa’s short-haired musclemen, who kill for cash. And ruthlessly efficient professionalism was not a quality they brought to mind. The three stooges took the stand in the South Gauteng High Court to explain the murder of Kebble and the shooting of Mildenhall in 2005. Boxer Mikey Schultz, rugby player-turned-bouncer Nigel McGurk and panelbeater Faizel "Kappie" Smith took turns in relaying the muddled events that left Mildenhall shot in the shoulder and Kebble dead In chillingly calm tones they described the plans that led to the hit on Mildenhall, who was calling for Kebble’s removal as chief executive of JCI.
Smith, who admits to being paid for "intimidating people and beating people up", said: "We wanted him taken out of action.” McGurk referred to "taking him [Mildenhall] out of commission"; Schultz said that they "wanted him taken care of". The men did not know Mildenhall and, according to Smith, did not even know what he looked like. They weren't making any money from the job -- but the Kebbles' security chief, Clinton Nassif, assured them that Kebble would look after them financially. On the way to Cape Town, the trio's hired BMW 4X4 ran over a "little buck". They had left their cellphones at home to avoid being traced and had to use a payphone to contact Nassif, who drove down to Colesberg. The three hitchhiked a ride to the sleepy Karoo town and Nassif rented them a Volkswagen Citi Golf to continue to Cape Town. Once there, the Mildenhall shooting was sub-sub-contracted to "two guys at a taxi rank" in Claremont, Cape Town, for R150 000. Smith had found them through "a family member". The shooters staked out the wrong house for three days, mixing up roads with streets, McGurk testified. The shooters waited for Mildenhall to return home from work and shot him in both shoulders. Mildenhall, now resident in the UK, still has pain and has restricted movement in his left shoulder, he testified on Wednesday. The shooters kept Mildenhall's driver's licence "to prove that we had done the job", said McGurk. Smith threw the gun into the sea. Mildenhall's wallet and credit cards were burned under a bridge en route to Johannesburg. In Johannesburg, Smith dropped off his accomplices and then "went to fetch my kid from school".
Smith told the court that a few weeks later Schultz had approached him at his panelbeating shop to say: "Kebble wants to go." Through messages passed from Nassif through Schultz to McGurk and Smith, the three planned to carry out the "assisted suicide" of Kebble for R500 000 each, by feigning a hijacking. On September 22 2005, the night originally planned for the job, it was called off. "I was furious; it was the only thing on my mind all night. I even took a shower," said McGurk. At the next attempt, on September 26, Schultz's wife's black Golf GTI, which they used for the hit, overheated and they had to head home. Kebble was "furious" and told Nassif "we didn’t know what we were putting him through", according to Schultz. The next night, Schultz’s gun jammed at the first two attempts. On the third attempt "Kebble rolled down the window and that was the first time I ever saw him," said Schultz. "I pulled the trigger and the gun fired." McGurk testified he was upset that Schultz had told Nassif about the mishaps. "The car overheated, the gun jammed.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Clinton Nassif, former owner of the Central National Security Group, is the state's key witness in its case against convicted drug-dealer Glenn Agliotti, the only person charged with Kebble's murder on September 27 2005. Nassif took the stand in the South Gauteng High Court on Thursday.
He testified that he met Agliotti on the golf course in 2003, where they "started discussing business". Nassif told Agliotti he was "doing security, investigations". Agliotti told him he was working for Brett Kebble. A week later Agliotti invited Nassif to a breakfast meeting in Sandton. "He spoke about what he did for the Kebbles. I gave him advice about the things they were doing. He told me he was working with Palto, a team under [former police boss] Jackie Selebi. He told me he was friends with Jackie [Selebi]; they worked on investigations."
Nassif said Agliotti suggested that he should start working for Kebble and his business partner, Australian John Stratton, who they flew down to Cape Town to meet. It was agreed that Nassif and his security firm would do work for the Kebbles, but Agliotti told him: "I handle the Kebbles and Stratton. Any meetings with them go through me." At a meeting with Stratton -- at that stage a director of JCI, of which Kebble was chief executive -- he was told about the company's interests and where JCI's "problems were coming from".
Nassif was contracted to "get information and do surveillance", including "bugging people's motor vehicles" and tapping "many people's phones" for Kebble and Stratton. In one case child pornography was planted on a JCI employee's computer. According to Nassif, he was given a list of people to spy on, including former Durban Roodepoort Deep boss Mark Wellesley-Wood, Uranium One chief executive Jean Nortier and Randgold Resources chief executive Mark Bristow. "We had to get bank statements, keep tabs on everyone [who was] against them [Kebble and Stratton]," Nassif testified. He also told the Kebbles he could bribe prosecutors and magistrates. One case against Roger Kebble, Brett's father, "fell away and we got favoured".
Kebble and Stratton's alleged methods were at their crudest in the shooting of former Allan Gray chief investment officer Stephen Mildenhall, who flew from London on Wednesday to testify in the trial. Mildenhall stood in the way of a large Investec loan to JCI. Nassif said that in mid-2005 Agliotti and Stratton gave him names of people "who ... had to be taken care of". "In one meeting Mildenhall came up. I was informed by Agliotti and Stratton that Mildenhall was the real, real problem. Something had to be done." At a meeting at Stratton's Cape Town house, "Stratton said he wanted this thing done" and pointed a sushi knife at Nassif. Nassif said: "I wasn't willing to take on the job of killing Mildenhall." They renegotiated with Stratton and Agliotti, who agreed that Mildenhall should be "taken out of the system for three to six months".
Nassif also revealed for the first time that Brett Kebble's father, Roger, knew about his son's plans to die. After Nassif was asked by Brett Kebble and Stratton to find a pill that could induce a heart attack, Nassif went to Roger's house at night and told him his son had "crazy" plans. "He [Roger Kebble] freaked out, saying since he [Brett] was a teenager, when things got hard, he always threatened this [suicide] ... we left it at that." When Brett Kebble found out Nassif had told his father, "he blasted me from a dizzy height". Meanwhile, the M&G has learned that charges of tax evasion and tax fraud were laid against Agliotti at the Brooklyn police station in Pretoria this week. They are understood to flow from a confidential inquiry by the South African Revenue Service into Agliotti's tax affairs, which the M&G revealed in late 2008.
The Kebble trial this week gave a glimpse into the world of South Africa’s short-haired musclemen, who kill for cash. And ruthlessly efficient professionalism was not a quality they brought to mind. The three stooges took the stand in the South Gauteng High Court to explain the murder of Kebble and the shooting of Mildenhall in 2005. Boxer Mikey Schultz, rugby player-turned-bouncer Nigel McGurk and panelbeater Faizel "Kappie" Smith took turns in relaying the muddled events that left Mildenhall shot in the shoulder and Kebble dead In chillingly calm tones they described the plans that led to the hit on Mildenhall, who was calling for Kebble’s removal as chief executive of JCI.
Smith, who admits to being paid for "intimidating people and beating people up", said: "We wanted him taken out of action.” McGurk referred to "taking him [Mildenhall] out of commission"; Schultz said that they "wanted him taken care of". The men did not know Mildenhall and, according to Smith, did not even know what he looked like. They weren't making any money from the job -- but the Kebbles' security chief, Clinton Nassif, assured them that Kebble would look after them financially. On the way to Cape Town, the trio's hired BMW 4X4 ran over a "little buck". They had left their cellphones at home to avoid being traced and had to use a payphone to contact Nassif, who drove down to Colesberg. The three hitchhiked a ride to the sleepy Karoo town and Nassif rented them a Volkswagen Citi Golf to continue to Cape Town. Once there, the Mildenhall shooting was sub-sub-contracted to "two guys at a taxi rank" in Claremont, Cape Town, for R150 000. Smith had found them through "a family member". The shooters staked out the wrong house for three days, mixing up roads with streets, McGurk testified. The shooters waited for Mildenhall to return home from work and shot him in both shoulders. Mildenhall, now resident in the UK, still has pain and has restricted movement in his left shoulder, he testified on Wednesday. The shooters kept Mildenhall's driver's licence "to prove that we had done the job", said McGurk. Smith threw the gun into the sea. Mildenhall's wallet and credit cards were burned under a bridge en route to Johannesburg. In Johannesburg, Smith dropped off his accomplices and then "went to fetch my kid from school".
Smith told the court that a few weeks later Schultz had approached him at his panelbeating shop to say: "Kebble wants to go." Through messages passed from Nassif through Schultz to McGurk and Smith, the three planned to carry out the "assisted suicide" of Kebble for R500 000 each, by feigning a hijacking. On September 22 2005, the night originally planned for the job, it was called off. "I was furious; it was the only thing on my mind all night. I even took a shower," said McGurk. At the next attempt, on September 26, Schultz's wife's black Golf GTI, which they used for the hit, overheated and they had to head home. Kebble was "furious" and told Nassif "we didn’t know what we were putting him through", according to Schultz. The next night, Schultz’s gun jammed at the first two attempts. On the third attempt "Kebble rolled down the window and that was the first time I ever saw him," said Schultz. "I pulled the trigger and the gun fired." McGurk testified he was upset that Schultz had told Nassif about the mishaps. "The car overheated, the gun jammed.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Media tribunal 'would be a very dangerous move'
A media tribunal would be an "imposition" on media freedom, press ombudsman Joe Thloloe warned on Friday. "Any system imposed from outside the press itself will be an imposition and in violation of the Constitution," Thloloe told the South African Press Association. He was responding to the African National Congress's (ANC) release of a discussion document, entitled "Media transformation, ownership and diversity", which proposes the setting up of a "Media Appeals Tribunal" to make the media "accountable".
Thloloe said he approached the ANC about a month ago to try to get clarity on talk of a tribunal, which the ANC said would complement the role of the press council and press ombudsman. "I was saying we were getting two different positions. The one, from Polokwane, that there will be an investigation into the possibility of a media tribunal ... But also, another position, coming from the alliance very strongly, is a view that a tribunal should be established. I went there to ask, where are we standing, is there going to be in an investigation or is it [the tribunal] going ahead? [I was told] they are going to recommend that Parliament will do an investigation," said Thloloe. He said he would be "happy" to participate in an investigation but expressed doubts about its intentions. "We are very happy to participate in any investigation, but what worries us are the people who have already made up their minds."
The ANC document criticised the press ombudsman, saying he could not be objective. The document states: "The mere fact that the press ombudsman is from the media ranks, a former journalist, and is not an independent person who looks at the media from the layman's perspective, poses an inherent bias towards the media with all interpretations favourable to the institution and the other party just has to understand and accept the media way, which is grossly unfair and unjust."
But Thloloe, a veteran journalist with almost 50 years' experience, said the self-regulatory system of the press ombudsman had been copied from various other systems around the world. "The press ombudsman's office and the press council are functioning well ... it doesn't need anything else," he said. The ANC discussion document did not really further "flesh out the proposal" of a media tribunal, he added. "It's a very strange document ... The arguments they have raised so far are not convincing; we can't take it further because they haven't fleshed out the proposal."
South African National Editors' Forum (Sanef) chairperson Mondli Makhanya on Friday said Sanef would request a meeting with the ANC to have a "decent conversation" about media freedom. "There seems to be a huge gulf that has developed between the ANC and the media. We want to sit down with them and a have a decent conversation," Makhanya told Sapa. We will be requesting a meeting with the ANC."
ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe on Thursday invited newspaper editors to join the ruling party's debate on setting up a statutory media tribunal. But Makhanya said there was no way Sanef would ever be open to the idea of such a tribunal. "A media tribunal would be unconstitutional and totally against media freedom. It would be a very, very dangerous move."
However, Sanef would be willing to discuss the role of the press ombudsman and press council. Makhanya said the media was not only accountable to the ANC, but to the public, and if the public felt the print media's self-regulation could be improved, it needed to be discussed. "We would be open to a discussion on how it can be strengthened," he said.
The ANC wants an independent statutory body accountable to Parliament to deal with complaints against newspapers, instead of only using the press ombudsman, who currently deals with complaints. Mantashe said on Thursday, according to the Star: "Our invitation is that the media must engage in that debate constructively, throw around ideas and not defend its own turf. "The fact that editors and columns in the newspapers are on the defensive is not going to stop us from having that discussion. It's up to them if they want to contribute to that debate, and actually to influence it. It is up to them, if they think they are on the defensive and must take a laager approach to that discussion, they are doing that at their own peril," said Mantashe.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Thloloe said he approached the ANC about a month ago to try to get clarity on talk of a tribunal, which the ANC said would complement the role of the press council and press ombudsman. "I was saying we were getting two different positions. The one, from Polokwane, that there will be an investigation into the possibility of a media tribunal ... But also, another position, coming from the alliance very strongly, is a view that a tribunal should be established. I went there to ask, where are we standing, is there going to be in an investigation or is it [the tribunal] going ahead? [I was told] they are going to recommend that Parliament will do an investigation," said Thloloe. He said he would be "happy" to participate in an investigation but expressed doubts about its intentions. "We are very happy to participate in any investigation, but what worries us are the people who have already made up their minds."
The ANC document criticised the press ombudsman, saying he could not be objective. The document states: "The mere fact that the press ombudsman is from the media ranks, a former journalist, and is not an independent person who looks at the media from the layman's perspective, poses an inherent bias towards the media with all interpretations favourable to the institution and the other party just has to understand and accept the media way, which is grossly unfair and unjust."
But Thloloe, a veteran journalist with almost 50 years' experience, said the self-regulatory system of the press ombudsman had been copied from various other systems around the world. "The press ombudsman's office and the press council are functioning well ... it doesn't need anything else," he said. The ANC discussion document did not really further "flesh out the proposal" of a media tribunal, he added. "It's a very strange document ... The arguments they have raised so far are not convincing; we can't take it further because they haven't fleshed out the proposal."
South African National Editors' Forum (Sanef) chairperson Mondli Makhanya on Friday said Sanef would request a meeting with the ANC to have a "decent conversation" about media freedom. "There seems to be a huge gulf that has developed between the ANC and the media. We want to sit down with them and a have a decent conversation," Makhanya told Sapa. We will be requesting a meeting with the ANC."
ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe on Thursday invited newspaper editors to join the ruling party's debate on setting up a statutory media tribunal. But Makhanya said there was no way Sanef would ever be open to the idea of such a tribunal. "A media tribunal would be unconstitutional and totally against media freedom. It would be a very, very dangerous move."
However, Sanef would be willing to discuss the role of the press ombudsman and press council. Makhanya said the media was not only accountable to the ANC, but to the public, and if the public felt the print media's self-regulation could be improved, it needed to be discussed. "We would be open to a discussion on how it can be strengthened," he said.
The ANC wants an independent statutory body accountable to Parliament to deal with complaints against newspapers, instead of only using the press ombudsman, who currently deals with complaints. Mantashe said on Thursday, according to the Star: "Our invitation is that the media must engage in that debate constructively, throw around ideas and not defend its own turf. "The fact that editors and columns in the newspapers are on the defensive is not going to stop us from having that discussion. It's up to them if they want to contribute to that debate, and actually to influence it. It is up to them, if they think they are on the defensive and must take a laager approach to that discussion, they are doing that at their own peril," said Mantashe.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Thursday, July 29, 2010
15 cops arrested in 1 day
Fifteen police officers have been arrested in the past 24 hours across the country for crimes including armed robbery. Police General Bheki Cele made the announcement at the memorial service for the seven officers who died in a helicopter crash while responding to a robbery in Emalahleni last week.
Lieutenant General Arno Lamoer said six officers were arrested in the Northern Cape, two in Pretoria and one in Mpumalanga. He said their biggest concern is that six more arrested in KwaZulu-Natal were members of the elite tactical response team. “In 24 hours, 15 members the SAPS were arrested, including six of the tactical response team who are supposed to be the first point of call when things are tough,” Cele said. He warned crooked cops better mend their ways or they would end up in jail. Lamoer added, “People that we trained highly for the purpose of fighting crime are getting involved in things like this. That is totally unacceptable and we will not stop until we root out all criminals.” Lamoer said the message from the top brass is clear. “If you don’t feel like being in this organisation, pick up, walk and go. We don’t need criminals. We are here to fight crime and serve our community,” he said.
Cele said he is insulted that the police’s elite are among those arrested. He encouraged corrupt police to come clean in memory of the seven dedicated officers who died. The 15 SAPS members are in custody and will appear in court soon.
Source: Eye Witness News
Lieutenant General Arno Lamoer said six officers were arrested in the Northern Cape, two in Pretoria and one in Mpumalanga. He said their biggest concern is that six more arrested in KwaZulu-Natal were members of the elite tactical response team. “In 24 hours, 15 members the SAPS were arrested, including six of the tactical response team who are supposed to be the first point of call when things are tough,” Cele said. He warned crooked cops better mend their ways or they would end up in jail. Lamoer added, “People that we trained highly for the purpose of fighting crime are getting involved in things like this. That is totally unacceptable and we will not stop until we root out all criminals.” Lamoer said the message from the top brass is clear. “If you don’t feel like being in this organisation, pick up, walk and go. We don’t need criminals. We are here to fight crime and serve our community,” he said.
Cele said he is insulted that the police’s elite are among those arrested. He encouraged corrupt police to come clean in memory of the seven dedicated officers who died. The 15 SAPS members are in custody and will appear in court soon.
Source: Eye Witness News
South Africa to lose six kings and queens
President Jacob Zuma has asked traditional communities to embark on a path of "acceptance, healing and reconciliation" after a recommendation by a traditional leadership commission that South Africa lose six of its kings and queens. Zuma, who was announcing the findings of the Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims, said it was essential that the six king and queenships come to an end in order to "correct the wrongs of the past". "The apartheid regime created its own traditional leadership at the expense of authentic leadership in some communities," Zuma said at a press conference in Pretoria. "It was how those in charge divided and disunited people. All we are doing is correcting the wrongs of the past."
The commission, established by then President Thabo Mbeki in 2004 to resolve disputes on "paramountcies and chieftaincy", concluded that South Africa has only seven legitimate kingships and recommended that the others lose their status on the death of the current incumbents. The seven that are recognised are the AbaThembu, the AmaXhosa and the AmaMpondo in the Eastern Cape, the AmaZulu in KwaZulu-Natal, the BaPedi ba Maroteng and the VhaVenda in Limpopo and the AmaNdebele in Mpumalanga.
The paramountcies that are not recognised are the Batlokwa ba Mota and the Kakwena baMopeli in the Free State, the AmaRharbabe, the Amampondo ase-Nyandeni and the AbaThembu base-Rhode the in the Eastern Cape and the Ndundza Mabhoko in Mpumalanga. "We urge all communities to accept the findings in the spirit of correcting the wrongs of the past as part of the country's nation building efforts," Zuma said. "It enabled us to restore dignity to the institution of traditional leadership. "The findings must help all affected communities to begin the path of acceptance, healing and reconciliation."
The commission will next make findings and recommendations on the next layer of traditional leadership -- the principal traditional leadership, senior traditional leadership and headmanship.
Source: Times Live
The commission, established by then President Thabo Mbeki in 2004 to resolve disputes on "paramountcies and chieftaincy", concluded that South Africa has only seven legitimate kingships and recommended that the others lose their status on the death of the current incumbents. The seven that are recognised are the AbaThembu, the AmaXhosa and the AmaMpondo in the Eastern Cape, the AmaZulu in KwaZulu-Natal, the BaPedi ba Maroteng and the VhaVenda in Limpopo and the AmaNdebele in Mpumalanga.
The paramountcies that are not recognised are the Batlokwa ba Mota and the Kakwena baMopeli in the Free State, the AmaRharbabe, the Amampondo ase-Nyandeni and the AbaThembu base-Rhode the in the Eastern Cape and the Ndundza Mabhoko in Mpumalanga. "We urge all communities to accept the findings in the spirit of correcting the wrongs of the past as part of the country's nation building efforts," Zuma said. "It enabled us to restore dignity to the institution of traditional leadership. "The findings must help all affected communities to begin the path of acceptance, healing and reconciliation."
The commission will next make findings and recommendations on the next layer of traditional leadership -- the principal traditional leadership, senior traditional leadership and headmanship.
Source: Times Live
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Why hasn’t Agliotti been charged with fraud?
One of the most fascinating aspects of the Brett Kebble murder trial in the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg is the fact that the accused, Glenn Agliotti, has not been charged with fraud relating to what appears to be a defence of assisted suicide. The evidence given by Agliotti in the corruption trial of former top cop Jackie Selebi, as well as both Michael “Mikey” Schultz and Nigel McGurk, appears to be that Kebble ordered his own killing. So much so that, as Schultz testified, he waited “patiently” for the gun to be fixed after it misfired on the first two occasions.
According to the latter two, Clinton Nassif, Kebble’s head of security, made all the arrangements. Unlike Stephen Mildenhall, who was purportedly an unwitting victim on a hit list, Kebble allegedly ordered his own hit. If that be so then — to a greater or lesser degree — this much is common cause. Yet that raises the question of why Agliotti, in the knowledge that this was aimed at deriving financial benefit, has not been charged with fraud as well.
The crime itself consists of the unlawful and intentional making of a misrepresentation, knowing it to be false, to the prejudice or potential prejudice of others. In this case the misrepresentation consists of holding out that Kebble was murdered by hijackers or hitmen when all along the parties knew it had been arranged by Kebble under controlled circumstances. At least if the version being given is true. The prejudice primarily being suffered by the insurance companies who paid out on a murder charge — noting of course that potential prejudice would suffice to sustain the charge.
Of course the fact that South African law does not recognise assisted suicide will be of concern in terms of the civil case rather than the criminal one. In this regard if a policy pays out on murder then in terms of South African law — as it presently stands — Kebble fits that description. The insurers can jump up and down all they like but as far as the civil court is concerned the Brett Kebble matter is murder because we don’t recognise assisted suicide. It will be interesting to see the court’s reaction if such a matter finds its way to some poor unsuspecting judge.
In terms of the criminal case, however, the intention was clear — make it look like murder in order to derive financial benefit but claim assisted suicide if caught. Murder is the unlawful and intentional killing of another human being. To exclude unlawfulness one has to show grounds of justification of which assisted suicide is presently not one. Intention in this case is clear and need not be canvassed here. That it is the killing of another human being speaks for itself.
In Lawrence Hodes, Agliotti has an outstanding counsel and it is worthwhile for junior counsel to attend court to see how he approaches these issues.
Source: Mail & Guardian Thought Leader - Michael Trapido
According to the latter two, Clinton Nassif, Kebble’s head of security, made all the arrangements. Unlike Stephen Mildenhall, who was purportedly an unwitting victim on a hit list, Kebble allegedly ordered his own hit. If that be so then — to a greater or lesser degree — this much is common cause. Yet that raises the question of why Agliotti, in the knowledge that this was aimed at deriving financial benefit, has not been charged with fraud as well.
The crime itself consists of the unlawful and intentional making of a misrepresentation, knowing it to be false, to the prejudice or potential prejudice of others. In this case the misrepresentation consists of holding out that Kebble was murdered by hijackers or hitmen when all along the parties knew it had been arranged by Kebble under controlled circumstances. At least if the version being given is true. The prejudice primarily being suffered by the insurance companies who paid out on a murder charge — noting of course that potential prejudice would suffice to sustain the charge.
Of course the fact that South African law does not recognise assisted suicide will be of concern in terms of the civil case rather than the criminal one. In this regard if a policy pays out on murder then in terms of South African law — as it presently stands — Kebble fits that description. The insurers can jump up and down all they like but as far as the civil court is concerned the Brett Kebble matter is murder because we don’t recognise assisted suicide. It will be interesting to see the court’s reaction if such a matter finds its way to some poor unsuspecting judge.
In terms of the criminal case, however, the intention was clear — make it look like murder in order to derive financial benefit but claim assisted suicide if caught. Murder is the unlawful and intentional killing of another human being. To exclude unlawfulness one has to show grounds of justification of which assisted suicide is presently not one. Intention in this case is clear and need not be canvassed here. That it is the killing of another human being speaks for itself.
In Lawrence Hodes, Agliotti has an outstanding counsel and it is worthwhile for junior counsel to attend court to see how he approaches these issues.
Source: Mail & Guardian Thought Leader - Michael Trapido
The ANC Turns on the Press (Again)
The African National Congress, perhaps buoyed by a renewed sense of public confidence in the wake of the World Cup, is, again, moving against one of our fundamental democratic freedoms.
Amidst a new flurry of indignation, paranoid and hysterical in equal measure, various representatives of the ANC have made it quite clear that they consider some of the criticisms of the party and its leaders that have appeared in the media to be unacceptable. This is not the first outbreak of this sort of hostility to press freedom within the ANC but it needs to be taken seriously because it’s backed up with real intent.
The most solid aspect of that intent is the Protection of Public Information Bill, which would allow more than 140 different bodies, from municipal managers up the Minister of State Security, to withhold information. It would also criminalise whistle blowing and effectively give the state the power to stop uncomfortable media investigations. By all accounts the Bill would, if passed into an Act, be unconstitutional and would go the same way as the Slums Act if confronted with a challenge in the Constitutional Court.
To compound the situation the ruling party has returned to its proposal, first put forward in 2007 and then abandoned after huge pressure, for a media tribunal that could, on its own account, result in journalists being imprisoned, fined and fired. As in 2007 statements from the ANC, many of which are patently anti-democratic, are quite clear that their central concern is how the party and its leaders are represented.
The South African Communist Party has supported the call arguing that the Press Ombudsman is inadequate and that the alternative opportunity for redress, the legal system, is not affordable to most South Africans. At least one newspaper editor takes the view that the ombudsman is, indeed, understaffed and underfunded but if this is the case it hardly justifies an inquisition aimed at stemming critique of the ruling party. On the contrary the solution would be to give the ombudsman’s office the support it needs or to propose a better alternative. The SACP’s second point is certainly fair but to point to the class bias of our legal system to justify a call for an inquisition by a ruling party that is actively entrenching inequality is, as the Communist Party often does, to misuse left wing critique of our society to try and legitimate right wing agendas.
Blade Nzimande, himself a recent target of media criticism, has argued that the confession by the former Cape Argus journalist Ashley Smith that he had taken money and privileged access to tenders to report favourably on Ebrahim Rasool indicates the necessity for a media tribunal. But Nzimande says nothing at all about the fact that the ANC has seen fit to give Rasool a prestigious and important diplomatic posting. The SACP is, to its credit, raising the issue of corruption within party structures and in a grassroots campaign that has had impressive moments. But that doesn’t change the fact that it is fundamentally dubious for Nzimande to call for the ANC to arrange for an inquisition into the media on the basis of a case that reveals corruption in both the party and the newsroom of the Cape Argus. Why not a tribunal to look at corruption in the party? To use one case of corruption to besmirch the reputation of the whole of the fourth estate, and to do so in a manner that aligns with the out and out political authoritarianism of someone like Jackson Mthembu and his clear desire to subordinate the media to the party, puts the SACP firmly in the camp of the authoritarian nationalists.
The third component of the ANC’s new strategy towards the media seems to be The New Age, the new newspaper to be published by the Gupta brothers. The paper will be ‘broadly supportive of the ANC’. There’s nothing wrong with a newspaper that aims to be supportive of a particular political party or idea but there is something very wrong when there’s a strong suspicion that the owners of that newspaper are involved in questionable business relations with the President and his family. Is this not potentially something very much like a supersized version of the Ashley Smith and Ebrahim Rasool nexus? Nzimande’s silence on this score is telling.
There is no question that the media is imperfect. Anyone who has been part of a project or event that makes the news will attest to the fact that most reports carry some errors. This is not, at all, a unique failing of the South African media or even of the media in general. A large proportion of the academic articles that deal with current events are also riddled with errors of fact. Governments, human rights organisations and businesses all get it wrong fairly often.
The tendency to error doesn’t have to be explained through the language of conspiracy. While there are better and worse ways of doing things, and while we certainly need to strive for the former, the fact is that some degree of error is inevitable. Error is part of the inevitable messiness of the world and a democratic view needs to understand that and to respond to it by preserving as much openness with which to respond to error as is possible.
Like all of us, journalists make mistakes and carry prejudices, but unlike most of us, journalists have to negotiate their fallibility under tight deadlines and in the public gaze. Around the world the pressures that journalists are under have been greatly exacerbated by newspaper owners that want to wring as much profit as they can out of their businesses with the result that newsrooms are often chronically underfunded. In South Africa journalists also work in a society structured in all kinds of systemic unfairness and in which all kinds of power relations are fundamentally unequal.
But no media tribunal will change any of this. On the contrary if it follows the logic of Jackson Mthembu all it will do is to send a clear message that the state does not consider certain forms of critique to be acceptable.
The ANC is as engaged as any other powerful constituency in society in trying to win the media to its point of view. There are times when it is successful and times when it is not. But it is certainly not just the ANC that gets the short end of the stick from time to time. Some of the poor people’s movements that are at the coalface of building real resistance to the ANC have, on occasion, been subject to entirely scurrilous treatment in the media. In fact popular protest is routinely treated through a prejudicial lens in which poor people are assumed to be irrational, violent, criminal and a threat to bourgeoisie society.
Among the many political clichés that deserve their regular repetition is the truism that being elected into power doesn’t make one a democrat. It’s equally important, given the legalistic nature of some of the responses to the ANC’s return to outright hostility to a free press, to repeat the point that a narrow and legalistic adherence to the letter of democratic obligations is hardly a meaningful fidelity to their spirit.
On the contrary a real fidelity to the spirit of democracy requires a genuine commitment to diffuse power and to engender multiple sites of power. If the ANC was committed to the democratisation of society it would be working to democratise the media by legislating for real diversity, generous subsidies for autonomous community media and serious state support for genuinely public broadcasting. What they are doing, instead, is trying to bully the media into submission to an increasingly authoritarian and conservative regime.
Source: The South African Civil Society Information Service: Richard Pithouse
Amidst a new flurry of indignation, paranoid and hysterical in equal measure, various representatives of the ANC have made it quite clear that they consider some of the criticisms of the party and its leaders that have appeared in the media to be unacceptable. This is not the first outbreak of this sort of hostility to press freedom within the ANC but it needs to be taken seriously because it’s backed up with real intent.
The most solid aspect of that intent is the Protection of Public Information Bill, which would allow more than 140 different bodies, from municipal managers up the Minister of State Security, to withhold information. It would also criminalise whistle blowing and effectively give the state the power to stop uncomfortable media investigations. By all accounts the Bill would, if passed into an Act, be unconstitutional and would go the same way as the Slums Act if confronted with a challenge in the Constitutional Court.
To compound the situation the ruling party has returned to its proposal, first put forward in 2007 and then abandoned after huge pressure, for a media tribunal that could, on its own account, result in journalists being imprisoned, fined and fired. As in 2007 statements from the ANC, many of which are patently anti-democratic, are quite clear that their central concern is how the party and its leaders are represented.
The South African Communist Party has supported the call arguing that the Press Ombudsman is inadequate and that the alternative opportunity for redress, the legal system, is not affordable to most South Africans. At least one newspaper editor takes the view that the ombudsman is, indeed, understaffed and underfunded but if this is the case it hardly justifies an inquisition aimed at stemming critique of the ruling party. On the contrary the solution would be to give the ombudsman’s office the support it needs or to propose a better alternative. The SACP’s second point is certainly fair but to point to the class bias of our legal system to justify a call for an inquisition by a ruling party that is actively entrenching inequality is, as the Communist Party often does, to misuse left wing critique of our society to try and legitimate right wing agendas.
Blade Nzimande, himself a recent target of media criticism, has argued that the confession by the former Cape Argus journalist Ashley Smith that he had taken money and privileged access to tenders to report favourably on Ebrahim Rasool indicates the necessity for a media tribunal. But Nzimande says nothing at all about the fact that the ANC has seen fit to give Rasool a prestigious and important diplomatic posting. The SACP is, to its credit, raising the issue of corruption within party structures and in a grassroots campaign that has had impressive moments. But that doesn’t change the fact that it is fundamentally dubious for Nzimande to call for the ANC to arrange for an inquisition into the media on the basis of a case that reveals corruption in both the party and the newsroom of the Cape Argus. Why not a tribunal to look at corruption in the party? To use one case of corruption to besmirch the reputation of the whole of the fourth estate, and to do so in a manner that aligns with the out and out political authoritarianism of someone like Jackson Mthembu and his clear desire to subordinate the media to the party, puts the SACP firmly in the camp of the authoritarian nationalists.
The third component of the ANC’s new strategy towards the media seems to be The New Age, the new newspaper to be published by the Gupta brothers. The paper will be ‘broadly supportive of the ANC’. There’s nothing wrong with a newspaper that aims to be supportive of a particular political party or idea but there is something very wrong when there’s a strong suspicion that the owners of that newspaper are involved in questionable business relations with the President and his family. Is this not potentially something very much like a supersized version of the Ashley Smith and Ebrahim Rasool nexus? Nzimande’s silence on this score is telling.
There is no question that the media is imperfect. Anyone who has been part of a project or event that makes the news will attest to the fact that most reports carry some errors. This is not, at all, a unique failing of the South African media or even of the media in general. A large proportion of the academic articles that deal with current events are also riddled with errors of fact. Governments, human rights organisations and businesses all get it wrong fairly often.
The tendency to error doesn’t have to be explained through the language of conspiracy. While there are better and worse ways of doing things, and while we certainly need to strive for the former, the fact is that some degree of error is inevitable. Error is part of the inevitable messiness of the world and a democratic view needs to understand that and to respond to it by preserving as much openness with which to respond to error as is possible.
Like all of us, journalists make mistakes and carry prejudices, but unlike most of us, journalists have to negotiate their fallibility under tight deadlines and in the public gaze. Around the world the pressures that journalists are under have been greatly exacerbated by newspaper owners that want to wring as much profit as they can out of their businesses with the result that newsrooms are often chronically underfunded. In South Africa journalists also work in a society structured in all kinds of systemic unfairness and in which all kinds of power relations are fundamentally unequal.
But no media tribunal will change any of this. On the contrary if it follows the logic of Jackson Mthembu all it will do is to send a clear message that the state does not consider certain forms of critique to be acceptable.
The ANC is as engaged as any other powerful constituency in society in trying to win the media to its point of view. There are times when it is successful and times when it is not. But it is certainly not just the ANC that gets the short end of the stick from time to time. Some of the poor people’s movements that are at the coalface of building real resistance to the ANC have, on occasion, been subject to entirely scurrilous treatment in the media. In fact popular protest is routinely treated through a prejudicial lens in which poor people are assumed to be irrational, violent, criminal and a threat to bourgeoisie society.
Among the many political clichés that deserve their regular repetition is the truism that being elected into power doesn’t make one a democrat. It’s equally important, given the legalistic nature of some of the responses to the ANC’s return to outright hostility to a free press, to repeat the point that a narrow and legalistic adherence to the letter of democratic obligations is hardly a meaningful fidelity to their spirit.
On the contrary a real fidelity to the spirit of democracy requires a genuine commitment to diffuse power and to engender multiple sites of power. If the ANC was committed to the democratisation of society it would be working to democratise the media by legislating for real diversity, generous subsidies for autonomous community media and serious state support for genuinely public broadcasting. What they are doing, instead, is trying to bully the media into submission to an increasingly authoritarian and conservative regime.
Source: The South African Civil Society Information Service: Richard Pithouse
Has Enver Daniels met Jeff Radebe lately?
Paul Hoffman from the Institute for Accountability wonders whether government talks to government when it sets about messing with the free flow of information. It is hard to believe that the Minister of Justice, Jeff Radebe, and the Chief State Law Advisor, Enver Daniels, are part of the same administration working together toward the realization of the founding values of the country.
Ensuring “accountability, openness and responsiveness”, as section 1(d) of the Constitution puts it, is at the core of their mission.
The Minister, addressing the SANEF meeting last weekend, put it well when he said: “As government we will not treat you the same way as the apartheid regime treated Nat Nakasa?we will not enact laws detrimental to your cause, including the current legislation being debated?I will ensure that any law that comes into being must be in conformity with our Constitution.” Quite so.
Now contrast the contribution by Daniels this week to the debate on the contentious Protection of Information Bill in which he, unusually so, personally participated. He dismissed critics of the bill as “emotional and hysterical” before delivering himself of this gem: “While they [the critics] raise valid points, we don’t agree with them.” He disagrees with “valid points” at his peril if, as seems likely, the disputed provisions of the bill are held up for constitutional scrutiny in Court.
Among the valid points raised are those complaining that the bill does nothing to ensure that which the state is bound to ensure, namely, compliance with the principles of accountability, openness and responsiveness. Widely framed definitions, especially that of “the national interest” (which can cover a multitude of sins and has no place in the bill), and the discretion given to officials to be judges in their own classificatory cause ought to be giving cause for pause, not an unseemly rush to finalize the bill by September, meanwhile rubbishing carefully considered submissions made to parliament by highly qualified and very learned critics.
In an open democracy protection of information can not be allowed to trump access to information, the latter being guaranteed to all in the Bill of Rights. Reasonable and justifiable limitations on access to state information in the interests of national security and in accordance with the constitutional governing principles set out in section 198 ought to be kept to a minimum in the quest for transparency.
Daniels ought to know that the entire public administration is constitutionally enjoined to foster transparency by “providing the public with timely, accessible and accurate information” [section 195]. He is hardly encouraging the public to participate in policy making (another principle governing him) by attacking the critics of the bill rather than dealing properly with the “valid points” he concedes they make. He does his high office and the Minister a disservice by playing the man instead of the ball/bill.
Paul Hoffman SC
Director, Institute for Accountability in Southern Africa
Ensuring “accountability, openness and responsiveness”, as section 1(d) of the Constitution puts it, is at the core of their mission.
The Minister, addressing the SANEF meeting last weekend, put it well when he said: “As government we will not treat you the same way as the apartheid regime treated Nat Nakasa?we will not enact laws detrimental to your cause, including the current legislation being debated?I will ensure that any law that comes into being must be in conformity with our Constitution.” Quite so.
Now contrast the contribution by Daniels this week to the debate on the contentious Protection of Information Bill in which he, unusually so, personally participated. He dismissed critics of the bill as “emotional and hysterical” before delivering himself of this gem: “While they [the critics] raise valid points, we don’t agree with them.” He disagrees with “valid points” at his peril if, as seems likely, the disputed provisions of the bill are held up for constitutional scrutiny in Court.
Among the valid points raised are those complaining that the bill does nothing to ensure that which the state is bound to ensure, namely, compliance with the principles of accountability, openness and responsiveness. Widely framed definitions, especially that of “the national interest” (which can cover a multitude of sins and has no place in the bill), and the discretion given to officials to be judges in their own classificatory cause ought to be giving cause for pause, not an unseemly rush to finalize the bill by September, meanwhile rubbishing carefully considered submissions made to parliament by highly qualified and very learned critics.
In an open democracy protection of information can not be allowed to trump access to information, the latter being guaranteed to all in the Bill of Rights. Reasonable and justifiable limitations on access to state information in the interests of national security and in accordance with the constitutional governing principles set out in section 198 ought to be kept to a minimum in the quest for transparency.
Daniels ought to know that the entire public administration is constitutionally enjoined to foster transparency by “providing the public with timely, accessible and accurate information” [section 195]. He is hardly encouraging the public to participate in policy making (another principle governing him) by attacking the critics of the bill rather than dealing properly with the “valid points” he concedes they make. He does his high office and the Minister a disservice by playing the man instead of the ball/bill.
Paul Hoffman SC
Director, Institute for Accountability in Southern Africa
Monday, July 26, 2010
Boxer reveals Kebble's final moments
A boxer, R2-million and two botched "assisted suicide" attempts emerged in the Johannesburg High Court on Monday as details of mining magnate Brett Kebble's murder.
The state's first witness, called by Gauteng deputy director of public prosecutions Dan Dakana, was professional boxer Michael Schultz, who described how he shot and killed Kebble. "I leaned out the [car] window, pointing the firearm at him... He just lifted his shoulder, his right shoulder, and looked in front... I aimed at his head and pulled the trigger, but the weapon did not discharge," Schultz told the court, describing the night of September 27, 2005.
He was testifying as state witness in the trial of convicted drug trafficker Glenn Agliotti, who faced four charges, two related to Kebble's murder. After the gun - which Schultz kept in a kitbag - failed to discharge the first time, he and two other accomplices turned state witnesses, Faizel Smith and Nigel McGurk, drove off. After inspecting the weapon, they returned and found Kebble in his vehicle and tried again. "I leaned out of the window and pointed the firearm... Once again the gun did not discharge."
Schultz said he then told Kebble to wait for him. The trio drove away for the second time. He inspected the gun. They made a U-turn and returned to where they had left Kebble. However, Kebble had driven off. They stopped their car and saw him coming towards them. They flashed their headlights at him. He made a U-turn and "stopped hard" next to them. "I could see the disappointment in his face, he gave me a look like to say 'get this over with, you're putting me through hell'," Schultz said.
Schultz leaned out of the window and this time aimed for Kebble's body. "I pulled the trigger, this time the gun fired. I kept firing." He could not remember how many times he shot, but recalled that one of his instructions was that Kebble should not suffer.
The three then drove away. Schultz looked back and saw Kebble's car rolling forward and hitting the pavement. They sped from the scene in Melrose Street in Johannesburg to Smith's panel-beating business, where Smith cut the gun into pieces and said he would dispose of it. The next morning Schultz got up and went to gym.
During cross-examination, Agliotti's lawyer Laurence Hodes SC put it to Schultz that his client "never ever conspired with you to aid the murder of Roger Brett Kebble". To which Schultz replied: "No, he didn't." Hodes then asked Schultz whether he agreed that Agliotti had not "in any manner" killed the mining magnate. Schultz replied: "I agree." He asked Schultz whether, to his knowledge, Agliotti had received part of the R2-million offered by Kebble to help him die. "Not from the R2-million, no, not to my knowledge," he replied.
Schultz could gain indemnity from prosecution for his role in the murder if the court finds his testimony truthful.
Agliotti faces two counts of conspiracy to commit murder, a charge of attempted murder and one of murder. The first count is conspiracy to commit the murders of Mark Bristow, Jean Daniel Nortier, Mark Wellesley-Woods and Stephen Mildenhall. The second count is the attempted murder of Stephen Mildenhall. The last two are conspiracy to murder Kebble and Kebble's murder.
Judge Frans Kgomo adjourned the matter until Tuesday morning.
Source: IoL
The state's first witness, called by Gauteng deputy director of public prosecutions Dan Dakana, was professional boxer Michael Schultz, who described how he shot and killed Kebble. "I leaned out the [car] window, pointing the firearm at him... He just lifted his shoulder, his right shoulder, and looked in front... I aimed at his head and pulled the trigger, but the weapon did not discharge," Schultz told the court, describing the night of September 27, 2005.
He was testifying as state witness in the trial of convicted drug trafficker Glenn Agliotti, who faced four charges, two related to Kebble's murder. After the gun - which Schultz kept in a kitbag - failed to discharge the first time, he and two other accomplices turned state witnesses, Faizel Smith and Nigel McGurk, drove off. After inspecting the weapon, they returned and found Kebble in his vehicle and tried again. "I leaned out of the window and pointed the firearm... Once again the gun did not discharge."
Schultz said he then told Kebble to wait for him. The trio drove away for the second time. He inspected the gun. They made a U-turn and returned to where they had left Kebble. However, Kebble had driven off. They stopped their car and saw him coming towards them. They flashed their headlights at him. He made a U-turn and "stopped hard" next to them. "I could see the disappointment in his face, he gave me a look like to say 'get this over with, you're putting me through hell'," Schultz said.
Schultz leaned out of the window and this time aimed for Kebble's body. "I pulled the trigger, this time the gun fired. I kept firing." He could not remember how many times he shot, but recalled that one of his instructions was that Kebble should not suffer.
The three then drove away. Schultz looked back and saw Kebble's car rolling forward and hitting the pavement. They sped from the scene in Melrose Street in Johannesburg to Smith's panel-beating business, where Smith cut the gun into pieces and said he would dispose of it. The next morning Schultz got up and went to gym.
During cross-examination, Agliotti's lawyer Laurence Hodes SC put it to Schultz that his client "never ever conspired with you to aid the murder of Roger Brett Kebble". To which Schultz replied: "No, he didn't." Hodes then asked Schultz whether he agreed that Agliotti had not "in any manner" killed the mining magnate. Schultz replied: "I agree." He asked Schultz whether, to his knowledge, Agliotti had received part of the R2-million offered by Kebble to help him die. "Not from the R2-million, no, not to my knowledge," he replied.
Schultz could gain indemnity from prosecution for his role in the murder if the court finds his testimony truthful.
Agliotti faces two counts of conspiracy to commit murder, a charge of attempted murder and one of murder. The first count is conspiracy to commit the murders of Mark Bristow, Jean Daniel Nortier, Mark Wellesley-Woods and Stephen Mildenhall. The second count is the attempted murder of Stephen Mildenhall. The last two are conspiracy to murder Kebble and Kebble's murder.
Judge Frans Kgomo adjourned the matter until Tuesday morning.
Source: IoL
Sunday, July 25, 2010
DG exodus an outrage, says Nehawu
The National Education Health and Allied Workers Union (Nehawu), is "deeply outraged" about how many directors-general have been fired, suspended, resigned in questionable circumstances or threatened to resign in the past 18 months. The public sector union was reacting to the dismissal of Communications Director-General Mamodupi Mohlala by Communications Minister Siphiwe Nyanda on Friday after "some troubling and discomforting reports" of the minister's alleged interference in the issuing of tenders in the department.
Nehawu general secretary Fikile Majola said the "centre does not hold", intimated that President Jacob Zuma must lead and pointed out that the directors-general were in a state of flux, which bode ill for service delivery. "We expect better answers and compelling reasons about this (Mohlala) dismissal than the tired old line of 'broken trust' because we want to know what broke the trust," said Majola.
The past 18 months had seen the departure of directors-general Njabulo Nduli, Pam Yako, Jimmy Manyi, Thozi Gwanya, Portia Molefe, Vuyi Nxasana and Mohlala.
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson told senior officials in the department this week that Nduli had gone on leave, a month after she criticised her director-general in Parliament for the department's regular production of substandard briefing documents. While sources said Nduli would not return, the ministry had refused to confirm or deny the termination of her contract. Dr Moshibudi Rampedi, who allegedly applied for a Food and Agriculture Organisation post last month, was appointed acting director-general this week.
Water Affairs Director-General Pam Yako has been on suspension for a year since being placed on special leave by Water and Environmental Affairs Minister Buyelwa Sonjica pending the outcome of an investigation of alleged procurement irregularities. The auditor-general has since found that a contract with a service provider for information technology services was extended "on numerous occasions" to 49 months, and grew in value by 587 percent in the process to more than R1-billion. The extensions contravened the department's procurement and delegation of authority regulations.
Labour Director-General Jimmy Manyi was suspended by Labour Minister Membathisi Mdladlana recently, apparently because of comments he made during an official meeting with Norway's ambassador to South Africa Tor Christian-Hilda. Soon before his suspension, Mdlalana had apparently told Manyi to choose between his job as director-general and the presidency of the Black Management Forum.
Land Reform Director-General Thozi Gwanya's departure from his post at the end of this month was confirmed by Rural Development and Land Reform Minister Gugile Nkwinti this week. The confirmation that Gwanya's contract had been "redetermined" came after initial denials by the department.
Public Enterprises Director-General Portia Molefe resigned in September. It is unclear why she left.
November saw the ousting of acting Women, Youth, Children and People with Disabilities Director-General Vuyi Nxasana by Minister Noluthando Mayende-Sibiya, apparently after a breakdown in the relationship between her and the minister who was alleged to be loath to make crucial decisions, act on proposals or stick to ministerial handbook guidelines.
Nehawu said it found the situation "troubling, unsustainable and unacceptable", adding that it did not bode well for the stability of governance and service delivery. "The merits and demerits of these suspensions, resignations and dismissals aside, the message that comes out is that the centre is not holding in our government and that is a disturbing state of affairs," said Majola. "The biggest casualties of this chaotic situation is the citizens of this country who expect, and have been promised, service delivery... this presents a challenge when it comes to the implementation of the five identified priorities," said Majola. He emphasised that the country could ill afford the leadership vacuum created by the absence and the uncertainty surrounding these top officials because it demoralised the entire workforce in the departments and created uncertainty and instability. "Nehawu calls on the government to act swiftly in addressing this unacceptable situation of government departments that operate without stable leadership and also investigate the reasons that led to this spate of resignations and dismissals. "Service delivery should be a priority for all of us and... the government needs to start providing clear decisive leadership before it's too late," said Majola.
Source: IoL
Nehawu general secretary Fikile Majola said the "centre does not hold", intimated that President Jacob Zuma must lead and pointed out that the directors-general were in a state of flux, which bode ill for service delivery. "We expect better answers and compelling reasons about this (Mohlala) dismissal than the tired old line of 'broken trust' because we want to know what broke the trust," said Majola.
The past 18 months had seen the departure of directors-general Njabulo Nduli, Pam Yako, Jimmy Manyi, Thozi Gwanya, Portia Molefe, Vuyi Nxasana and Mohlala.
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson told senior officials in the department this week that Nduli had gone on leave, a month after she criticised her director-general in Parliament for the department's regular production of substandard briefing documents. While sources said Nduli would not return, the ministry had refused to confirm or deny the termination of her contract. Dr Moshibudi Rampedi, who allegedly applied for a Food and Agriculture Organisation post last month, was appointed acting director-general this week.
Water Affairs Director-General Pam Yako has been on suspension for a year since being placed on special leave by Water and Environmental Affairs Minister Buyelwa Sonjica pending the outcome of an investigation of alleged procurement irregularities. The auditor-general has since found that a contract with a service provider for information technology services was extended "on numerous occasions" to 49 months, and grew in value by 587 percent in the process to more than R1-billion. The extensions contravened the department's procurement and delegation of authority regulations.
Labour Director-General Jimmy Manyi was suspended by Labour Minister Membathisi Mdladlana recently, apparently because of comments he made during an official meeting with Norway's ambassador to South Africa Tor Christian-Hilda. Soon before his suspension, Mdlalana had apparently told Manyi to choose between his job as director-general and the presidency of the Black Management Forum.
Land Reform Director-General Thozi Gwanya's departure from his post at the end of this month was confirmed by Rural Development and Land Reform Minister Gugile Nkwinti this week. The confirmation that Gwanya's contract had been "redetermined" came after initial denials by the department.
Public Enterprises Director-General Portia Molefe resigned in September. It is unclear why she left.
November saw the ousting of acting Women, Youth, Children and People with Disabilities Director-General Vuyi Nxasana by Minister Noluthando Mayende-Sibiya, apparently after a breakdown in the relationship between her and the minister who was alleged to be loath to make crucial decisions, act on proposals or stick to ministerial handbook guidelines.
Nehawu said it found the situation "troubling, unsustainable and unacceptable", adding that it did not bode well for the stability of governance and service delivery. "The merits and demerits of these suspensions, resignations and dismissals aside, the message that comes out is that the centre is not holding in our government and that is a disturbing state of affairs," said Majola. "The biggest casualties of this chaotic situation is the citizens of this country who expect, and have been promised, service delivery... this presents a challenge when it comes to the implementation of the five identified priorities," said Majola. He emphasised that the country could ill afford the leadership vacuum created by the absence and the uncertainty surrounding these top officials because it demoralised the entire workforce in the departments and created uncertainty and instability. "Nehawu calls on the government to act swiftly in addressing this unacceptable situation of government departments that operate without stable leadership and also investigate the reasons that led to this spate of resignations and dismissals. "Service delivery should be a priority for all of us and... the government needs to start providing clear decisive leadership before it's too late," said Majola.
Source: IoL
Gautrain company 'hijacked' at Cipro
Politically well-connected "entrepreneurs", including a senior ANC official, have "hijacked" a company that landed a R220-million deal to build the Gautrain electrical system, by exploiting cracks in the Companies and Intellectual Property Registration Office (Cipro).
This comes as a red-faced Cipro introduced new measures last week to prevent people registering as directors with fake identity numbers and no documents - as Sunday Times did two weeks ago. Since then, many people have come forward, claiming loopholes at Cipro allowed fraud to be perpetrated against them, citing instances of tender fraud and empowerment fronting. In one case, the 28-year-old Roodepoort engineering company Tension Overhead, which landed the lucrative Gautrain contract, said Cipro loopholes allowed it to be "hijacked". Here, Advocate Matane Mphahlele simply appointed himself director and managing director of Tension Overhead at Cipro and "suspended" the existing bosses. Then he went to Absa and tried to take over the company's bank accounts, based on his claim that he owns 60% of the shares - a claim the company is disputing in court proceedings.
Mphahlele also simply "deregistered" two of the company's existing directors at Cipro without providing any board resolution or resignation letters, and appointed three of his associates as directors. Both sides have laid criminal charges. The "hijackers" are politically well connected. Mphahlele served as a legal director in the Department of Public Enterprises, while his new directors include ANC member and National African Federated Chamber of Commerce (Nafcoc) deputy secretary-general Kentse Makgae, and Limpopo treasury official Thomas Mphahlele. Makgae confirmed she was a new director, but referred questions to Mphahlele.
Directors whom Mphahlele bumped from the board include BEE heavyweights Buhle Mthethwa, a former Nafcoc president, and Parmanathan Mariemuthu. Mariemuthu says minister of trade and industry Rob Davies should take responsibility for this. "You can go to bed knowing you own something, and wake up having been dispossessed," he says. "How can you have Davies telling people to invest in this country when this kind of thing can happen?"
Tension Overhead director Coenraad Boschoff is astounded that "it can be that easy" to hijack a company. "(Mphahlele) no longer has any shares in the company, yet he convinced Cipro to register him as a director. On this basis, I could simply go to Cipro and register myself as a director of Sasol tomorrow," he said.
Alarmingly, Cipro confirmed as much. Cipro's acting registrar Joey Mathekga admitted that anyone can register as a director of any company today, and Cipro only then launches an investigation. "There is no existing legal framework that says you can't do this," he says.
After Cipro registered Mphahlele as a director, he called a "shareholders meeting" on June 22 where, according to the minutes, he "appointed himself the chairman of the board of directors, and also joint managing director". Though Boschoff arrived and objected to the meeting taking place, Mphahlele brushed him off. Instead, Mphahlele's minutes say it "was resolved" that he and his directors get access to Tension Overhead's bank account. Armed with the Cipro registration documents, Mphahlele and Makgae went to Absa's Horizon branch and demanded access to the account - which was denied. But Mphahlele claims it is "very unfair" to portray him as a company "hijacker". "I have the right to the 60% ... those directors were appointed in a general meeting, where the rule of the majority prevailed," he says. "I appointed myself chairman of the board because I am representing the majority interest."
But Tension Overhead's bosses say he doesn't own those shares. Mphahlele's claim is based on a 2003 deal that gave him 30% of the company. But Boschoff said Mphahlele sold this stake to African Heritage Investments in 2004 and resigned as a director. Boschoff said Mphahlele was "double-counting" by claiming the initial sale agreement gave him the first 30%, and the share certificate he got as part of that deal gave him another 30%. "The fact is, there was only ever one deal to sell him 30%, and these shares were ultimately taken over by African Heritage, as that sale contract clearly shows," he says. Mphahlele also did not part with a cent for that 30%, but he was due to pay R1.5-million for those shares out of dividends that the company would declare. However, it is surprising that Cipro allowed Mphahlele to register new directors, and "resign" others, while the shareholding dispute has yet to be decided in court. The Companies Act does not allow someone to be "removed" as a director without resigning, or after a proper board process.
Asked how he was able to do this, Mphahlele said "those people were disqualified because they don't have qualification shares as required by the Companies Act, so we don't have to use those procedures". But the Companies Act says this only applies if the company's articles of association requires directors to hold shares - and Tension Overhead's do not. While Cipro could not explain how this incident happened, it said it was " investigating" the matter.
Source: Times Live
This comes as a red-faced Cipro introduced new measures last week to prevent people registering as directors with fake identity numbers and no documents - as Sunday Times did two weeks ago. Since then, many people have come forward, claiming loopholes at Cipro allowed fraud to be perpetrated against them, citing instances of tender fraud and empowerment fronting. In one case, the 28-year-old Roodepoort engineering company Tension Overhead, which landed the lucrative Gautrain contract, said Cipro loopholes allowed it to be "hijacked". Here, Advocate Matane Mphahlele simply appointed himself director and managing director of Tension Overhead at Cipro and "suspended" the existing bosses. Then he went to Absa and tried to take over the company's bank accounts, based on his claim that he owns 60% of the shares - a claim the company is disputing in court proceedings.
Mphahlele also simply "deregistered" two of the company's existing directors at Cipro without providing any board resolution or resignation letters, and appointed three of his associates as directors. Both sides have laid criminal charges. The "hijackers" are politically well connected. Mphahlele served as a legal director in the Department of Public Enterprises, while his new directors include ANC member and National African Federated Chamber of Commerce (Nafcoc) deputy secretary-general Kentse Makgae, and Limpopo treasury official Thomas Mphahlele. Makgae confirmed she was a new director, but referred questions to Mphahlele.
Directors whom Mphahlele bumped from the board include BEE heavyweights Buhle Mthethwa, a former Nafcoc president, and Parmanathan Mariemuthu. Mariemuthu says minister of trade and industry Rob Davies should take responsibility for this. "You can go to bed knowing you own something, and wake up having been dispossessed," he says. "How can you have Davies telling people to invest in this country when this kind of thing can happen?"
Tension Overhead director Coenraad Boschoff is astounded that "it can be that easy" to hijack a company. "(Mphahlele) no longer has any shares in the company, yet he convinced Cipro to register him as a director. On this basis, I could simply go to Cipro and register myself as a director of Sasol tomorrow," he said.
Alarmingly, Cipro confirmed as much. Cipro's acting registrar Joey Mathekga admitted that anyone can register as a director of any company today, and Cipro only then launches an investigation. "There is no existing legal framework that says you can't do this," he says.
After Cipro registered Mphahlele as a director, he called a "shareholders meeting" on June 22 where, according to the minutes, he "appointed himself the chairman of the board of directors, and also joint managing director". Though Boschoff arrived and objected to the meeting taking place, Mphahlele brushed him off. Instead, Mphahlele's minutes say it "was resolved" that he and his directors get access to Tension Overhead's bank account. Armed with the Cipro registration documents, Mphahlele and Makgae went to Absa's Horizon branch and demanded access to the account - which was denied. But Mphahlele claims it is "very unfair" to portray him as a company "hijacker". "I have the right to the 60% ... those directors were appointed in a general meeting, where the rule of the majority prevailed," he says. "I appointed myself chairman of the board because I am representing the majority interest."
But Tension Overhead's bosses say he doesn't own those shares. Mphahlele's claim is based on a 2003 deal that gave him 30% of the company. But Boschoff said Mphahlele sold this stake to African Heritage Investments in 2004 and resigned as a director. Boschoff said Mphahlele was "double-counting" by claiming the initial sale agreement gave him the first 30%, and the share certificate he got as part of that deal gave him another 30%. "The fact is, there was only ever one deal to sell him 30%, and these shares were ultimately taken over by African Heritage, as that sale contract clearly shows," he says. Mphahlele also did not part with a cent for that 30%, but he was due to pay R1.5-million for those shares out of dividends that the company would declare. However, it is surprising that Cipro allowed Mphahlele to register new directors, and "resign" others, while the shareholding dispute has yet to be decided in court. The Companies Act does not allow someone to be "removed" as a director without resigning, or after a proper board process.
Asked how he was able to do this, Mphahlele said "those people were disqualified because they don't have qualification shares as required by the Companies Act, so we don't have to use those procedures". But the Companies Act says this only applies if the company's articles of association requires directors to hold shares - and Tension Overhead's do not. While Cipro could not explain how this incident happened, it said it was " investigating" the matter.
Source: Times Live
New law may force reporters to reveal sources
The government was finalising proposals regarding a section of the Criminal Procedure Act which could force journalists to reveal confidential sources, Justice Minister Jeff Radebe said in Johannesburg on Saturday night. Speaking at the annual general meeting of the SA National Editors' Forum (Sanef), Radebe emphasised that the government would not treat the media in the manner it had been treated during the apartheid years. "As a minister of justice I want to assure you that any [new] law must be in conformity with the Constitution," the minister said.
Radebe was speaking against the backdrop of increased concerns at the ANC's proposed introduction of a state appointed media appeal tribunal to adjudicate complaints against the press. Radebe said the ANC had been deliberating on various issues in preparation for its national general council meeting in Durban later this year. "One of these is that of information communication technology and the media." Referring to an ongoing discussion of Section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act and other sections affecting journalists, Radebe said: "We are in the process of finalising proposals in this regard."
The SA Law Commission would also soon present its finding of research on this and other laws that the media found problematic.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Radebe was speaking against the backdrop of increased concerns at the ANC's proposed introduction of a state appointed media appeal tribunal to adjudicate complaints against the press. Radebe said the ANC had been deliberating on various issues in preparation for its national general council meeting in Durban later this year. "One of these is that of information communication technology and the media." Referring to an ongoing discussion of Section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act and other sections affecting journalists, Radebe said: "We are in the process of finalising proposals in this regard."
The SA Law Commission would also soon present its finding of research on this and other laws that the media found problematic.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Communications director 'released' from contract
The director general of the department of communications Mamodupi Mohlala has been "released" from her contract with immediate effect. "In the process of trying to find solutions to the challenges, it subsequently became apparent that trust between the minister [Siphiwe Nyanda] and the director general has broken down irretrievably," said spokesperson for the communications ministry Tiyani Rikhotso in a statement on Friday afternoon.Rikhotso said Mohlala was not released from her contract because of tender issues mentioned in the media. He said the department recently faced a number of challenges "relating to internal processes and procedure". Nyanda and the deputy minister Dina Pule met the director general to resolve the issues as they threatened the day-to-day operations of the department and negatively affected its image. In the interests of the department, the staff and the government, the minister concluded that it would be best to release Mohlala from her position as director general from July 23, he said.
Harold Wesso was appointed the acting director general to ensure that the work of the department was not negatively affected. The Mail and Guardian reported last week that Wesso was appointed as an acting director general for two days after a fall-out between Nyanda and Mohlala. Nyanda last week dismissed reports that he was suspending "Mohlala" -- following repeated disagreements over tenders she refused to sign -- as "false, spurious and malicious". Nyanda reportedly issued an instruction that all tenders for the department be cancelled until they had been "discussed and approved by the minister". It was understood that Mohlala warned Nyanda this week that removing the administration of tenders from her would violate the Public Finances Management Act. The saga with his director general is the latest landing Nyanda in the media spotlight.
In March freight group Transnet dismissed two senior managers for irregularly awarding a R55-million tender to a company allegedly linked to Nyanda.
In a separate case, the Democratic Alliance alleged that a company partly owned by Nyanda was unlawfully awarded a R67,8-million tender by the Gauteng roads and transport department.
Earlier this year Nyanda was accused of indulging in a "caviar and silk" lifestyle after allegedly spending thousands of rands on hotel stays at the luxurious Mount Nelson and Twelve Apostles hotels and buying two R1,2-million BMWs for his work.
Congress of South African Trade Union leader Zwelinzima Vavi singled out Nyanda when criticising the government's failure to act on allegations of corruption in Cabinet. Vavi had said reports that Nyanda had spent half-a-million rand on hotels in Cape Town should be probed, which landed him in hot water with its ally in the ruling alliance, the ANC.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)