"The leaders of this current government set an appalling example that others follow ... They seem to think they are beyond the reach of the law," Agang SA leader Mamphela Ramphele said on Saturday at the Tshwane Events Centre.
"One by one they have systematically attacked the very foundations of our constitutional democracy, the judicial system, the freedom of the press, accountability of government and the human rights of all citizens."
She said the arrogance of the current government was "breathtaking". It was acting with impunity and abusing "the resources of the state for the enrichment of a party, themselves and their friends".
"The arms deal, Nkandla, the Guptas, the list of these abuses goes on and on," she said to a cheering crowd.
The former activist and businessperson was welcomed by cheers from the crowd who arrived to support her new party.
More than a thousand people, mostly dressed in white T-shirts with Agang SA printed on them, listened intently and cheered as Ramphele spoke about problems facing South Africa.
For the past five months Ramphele visited communities around the country listening to people's concerns.
"We are here to begin the restoration of the promise of our great nation and to offer the hope of a better future for South Africa," she told the crowd.
"There is a desperate need for change."
Leaders failed to deliver
After nearly 20 years, the country's leaders failed to deliver on the promise of freedom, she said. Adding that it was too long to wait for jobs, education and healthcare.
Ramphele said the country had reached a crossroads.
"I for one do not want to think about where we will be in five years time unless we change course. Imagine five more years of corruption," she said as the crowd shouted "no".
"Imagine five more years of young people being lost from the education system and the economy. Five more years of millions of people entering the workforce but not having jobs. Five more years of non-functioning hospitals and clinics."
However, the country had potential and it was this, according to Ramphele, which inspired her at the age of 65 to enter South African politics and start Agang SA.
During Ramphele's speech the mostly youthful crowd, started shouting "enough is enough".
She introduced her campaign team calling them world-class.
Nkosinathi Solomon, who joined Agang from Absa, was the campaign director.
Also on the team were Dr Mills Soko, director of policy, from the University of Cape Town's graduate school of business, Thabo Leshilo, a former Sowetan editor as director of communications, Zohra Dawood as director of fundraising and Rorisang Tshabalala as deputy director of field management.
Elective conference
Ramphele also announced that Vanessa Hani, former South African Communist Party leader Chris Hani's daughter, would join her team to focus on mobilising women as part of the field management team.
Moeketsi Mosola joined as political director and would lead the creation of the party's political leadership.
Ramphele said Agang would hold an elective conference towards the end of the year.
"There are many experienced parliamentarians and battle hardened activists who will join our national and provincial leadership in the coming months," she said.
"We will strike a balance between old hands and many new faces." – Sapa
Source: Mail & Guardian
Saturday, June 22, 2013
Sunday, May 5, 2013
McBride 'heavily indebted' and must find a job
Former Ekurhuleni metro police chief Robert McBride is "heavily indebted" and needs to start looking for a job, according to a report.
"I owe lots of people money," McBride told City Press. "I had to sell lots of my things. Fortunately some of my family, friends and comrades assisted me."
McBride spent R1.7-million on legal fees.
On Friday, the state lost its bid to appeal against McBride's acquittal on charges of drunken driving and attempting to obstruct justice.
The high court in Pretoria ruled on Friday the state had not raised any question of law that the Supreme Court of Appeal should consider.
McBride was arrested in 2006 after crashing his official car on the R511 near Hartbeespoort Dam following a Christmas party.
Pretoria regional magistrate Peet Johnson in September 2011 sentenced him to five years' imprisonment, but he appealed to the high court in Pretoria. Judges Cynthia Pretorius and Lettie Malopa-Setshosa acquitted him in March this year, on the grounds the state had not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, despite McBride's "strange" behaviour. They set aside McBride's five-year prison sentence.
The state applied for leave to appeal against the ruling on various technical grounds. City Press reported McBride felt vindicated, but angry. "It's good to win, especially when you know it's a personal issue against you and not a matter of law," he was quoted as saying.
"But despite the judges' findings of police manipulation and evidence fabrication, there seems to be a lack of interest in the real issue behind the whole saga – the involvement of the South African Police Service in violent crime." – Sapa
Source: Mail & Guardian
"I owe lots of people money," McBride told City Press. "I had to sell lots of my things. Fortunately some of my family, friends and comrades assisted me."
McBride spent R1.7-million on legal fees.
On Friday, the state lost its bid to appeal against McBride's acquittal on charges of drunken driving and attempting to obstruct justice.
The high court in Pretoria ruled on Friday the state had not raised any question of law that the Supreme Court of Appeal should consider.
McBride was arrested in 2006 after crashing his official car on the R511 near Hartbeespoort Dam following a Christmas party.
Pretoria regional magistrate Peet Johnson in September 2011 sentenced him to five years' imprisonment, but he appealed to the high court in Pretoria. Judges Cynthia Pretorius and Lettie Malopa-Setshosa acquitted him in March this year, on the grounds the state had not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, despite McBride's "strange" behaviour. They set aside McBride's five-year prison sentence.
The state applied for leave to appeal against the ruling on various technical grounds. City Press reported McBride felt vindicated, but angry. "It's good to win, especially when you know it's a personal issue against you and not a matter of law," he was quoted as saying.
"But despite the judges' findings of police manipulation and evidence fabrication, there seems to be a lack of interest in the real issue behind the whole saga – the involvement of the South African Police Service in violent crime." – Sapa
Source: Mail & Guardian
Friday, April 26, 2013
The Secret of the Seven Sisters
On August 28, 1928, in the Scottish highlands, began the secret story of oil.
Three men had an appointment at Achnacarry Castle - a Dutchman, an American and an Englishman.
The Dutchman was Henry Deterding, a man nicknamed the Napoleon of Oil, having exploited a find in Sumatra. He joined forces with a rich ship owner and painted Shell salesman and together the two men founded Royal Dutch Shell.
The American was Walter C. Teagle and he represents the Standard Oil Company, founded by John D. Rockefeller at the age of 31 - the future Exxon. Oil wells, transport, refining and distribution of oil - everything is controlled by Standard oil.
The Englishman, Sir John Cadman, was the director of the Anglo-Persian oil Company, soon to become BP. On the initiative of a young Winston Churchill, the British government had taken a stake in BP and the Royal Navy switched its fuel from coal to oil. With fuel-hungry ships, planes and tanks, oil became "the blood of every battle".
The new automobile industry was developing fast, and the Ford T was selling by the million. The world was thirsty for oil, and companies were waging a merciless contest but the competition was making the market unstable.
That August night, the three men decided to stop fighting and to start sharing out the world's oil. Their vision was that production zones, transport costs, sales prices - everything would be agreed and shared. And so began a great cartel, whose purpose was to dominate the world, by controlling its oil.
Four others soon joined them, and they came to be known as the Seven Sisters - the biggest oil companies in the world.
EPISODE 1: DESERT STORMS
In the first episode, we travel across the Middle East, through both time and space.
Since that notorious meeting at Achnacarry Castle on August 28, 1928, they have never ceased to plot, to plan and to scheme.
Throughout the region's modern history, since the discovery of oil, the Seven Sisters have sought to control the balance of power.
They have supported monarchies in Iran and Saudi Arabia, opposed the creation of OPEC, profiting from the Iran-Iraq war, leading to the ultimate destruction of Saddam Hussein and Iraq.
The Seven Sisters were always present, and almost always came out on top.
EPISODE 2: THE BLACK EL DORADO
At the end of the 1960s, the Seven Sisters, the major oil companies, controlled 85 percent of the world's oil reserves. Today, they control just 10 percent.
New hunting grounds are therefore required, and the Sisters have turned their gaze towards Africa. With peak oil, wars in the Middle East, and the rise in crude prices, Africa is the oil companies' new battleground.
But the real story, the secret story of oil, begins far from Africa.
In their bid to dominate Africa, the Sisters installed a king in Libya, a dictator in Gabon, fought the nationalisation of oil resources in Algeria, and through corruption, war and assassinations, brought Nigeria to its knees.
Oil may be flowing into the holds of huge tankers, but in Lagos, petrol shortages are chronic.
The country's four refineries are obsolete and the continent's main oil exporter is forced to import refined petrol - a paradox that reaps fortunes for a handful of oil companies.
Encouraged by the companies, corruption has become a system of government - some $50bn are estimated to have 'disappeared' out of the $350bn received since independence.
But new players have now joined the great oil game.
China, with its growing appetite for energy, has found new friends in Sudan, and the Chinese builders have moved in. Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir is proud of his co-operation with China - a dam on the Nile, roads, and stadiums.
In order to export 500,000 barrels of oil a day from the oil fields in the South - China financed and built the Heglig pipeline connected to Port Sudan - now South Sudan's precious oil is shipped through North Sudan to Chinese ports.
In a bid to secure oil supplies out of Libya, the US, the UK and the Seven Sisters made peace with the once shunned Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, until he was killed during the Libyan uprising of 2011, but the flow of Libyan oil remains uninterrupted.
In need of funds for rebuilding, Libya is now back to pumping more than a million barrels of oil per day. And the Sisters are happy to oblige.
EPISODE 3: THE DANCING BEAR
In the Caucasus, the US and Russia are vying for control of the region. The great oil game is in full swing. Whoever controls the Caucasus and its roads, controls the transport of oil from the Caspian Sea.
Tbilisi, Erevan and Baku - the three capitals of the Caucasus. The oil from Baku in Azerbaijan is a strategic priority
for all the major companies.
From the fortunes of the Nobel family to the Russian revolution, to World War II, oil from the Caucasus and the Caspian has played a central role. Lenin fixated on conquering the Azeri capital Baku for its oil, as did Stalin and Hitler.
On his birthday in 1941, Adolf Hitler received a chocolate and cream birthday cake, representing a map. He chose the slice with Baku on it.
On June 22nd 1941, the armies of the Third Reich invaded Russia. The crucial battle of Stalingrad was the key to the road to the Caucasus and Baku’s oil, and would decide the outcome of the war.
Stalin told his troops: "Fighting for one’s oil is fighting for one’s freedom."
After World War II, President Nikita Krushchev would build the Soviet empire and its Red Army with revenues from the USSR’s new-found oil reserves.
Decades later, oil would bring that empire to its knees, when Saudi Arabia and the US would conspire to open up the oil taps, flood the markets, and bring the price of oil down to $13 per barrel. Russian oligarchs would take up the oil mantle, only to be put in their place by their president, Vladimir Putin, who knows that oil is power.
The US and Putin‘s Russia would prop up despots, and exploit regional conflicts to maintain a grip on the oil fields of the Caucusus and the Caspian.
But they would not have counted on the rise of a new, strong and hungry China, with an almost limitless appetite for oil and energy. Today, the US, Russia and China contest the control of the former USSR’s fossil fuel reserves, and the supply routes. A three-handed match, with the world as spectators, between three ferocious beasts – The American eagle, the Russian bear, and the Chinese dragon.
EPISODE 4: A TIME FOR LIES
Peak oil – the point in time at which the highest rate of oil extraction has been reached, and after which world production will start decline. Many geologists and the International Energy Agency say the world's crude oil output reached its peak in 2006.
But while there may be less oil coming out of the ground, the demand for it is definitely on the rise.
The final episode of this series explores what happens when oil becomes more and more inaccessible, while at the same time, new powers like China and India try to fulfill their growing energy needs.
And countries like Iran, while suffering international sanctions, have welcomed these new oil buyers, who put business ahead of lectures on human rights and nuclear ambitions.
At the same time, oil-producing countries have had enough with the Seven Sisters controlling their oil assets. Nationalisation of oil reserves around the world has ushered in a new generation of oil companies all vying for a slice of the oil pie.
These are the new Seven Sisters:
Saudi Arabia's Saudi Aramco, the largest and most sophisticated oil company in the world; Russia's Gazprom, a company that Russia's President Vladimir Putin wrested away from the oligarchs; The China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), which, along with its subsidiary, Petrochina, is the world's secnd largest company in terms of market value; The National Iranian Oil Company, which has a monopoly on exploration, extraction, transportation and exportation of crude oil in Iran – OPEC's second largest oil producer after Saudi Arabia; Venezuela's PDVSA, a company the late president Hugo Chavez dismantled and rebuilt into his country's economic engine and part of his diplomatic arsenal; Brazil's Petrobras, a leader in deep water oil production, that pumps out 2 million barrels of crude oil a day; and Malaysia's Petronas - Asia's most profitable company in 2012.
Mainly state-owned, the new Seven Sisters control a third of the world's oil and gas production, and more than a third of the world's reserves. The old Seven Sisters, by comparison, produce a tenth of the world's oil, and control only three percent of the reserves.
The balance has shifted.
Source: Al Jazeera
Three men had an appointment at Achnacarry Castle - a Dutchman, an American and an Englishman.
The Dutchman was Henry Deterding, a man nicknamed the Napoleon of Oil, having exploited a find in Sumatra. He joined forces with a rich ship owner and painted Shell salesman and together the two men founded Royal Dutch Shell.
The American was Walter C. Teagle and he represents the Standard Oil Company, founded by John D. Rockefeller at the age of 31 - the future Exxon. Oil wells, transport, refining and distribution of oil - everything is controlled by Standard oil.
The Englishman, Sir John Cadman, was the director of the Anglo-Persian oil Company, soon to become BP. On the initiative of a young Winston Churchill, the British government had taken a stake in BP and the Royal Navy switched its fuel from coal to oil. With fuel-hungry ships, planes and tanks, oil became "the blood of every battle".
The new automobile industry was developing fast, and the Ford T was selling by the million. The world was thirsty for oil, and companies were waging a merciless contest but the competition was making the market unstable.
That August night, the three men decided to stop fighting and to start sharing out the world's oil. Their vision was that production zones, transport costs, sales prices - everything would be agreed and shared. And so began a great cartel, whose purpose was to dominate the world, by controlling its oil.
Four others soon joined them, and they came to be known as the Seven Sisters - the biggest oil companies in the world.
EPISODE 1: DESERT STORMS
In the first episode, we travel across the Middle East, through both time and space.
We waged the Iran-Iraq war and I say we waged it, because one country had to be used to destroy the other.
- Xavier Houzel, an oil trader
Since that notorious meeting at Achnacarry Castle on August 28, 1928, they have never ceased to plot, to plan and to scheme.
Throughout the region's modern history, since the discovery of oil, the Seven Sisters have sought to control the balance of power.
They have supported monarchies in Iran and Saudi Arabia, opposed the creation of OPEC, profiting from the Iran-Iraq war, leading to the ultimate destruction of Saddam Hussein and Iraq.
The Seven Sisters were always present, and almost always came out on top.
EPISODE 2: THE BLACK EL DORADO
At the end of the 1960s, the Seven Sisters, the major oil companies, controlled 85 percent of the world's oil reserves. Today, they control just 10 percent.
New hunting grounds are therefore required, and the Sisters have turned their gaze towards Africa. With peak oil, wars in the Middle East, and the rise in crude prices, Africa is the oil companies' new battleground.
Everybody thought there could be oil in Sudan but nobody knew anything. It was revealed through exploration by the American company Chevron, towards the end of the 70s. And that was the beginning of the second civil war, which went on until 2002. It lasted for 19 years and cost a million and a half lives and the oil business was at the heart of it.
- Gerard Prunier, a historian
But the real story, the secret story of oil, begins far from Africa.
In their bid to dominate Africa, the Sisters installed a king in Libya, a dictator in Gabon, fought the nationalisation of oil resources in Algeria, and through corruption, war and assassinations, brought Nigeria to its knees.
Oil may be flowing into the holds of huge tankers, but in Lagos, petrol shortages are chronic.
The country's four refineries are obsolete and the continent's main oil exporter is forced to import refined petrol - a paradox that reaps fortunes for a handful of oil companies.
Encouraged by the companies, corruption has become a system of government - some $50bn are estimated to have 'disappeared' out of the $350bn received since independence.
But new players have now joined the great oil game.
China, with its growing appetite for energy, has found new friends in Sudan, and the Chinese builders have moved in. Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir is proud of his co-operation with China - a dam on the Nile, roads, and stadiums.
In order to export 500,000 barrels of oil a day from the oil fields in the South - China financed and built the Heglig pipeline connected to Port Sudan - now South Sudan's precious oil is shipped through North Sudan to Chinese ports.
In a bid to secure oil supplies out of Libya, the US, the UK and the Seven Sisters made peace with the once shunned Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, until he was killed during the Libyan uprising of 2011, but the flow of Libyan oil remains uninterrupted.
In need of funds for rebuilding, Libya is now back to pumping more than a million barrels of oil per day. And the Sisters are happy to oblige.
EPISODE 3: THE DANCING BEAR
In the Caucasus, the US and Russia are vying for control of the region. The great oil game is in full swing. Whoever controls the Caucasus and its roads, controls the transport of oil from the Caspian Sea.
Tbilisi, Erevan and Baku - the three capitals of the Caucasus. The oil from Baku in Azerbaijan is a strategic priority
for all the major companies.
From the fortunes of the Nobel family to the Russian revolution, to World War II, oil from the Caucasus and the Caspian has played a central role. Lenin fixated on conquering the Azeri capital Baku for its oil, as did Stalin and Hitler.
On his birthday in 1941, Adolf Hitler received a chocolate and cream birthday cake, representing a map. He chose the slice with Baku on it.
On June 22nd 1941, the armies of the Third Reich invaded Russia. The crucial battle of Stalingrad was the key to the road to the Caucasus and Baku’s oil, and would decide the outcome of the war.
Stalin told his troops: "Fighting for one’s oil is fighting for one’s freedom."
After World War II, President Nikita Krushchev would build the Soviet empire and its Red Army with revenues from the USSR’s new-found oil reserves.
Decades later, oil would bring that empire to its knees, when Saudi Arabia and the US would conspire to open up the oil taps, flood the markets, and bring the price of oil down to $13 per barrel. Russian oligarchs would take up the oil mantle, only to be put in their place by their president, Vladimir Putin, who knows that oil is power.
The US and Putin‘s Russia would prop up despots, and exploit regional conflicts to maintain a grip on the oil fields of the Caucusus and the Caspian.
But they would not have counted on the rise of a new, strong and hungry China, with an almost limitless appetite for oil and energy. Today, the US, Russia and China contest the control of the former USSR’s fossil fuel reserves, and the supply routes. A three-handed match, with the world as spectators, between three ferocious beasts – The American eagle, the Russian bear, and the Chinese dragon.
EPISODE 4: A TIME FOR LIES
Peak oil – the point in time at which the highest rate of oil extraction has been reached, and after which world production will start decline. Many geologists and the International Energy Agency say the world's crude oil output reached its peak in 2006.
But while there may be less oil coming out of the ground, the demand for it is definitely on the rise.
The final episode of this series explores what happens when oil becomes more and more inaccessible, while at the same time, new powers like China and India try to fulfill their growing energy needs.
And countries like Iran, while suffering international sanctions, have welcomed these new oil buyers, who put business ahead of lectures on human rights and nuclear ambitions.
At the same time, oil-producing countries have had enough with the Seven Sisters controlling their oil assets. Nationalisation of oil reserves around the world has ushered in a new generation of oil companies all vying for a slice of the oil pie.
These are the new Seven Sisters:
Saudi Arabia's Saudi Aramco, the largest and most sophisticated oil company in the world; Russia's Gazprom, a company that Russia's President Vladimir Putin wrested away from the oligarchs; The China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), which, along with its subsidiary, Petrochina, is the world's secnd largest company in terms of market value; The National Iranian Oil Company, which has a monopoly on exploration, extraction, transportation and exportation of crude oil in Iran – OPEC's second largest oil producer after Saudi Arabia; Venezuela's PDVSA, a company the late president Hugo Chavez dismantled and rebuilt into his country's economic engine and part of his diplomatic arsenal; Brazil's Petrobras, a leader in deep water oil production, that pumps out 2 million barrels of crude oil a day; and Malaysia's Petronas - Asia's most profitable company in 2012.
Mainly state-owned, the new Seven Sisters control a third of the world's oil and gas production, and more than a third of the world's reserves. The old Seven Sisters, by comparison, produce a tenth of the world's oil, and control only three percent of the reserves.
The balance has shifted.
Source: Al Jazeera
Thursday, March 28, 2013
McBride wins appeal against drunk driving conviction
The high court in Pretoria on Thursday concluded he was not guilty on all charges.
"The appeal against conviction on both counts is upheld," Judges Cynthia Pretorius and Lettie Molopa-Sethosa said in their written judgment.
"The appellant is found not guilty on all charges and is discharged."
McBride was arrested in 2006 after crashing his official car on the R511 following a Christmas party.
Earlier this month, the two judges reserved judgment in McBride's appeal against his conviction, as well as his five-year jail sentence.
In September 2011, a Pretoria regional magistrate sentenced McBride to two years imprisonment for driving under the influence of alcohol and an effective three years imprisonment for attempting to obstruct the course of justice.
Under the influence
Initially three of McBride's colleagues made statements supporting his version that he had not been drunk and did not leave the scene of the accident to evade justice.
However, five months later they testified that he had been heavily under the influence of alcohol and systematically set about covering this up with their assistance.
In his appeal, McBride argued the three former colleagues had themselves been intimidated into changing their story. They were under investigation by the Organised Crime Unit (OCU) in a separate attempted murder matter and had been offered indemnity in exchange for statements against him.
McBride had previously clashed with the OCU. About a month before his colleagues changed their statements, he had written to the South African Police Service asking them to initiate an investigation into the possible involvement of some members of the OCU in cash-in-transit crimes.
In Thursday's judgment, Pretorius and Molopa-Sethosa wrote there was clear evidence that OCU members had manipulated the testimony of the three.
Describing the three as "self-confessed liars", the judges said the magistrate had erred in finding their testimony credible.
There were "several strange aspects" to McBride's behaviour after the accident, such as trying to get medical certificates from a variety of doctors and driving to Durban to see a doctor.
The state had not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, the judges concluded. "Although the appellant's action after the accident is suspect, it is not possible to draw the inference that the appellant was driving under the influence of intoxicating alcohol at the time beyond a reasonable doubt." – Sapa
Source: Mail & Guardian
"The appeal against conviction on both counts is upheld," Judges Cynthia Pretorius and Lettie Molopa-Sethosa said in their written judgment.
"The appellant is found not guilty on all charges and is discharged."
McBride was arrested in 2006 after crashing his official car on the R511 following a Christmas party.
Earlier this month, the two judges reserved judgment in McBride's appeal against his conviction, as well as his five-year jail sentence.
In September 2011, a Pretoria regional magistrate sentenced McBride to two years imprisonment for driving under the influence of alcohol and an effective three years imprisonment for attempting to obstruct the course of justice.
Under the influence
Initially three of McBride's colleagues made statements supporting his version that he had not been drunk and did not leave the scene of the accident to evade justice.
However, five months later they testified that he had been heavily under the influence of alcohol and systematically set about covering this up with their assistance.
In his appeal, McBride argued the three former colleagues had themselves been intimidated into changing their story. They were under investigation by the Organised Crime Unit (OCU) in a separate attempted murder matter and had been offered indemnity in exchange for statements against him.
McBride had previously clashed with the OCU. About a month before his colleagues changed their statements, he had written to the South African Police Service asking them to initiate an investigation into the possible involvement of some members of the OCU in cash-in-transit crimes.
In Thursday's judgment, Pretorius and Molopa-Sethosa wrote there was clear evidence that OCU members had manipulated the testimony of the three.
Describing the three as "self-confessed liars", the judges said the magistrate had erred in finding their testimony credible.
There were "several strange aspects" to McBride's behaviour after the accident, such as trying to get medical certificates from a variety of doctors and driving to Durban to see a doctor.
The state had not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, the judges concluded. "Although the appellant's action after the accident is suspect, it is not possible to draw the inference that the appellant was driving under the influence of intoxicating alcohol at the time beyond a reasonable doubt." – Sapa
Source: Mail & Guardian
Monday, February 18, 2013
Mamphela Ramphele launches new party political platform
DR MAMPHELA Ramphele on Monday announced the formation of a “party political platform” whose first order of business would be to call for reform of South Africa’s electoral system and with the aim of contesting the 2014 national elections.
Speculation had been rife for weeks that the activist and doctor — a former MD of the World Bank — would enter the country’s political space through forming her own political party.
She will challenge the 2014 election, although she admits to having a staff of just five people, and expects funding, always an elephant in the room for political parties, to come largely from “supportive” South Africans.
On Monday, she delivered a hard-hitting speech on how the dream of a democratic South Africa had been derailed by poor governance, corruption, nepotism, poverty and powerlessness.
“Our country is at risk because self-interest has become the driver of many of those in positions of authority who should be focused on serving the public,” she said.
The platform — to be called “Agang” in Sesotho, meaning “Build SA” — will embark on a 1-million-signature campaign to ensure that electoral reform is the “first order of business” for Parliament after the 2014 election.
“I am here today to invite you, young and old, to reimagine the country of our dreams and to commit to building it into a reality in the lives of every South African,” Dr Ramphele said at the historic Women’s Gaol at Constitutional Hill in Johannesburg.
“I have said that I am no messiah. No single individual acting on their own can build our nation into the country of our dreams. But I am willing to be a bridge between my generation — those of us who fought for freedom who remember not only with their minds but also with their hearts — and that of my children. For us the dream remains alive as a link between those who sacrificed their lives for freedom to be born and those who live in the hope of seeing the reality of the dream come alive in their own lifetime.”
She said South Africans were being denied the right to govern by the current electoral system, and bemoaned the deployment of people to government by parties and the impact of being beholden to party leaders on their performance.
“We should be able to vote for the person in our own area we want to represent us in Parliament, so we can hold them accountable for the electoral promises they make,” she said. “We want an MP for Marikana, an MP for De Doorns and an MP for Sasolburg, so if the people are unhappy and the MP is not responsive enough, they will be voted out at the next election.”
The new party political platform would give citizens who stood on the sidelines an opportunity to become actively involved in building a South Africa to be proud of, Ms Ramphele said.
She blamed a passive citizenry for the direction South Africa had taken, saying she wanted to ignite South Africans to help pull the country back on track. This would be accomplished through “consultation” with those in villages, townships and suburbs, which would feed into her party’s policies.
An active citizenry would also aid in the party’s “war” against corruption. “If we operate as vigilant, active citizens, we can tackle corruption. We too are part of the problem,” Dr Ramphele said.
She added that the decision to enter party politics had not come easily. “I have never been a member of a political party nor aspired to political office. I however feel called to lead the efforts of many South Africans who increasingly fear that we are missing too many opportunities to become that which we have the potential to become — a great society.
“I have no illusions about the difficult road ahead. Bridges get trampled on. But I trust my fellow South Africans’ capacity to come together at critical times to do what others believe is impossible. I believe in our potential for greatness. I believe that greatness is within our grasp if only we can reach out across divisions and self-interests and put the country first.”
Dr Ramphele also said Marikana and De Doorns underscored the urgent need for South Africa to restructure its economic system — but such a restructuring should also focus on job satisfaction and a sense of fulfilment for workers.
Since last year, South Africa has seen a surge in violent and sometimes deadly industrial protests, often with demands for higher wages.
“What we want is an economy that works for all South Africans,” Dr Ramphele said.
She said Agang did not have a preferred economic policy at this stage as it was a work in progress and would be developed as consultation continued. She added, however, that the current economic structure undermined the country’s growth prospects.
News of Dr Ramphele’s political plans have created a buzz in opposition circles, though she made it clear on Monday that she was not joining any other political party, but consulting them widely with. “I am not a joiner,” she said.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) said on Monday that it took note of Dr Ramphele’s intention “to engage South Africans about the formation of a new political party”.
“Dr Ramphele shares the DA’s core values of nonracialism and constitutionalism, and her move is another step in the long process of realigning South African politics around these values,” said DA spokesman Mmusi Maimane, adding: “We will continue to engage Dr Ramphele in the coming months.”
Smaller parties such as the Congress of the People (COPE) can be expected to seize the opportunity of jumping on the bandwagon.
COPE leaders have said they are mulling ways to work with Dr Ramphele. While this could give her initiative a boost, it could also raise credibility questions, as COPE has battled with internal squabbles that have all but eroded its credibility.
Political analyst Susan Booysens said Ms Ramphele’s announcement on Monday was “odd and bizarre”.
Ms Booysens said she did not see Agang taking off as an imagination-grabbing political party. “I cannot even say refreshing because I cannot see how it fits into party politics,” said Ms Booysens.
Aubrey Matshiqi, political analyst and research fellow at the Helen Suzman Foundation, said Ms Ramphele’s first handicap was that she started with a party political platform. However, Mr Matshiqi said he was not surprised with the move as it appeared that Ms Ramphele and her team were “not able to settle for a very clear way of defining themselves”.
“But when you are consulting a broad range of people, defining yourself can be a problem,” Mr Matshiqi said.
Related files
PDF: Dr Mamphela Ramphele's full speech delivered at the launch of her new party political platform
Source:
Speculation had been rife for weeks that the activist and doctor — a former MD of the World Bank — would enter the country’s political space through forming her own political party.
She will challenge the 2014 election, although she admits to having a staff of just five people, and expects funding, always an elephant in the room for political parties, to come largely from “supportive” South Africans.
On Monday, she delivered a hard-hitting speech on how the dream of a democratic South Africa had been derailed by poor governance, corruption, nepotism, poverty and powerlessness.
“Our country is at risk because self-interest has become the driver of many of those in positions of authority who should be focused on serving the public,” she said.
The platform — to be called “Agang” in Sesotho, meaning “Build SA” — will embark on a 1-million-signature campaign to ensure that electoral reform is the “first order of business” for Parliament after the 2014 election.
“I am here today to invite you, young and old, to reimagine the country of our dreams and to commit to building it into a reality in the lives of every South African,” Dr Ramphele said at the historic Women’s Gaol at Constitutional Hill in Johannesburg.
“I have said that I am no messiah. No single individual acting on their own can build our nation into the country of our dreams. But I am willing to be a bridge between my generation — those of us who fought for freedom who remember not only with their minds but also with their hearts — and that of my children. For us the dream remains alive as a link between those who sacrificed their lives for freedom to be born and those who live in the hope of seeing the reality of the dream come alive in their own lifetime.”
She said South Africans were being denied the right to govern by the current electoral system, and bemoaned the deployment of people to government by parties and the impact of being beholden to party leaders on their performance.
“We should be able to vote for the person in our own area we want to represent us in Parliament, so we can hold them accountable for the electoral promises they make,” she said. “We want an MP for Marikana, an MP for De Doorns and an MP for Sasolburg, so if the people are unhappy and the MP is not responsive enough, they will be voted out at the next election.”
The new party political platform would give citizens who stood on the sidelines an opportunity to become actively involved in building a South Africa to be proud of, Ms Ramphele said.
She blamed a passive citizenry for the direction South Africa had taken, saying she wanted to ignite South Africans to help pull the country back on track. This would be accomplished through “consultation” with those in villages, townships and suburbs, which would feed into her party’s policies.
An active citizenry would also aid in the party’s “war” against corruption. “If we operate as vigilant, active citizens, we can tackle corruption. We too are part of the problem,” Dr Ramphele said.
She added that the decision to enter party politics had not come easily. “I have never been a member of a political party nor aspired to political office. I however feel called to lead the efforts of many South Africans who increasingly fear that we are missing too many opportunities to become that which we have the potential to become — a great society.
“I have no illusions about the difficult road ahead. Bridges get trampled on. But I trust my fellow South Africans’ capacity to come together at critical times to do what others believe is impossible. I believe in our potential for greatness. I believe that greatness is within our grasp if only we can reach out across divisions and self-interests and put the country first.”
Dr Ramphele also said Marikana and De Doorns underscored the urgent need for South Africa to restructure its economic system — but such a restructuring should also focus on job satisfaction and a sense of fulfilment for workers.
Since last year, South Africa has seen a surge in violent and sometimes deadly industrial protests, often with demands for higher wages.
“What we want is an economy that works for all South Africans,” Dr Ramphele said.
She said Agang did not have a preferred economic policy at this stage as it was a work in progress and would be developed as consultation continued. She added, however, that the current economic structure undermined the country’s growth prospects.
News of Dr Ramphele’s political plans have created a buzz in opposition circles, though she made it clear on Monday that she was not joining any other political party, but consulting them widely with. “I am not a joiner,” she said.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) said on Monday that it took note of Dr Ramphele’s intention “to engage South Africans about the formation of a new political party”.
“Dr Ramphele shares the DA’s core values of nonracialism and constitutionalism, and her move is another step in the long process of realigning South African politics around these values,” said DA spokesman Mmusi Maimane, adding: “We will continue to engage Dr Ramphele in the coming months.”
Smaller parties such as the Congress of the People (COPE) can be expected to seize the opportunity of jumping on the bandwagon.
COPE leaders have said they are mulling ways to work with Dr Ramphele. While this could give her initiative a boost, it could also raise credibility questions, as COPE has battled with internal squabbles that have all but eroded its credibility.
Political analyst Susan Booysens said Ms Ramphele’s announcement on Monday was “odd and bizarre”.
Ms Booysens said she did not see Agang taking off as an imagination-grabbing political party. “I cannot even say refreshing because I cannot see how it fits into party politics,” said Ms Booysens.
Aubrey Matshiqi, political analyst and research fellow at the Helen Suzman Foundation, said Ms Ramphele’s first handicap was that she started with a party political platform. However, Mr Matshiqi said he was not surprised with the move as it appeared that Ms Ramphele and her team were “not able to settle for a very clear way of defining themselves”.
“But when you are consulting a broad range of people, defining yourself can be a problem,” Mr Matshiqi said.
Related files
PDF: Dr Mamphela Ramphele's full speech delivered at the launch of her new party political platform
Source:
Friday, January 25, 2013
FNB: You Can Help campaign is regrettable
FNB met with the leadership of the ANC, led by its secretary general Gwede Mantashe on Thursday. The bank apologised to the ANC on Friday.
"The CEO of FirstRand, Mr Sizwe Nxasana, agreed that the research clippings that were posted online were regrettable; he apologised for the posting of the research clippings online," the ANC said in a statement.
"He then assured the meeting that this regrettable incident will not be repeated."
The FNB campaign features a number of videos of children in school uniform reading their hopes for the country. Opposition parties and activist groups said the ANC's criticism of the campaign showed its intolerance.
During the meeting, the ANC pointed out that the video clips were a deliberate attack on the ANC.
The clips fed into the opposition narrative that sought to project the ANC and government in a negative manner, it said.
The ANC said the clips had a negative impact on business confidence and could undermine the promotion of investment into the country.
"The ANC indicated that its leadership and membership were strongly raising a question why the organisation should continue to bank with a bank that has adopted an oppositional (sic) stance to it."
Nxasa explained to the ruling party the objectives of their youth campaign and stressed that it was meant to inspire all South Africans to work together by helping one another.
FNB expressed its commitment to the National Development Plan in addressing the areas of poverty, inequality and unemployment, the ANC said on Friday.
Source: Mail & Guardian
"The CEO of FirstRand, Mr Sizwe Nxasana, agreed that the research clippings that were posted online were regrettable; he apologised for the posting of the research clippings online," the ANC said in a statement.
"He then assured the meeting that this regrettable incident will not be repeated."
The FNB campaign features a number of videos of children in school uniform reading their hopes for the country. Opposition parties and activist groups said the ANC's criticism of the campaign showed its intolerance.
During the meeting, the ANC pointed out that the video clips were a deliberate attack on the ANC.
The clips fed into the opposition narrative that sought to project the ANC and government in a negative manner, it said.
The ANC said the clips had a negative impact on business confidence and could undermine the promotion of investment into the country.
"The ANC indicated that its leadership and membership were strongly raising a question why the organisation should continue to bank with a bank that has adopted an oppositional (sic) stance to it."
Nxasa explained to the ruling party the objectives of their youth campaign and stressed that it was meant to inspire all South Africans to work together by helping one another.
FNB expressed its commitment to the National Development Plan in addressing the areas of poverty, inequality and unemployment, the ANC said on Friday.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Police accused of looting during Sasolburg protest
A security guard has said that police also looted shops during the violent protests in Zamdela. "If I had a camera, I would have taken photos. They took stuff in one Chinese shop and the community followed," said a security guard at a municipal office. "At Save Right [a local shop near the police station] they even advised us not to injure each other, and when the ATM was robbed, their van was nearby."
The 32-year-old man claimed that Sasolburg police were also unhappy about the proposed merger of the Ngwathe and Metsimaholo local municipalities.
He said this was evident in Tuesday's shooting, in which two people died and others were wounded when police from other provinces were deployed.
"We protested on Sunday [and] no one was wounded or died; we did it again on Monday ... [there were] no injuries we heard about. So why are people being shot at when there is police from other provinces?"
Earlier in the week, police from Gauteng and Welkom were deployed in the area to help control the situation.
Criticism
Police spokesperson Colonel Motantsi Makhele said he was aware of the allegations that police were among the looters. "People must come to the front if they have information," he said. "We welcome anyone who has information so that we can investigate this."
Resident Nthako (47) said he was happy Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs Minister Richard Baloyi had announced that the process of merging the municipalities had been stopped.
However, Nthako criticised government officials for not arriving at Moses Kotane Stadium where residents had expected to be addressed on the matter at 10am on Tuesday.
Residents ran out of patience and left the stadium at 11am.
"If they came to the stadium and addressed people, no one would have died or got injured," Nthako said. A protester was shot dead at the Zamdela police station during a clash with protesters on Tuesday.
Sticks and stones
Earlier in the day, police said another protester was shot dead by a motorist after a group of protesters tried to block his way. Nine people, two of them police officers, have been injured since the protest started on Sunday.
A Jacaranda radio journalist's car was pelted with stones and a South African Press Association cameraperson was threatened with a knife, also on Tuesday. The situation was quiet on Wednesday and police were seen patrolling the area and taking photographs of damaged properties on the main road.
Three police nyalas [armoured vehicles] were seen driving around in the area while a helicopter hovered overhead. Lucky Malebo, a community leader, said people had gone to hospital to check on the wounded.
"A list of those who were injured and those who died is being compiled, and we might get it around 3pm," he said. Malebo said the residents had wanted to hold a meeting at the stadium on Wednesday, but could not apply for permission as no one was on duty at the council.
Source: Mail & Guardian
The 32-year-old man claimed that Sasolburg police were also unhappy about the proposed merger of the Ngwathe and Metsimaholo local municipalities.
He said this was evident in Tuesday's shooting, in which two people died and others were wounded when police from other provinces were deployed.
"We protested on Sunday [and] no one was wounded or died; we did it again on Monday ... [there were] no injuries we heard about. So why are people being shot at when there is police from other provinces?"
Earlier in the week, police from Gauteng and Welkom were deployed in the area to help control the situation.
Criticism
Police spokesperson Colonel Motantsi Makhele said he was aware of the allegations that police were among the looters. "People must come to the front if they have information," he said. "We welcome anyone who has information so that we can investigate this."
Resident Nthako (47) said he was happy Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs Minister Richard Baloyi had announced that the process of merging the municipalities had been stopped.
However, Nthako criticised government officials for not arriving at Moses Kotane Stadium where residents had expected to be addressed on the matter at 10am on Tuesday.
Residents ran out of patience and left the stadium at 11am.
"If they came to the stadium and addressed people, no one would have died or got injured," Nthako said. A protester was shot dead at the Zamdela police station during a clash with protesters on Tuesday.
Sticks and stones
Earlier in the day, police said another protester was shot dead by a motorist after a group of protesters tried to block his way. Nine people, two of them police officers, have been injured since the protest started on Sunday.
A Jacaranda radio journalist's car was pelted with stones and a South African Press Association cameraperson was threatened with a knife, also on Tuesday. The situation was quiet on Wednesday and police were seen patrolling the area and taking photographs of damaged properties on the main road.
Three police nyalas [armoured vehicles] were seen driving around in the area while a helicopter hovered overhead. Lucky Malebo, a community leader, said people had gone to hospital to check on the wounded.
"A list of those who were injured and those who died is being compiled, and we might get it around 3pm," he said. Malebo said the residents had wanted to hold a meeting at the stadium on Wednesday, but could not apply for permission as no one was on duty at the council.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Reaction to FNB advert like Lady Macbeth’s guilty rants
It is never a good sign when an organisation or individual completely overreacts to perceived criticism. As the simmering discontent of South Africa’s underclass boils over into open revolt and violence and as corrupt shoot-to-kill cops are increasingly deployed in places as far flung as Marikana, De Doorns and Sasolburg to protect the old and new elites from the wrath of the dispossessed, some politicians are increasingly resembling Lady Macbeth, driven by their guilt and shame to commit ever more heinous misdeeds. The hysterical and often undemocratic response of various ANC and SACP structures to the silly First National Bank (FNB) advertising campaign is a case in point.
In Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”, Lady Macbeth urges her husband to kill Duncan, the king, to allow Macbeth to satisfy his ambitions of becoming king. She overrides all of her husband’s objections by challenging his manhood and he relents and kills Duncan. Later Lady Macbeth becomes racked with guilt and sleepwalks through the palace, haunted by the murder of the former king. In this trance she tries to wash off imaginary bloodstains from her hands, shouting: “Out, damned spot! Out, I say!—One, two. Why, then, ’tis time to do ’t. Hell is murky!—Fie, my lord, fie! A soldier, and afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account?—Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him.”
The response of the ANC, the ANC Youth League and the SACP to the FNB campaign resembles the attempts of Lady Macbeth to clean imaginary bloodstains from her hands.
“What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account?”
The FNB campaign includes videos of young South Africans apparently speaking their minds. In one of the videos a participant says: “Stop voting for the same government in hopes for change – instead, change your hopes to a government that has the same hopes as us.”
The ANC Youth League and SACP joined the ANC in slamming the campaign, with the league saying it was “deeply angered and disappointed” by the bank’s “treacherous” campaign. On Sunday, Youth League spokeswoman Khusela Sangoni-Khawe said FNB had failed in trying to “recreate an Arab Spring of some sort in South Africa” and said it “uses children to make unproven claims of a government rife with corruption. We call upon South Africans to close ranks against what is a treacherous attack on our country.”
ANC spokesperson Jackson Mthembu said the ANC (who is never directly mentioned in any of the videos) was “appalled” by the campaign in which the ANC, its leadership and government were “under attack” the campaign was an “undisguised political statement that makes random and untested accusations against our government in the name of discourse. While we believe that people are entitled to their views, we don’t accept that young kids should be used as proxies to articulate political views espoused, as in the case of the FNB advertisement.”
“Out, damned spot! Out, I say!”
These vehement reactions to what appear to be rather mild criticisms of the government and platitudes about one’s right to vote for the party of one’s choice (widely accepted in any functioning democracy) are curious for several reasons.
First, whatever one might think of FNB and its advertising campaign (and I am not a fan of the campaign or of the lily-livered manner in which the bank caved in to political thugs), the manner in which several ANC and SACP spokespersons conflated the ANC with the state and with the country is worrying. The ANC is not the state. Neither is it the sole representative of the South African people. South Africa, in the words of the Freedom Charter, belongs to all who live in it – it does not belong to the ANC. Like any political party, the ANC deserves to be praised when it does something well and deserves to be criticised when it abandons the poor that it professes to love and serve.
Second, the statement that the FNB campaign is treacherous and tries to recreate the Arab Spring, is anti-democratic and – I am sorry to have to use such an emotive term – proto-fascist. There is nothing wrong with telling people that they should refrain from voting for the governing party. Voting for whomever one pleases is at the heart of political freedom in a democratic state. Every democratic election is based on a fair and free contestation between political parties in which we are all allowed to express our preferences.
We are also all free to try and convince others to vote for the ANC, to vote for the DA, or to vote for the TP (Tender Party), for that matter. It is probably not a great business model for a Bank to get involved in an advertising campaign that might alienate the majority of voters, but if it does, there is nothing treacherous about it. If FNB had not pulled the adverts I might even have lauded the bank for putting its principles (which one may agree or disagree with) before naked profits.
The Arab Spring refers to various uprisings organised by oppressed populations in countries where citizens did not enjoy political rights and where democratic contestation and free and fair elections could not be held. To refer to an advertising campaign in which a teenager urges people in South Africa to vote for the party of their choice as an attempt to recreate an Arab Spring, suggests the ANC Youth league believes that South Africa is not a democracy, that its citizens are oppressed and do not enjoy political rights and that they will never be allowed to change the government by using their vote. Like Lady Macbeth wandering in a trance and trying to wash off imaginary bloodstains from her hands, the ANC Youth League is revealing rather more than it intended about its own undemocratic tendencies. Pity Jackson Mthembu will not display the same sense of outrage about this full-frontal attack on our democracy.
Whether one is a staunch ANC supporter or a supporter of the right wing Freedom Front Plus, if one supports democracy one will not be appalled by the fact that an institution has dared to criticise a political party. Only proto-fascists would be appalled by the fact that a bank has dared to broadcast statements criticising the government.
One might, of course, disagree with the sentiments expressed by the youngsters in the FNB produced videos, and the ANC has every right to express its disagreement with some of the statments made by the youngsters. But claiming that the sentiments are treacherous or that it is not legitimate to criticise the party displays the kind of undemocratic intolerance that cannot be associated with a party who supports democracy.
Personally I find that it is better to ignore attacks that are far-fetched or motivated by racism, hatred or a complete lack of information. That is what I do when I am criticised for something I have written. “Don’t feed the trolls,” I tell myself every time I read the unhinged invective of faceless loonies on my Blog. If the criticism is serious, one either responds to it by pointing out why and how it is wrong, or one takes it on board and changes one’s behaviour. Just a thought: use it, don’t use it.
One does not tell those who criticise that they are committing treason or that they are attacking the state merely because one happens (for the time being) to be the party of government.
I was reluctant even to enter this discussion, not because I am fearful of repercussions, but because what I have written here is so obvious and because all this fuss about a bank’s advertising campaign detracts attention from the far more important social and economic issues facing the country.
Maybe that is why the campaign has attracted such hysterical responses from the ANC and its partners. Like Lady Macbeth, whose paranoid dreams symbolises the fact that she is haunted by her guilt, the ANC reaction is perhaps a symptom of the fear and guilt that stalks the political class in South Africa. As Marikana, De Doorns and Sasolburg have shown, the poor, economically excluded and marginalised members of society have not benefited as handsomely from the end of apartheid as the members of the old (mostly white) and emerging (mostly black) middle classes.
While those in the chattering classes squabble about silly adverts made to promote the commercial interests of a big bank and argue whether these adds exploit children, many of those same children are dropping out of school or receiving a third rate education because of the cowardice of politicians who are too scared to take on a powerful union. While I write about the nature of democracy, members of social movement are harassed and tortured by the police. While Helen Zille spends her days on twitter, blaming the poor for the lack of services in their communities in Cape Town, millions of South Africans go to bed hungry, wondering whether this wonderful democracy will ever guarantee them a full stomach.
Source: Constitutionally Speaking
In Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”, Lady Macbeth urges her husband to kill Duncan, the king, to allow Macbeth to satisfy his ambitions of becoming king. She overrides all of her husband’s objections by challenging his manhood and he relents and kills Duncan. Later Lady Macbeth becomes racked with guilt and sleepwalks through the palace, haunted by the murder of the former king. In this trance she tries to wash off imaginary bloodstains from her hands, shouting: “Out, damned spot! Out, I say!—One, two. Why, then, ’tis time to do ’t. Hell is murky!—Fie, my lord, fie! A soldier, and afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account?—Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him.”
The response of the ANC, the ANC Youth League and the SACP to the FNB campaign resembles the attempts of Lady Macbeth to clean imaginary bloodstains from her hands.
“What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account?”
The FNB campaign includes videos of young South Africans apparently speaking their minds. In one of the videos a participant says: “Stop voting for the same government in hopes for change – instead, change your hopes to a government that has the same hopes as us.”
The ANC Youth League and SACP joined the ANC in slamming the campaign, with the league saying it was “deeply angered and disappointed” by the bank’s “treacherous” campaign. On Sunday, Youth League spokeswoman Khusela Sangoni-Khawe said FNB had failed in trying to “recreate an Arab Spring of some sort in South Africa” and said it “uses children to make unproven claims of a government rife with corruption. We call upon South Africans to close ranks against what is a treacherous attack on our country.”
ANC spokesperson Jackson Mthembu said the ANC (who is never directly mentioned in any of the videos) was “appalled” by the campaign in which the ANC, its leadership and government were “under attack” the campaign was an “undisguised political statement that makes random and untested accusations against our government in the name of discourse. While we believe that people are entitled to their views, we don’t accept that young kids should be used as proxies to articulate political views espoused, as in the case of the FNB advertisement.”
“Out, damned spot! Out, I say!”
These vehement reactions to what appear to be rather mild criticisms of the government and platitudes about one’s right to vote for the party of one’s choice (widely accepted in any functioning democracy) are curious for several reasons.
First, whatever one might think of FNB and its advertising campaign (and I am not a fan of the campaign or of the lily-livered manner in which the bank caved in to political thugs), the manner in which several ANC and SACP spokespersons conflated the ANC with the state and with the country is worrying. The ANC is not the state. Neither is it the sole representative of the South African people. South Africa, in the words of the Freedom Charter, belongs to all who live in it – it does not belong to the ANC. Like any political party, the ANC deserves to be praised when it does something well and deserves to be criticised when it abandons the poor that it professes to love and serve.
Second, the statement that the FNB campaign is treacherous and tries to recreate the Arab Spring, is anti-democratic and – I am sorry to have to use such an emotive term – proto-fascist. There is nothing wrong with telling people that they should refrain from voting for the governing party. Voting for whomever one pleases is at the heart of political freedom in a democratic state. Every democratic election is based on a fair and free contestation between political parties in which we are all allowed to express our preferences.
We are also all free to try and convince others to vote for the ANC, to vote for the DA, or to vote for the TP (Tender Party), for that matter. It is probably not a great business model for a Bank to get involved in an advertising campaign that might alienate the majority of voters, but if it does, there is nothing treacherous about it. If FNB had not pulled the adverts I might even have lauded the bank for putting its principles (which one may agree or disagree with) before naked profits.
The Arab Spring refers to various uprisings organised by oppressed populations in countries where citizens did not enjoy political rights and where democratic contestation and free and fair elections could not be held. To refer to an advertising campaign in which a teenager urges people in South Africa to vote for the party of their choice as an attempt to recreate an Arab Spring, suggests the ANC Youth league believes that South Africa is not a democracy, that its citizens are oppressed and do not enjoy political rights and that they will never be allowed to change the government by using their vote. Like Lady Macbeth wandering in a trance and trying to wash off imaginary bloodstains from her hands, the ANC Youth League is revealing rather more than it intended about its own undemocratic tendencies. Pity Jackson Mthembu will not display the same sense of outrage about this full-frontal attack on our democracy.
Whether one is a staunch ANC supporter or a supporter of the right wing Freedom Front Plus, if one supports democracy one will not be appalled by the fact that an institution has dared to criticise a political party. Only proto-fascists would be appalled by the fact that a bank has dared to broadcast statements criticising the government.
One might, of course, disagree with the sentiments expressed by the youngsters in the FNB produced videos, and the ANC has every right to express its disagreement with some of the statments made by the youngsters. But claiming that the sentiments are treacherous or that it is not legitimate to criticise the party displays the kind of undemocratic intolerance that cannot be associated with a party who supports democracy.
Personally I find that it is better to ignore attacks that are far-fetched or motivated by racism, hatred or a complete lack of information. That is what I do when I am criticised for something I have written. “Don’t feed the trolls,” I tell myself every time I read the unhinged invective of faceless loonies on my Blog. If the criticism is serious, one either responds to it by pointing out why and how it is wrong, or one takes it on board and changes one’s behaviour. Just a thought: use it, don’t use it.
One does not tell those who criticise that they are committing treason or that they are attacking the state merely because one happens (for the time being) to be the party of government.
I was reluctant even to enter this discussion, not because I am fearful of repercussions, but because what I have written here is so obvious and because all this fuss about a bank’s advertising campaign detracts attention from the far more important social and economic issues facing the country.
Maybe that is why the campaign has attracted such hysterical responses from the ANC and its partners. Like Lady Macbeth, whose paranoid dreams symbolises the fact that she is haunted by her guilt, the ANC reaction is perhaps a symptom of the fear and guilt that stalks the political class in South Africa. As Marikana, De Doorns and Sasolburg have shown, the poor, economically excluded and marginalised members of society have not benefited as handsomely from the end of apartheid as the members of the old (mostly white) and emerging (mostly black) middle classes.
While those in the chattering classes squabble about silly adverts made to promote the commercial interests of a big bank and argue whether these adds exploit children, many of those same children are dropping out of school or receiving a third rate education because of the cowardice of politicians who are too scared to take on a powerful union. While I write about the nature of democracy, members of social movement are harassed and tortured by the police. While Helen Zille spends her days on twitter, blaming the poor for the lack of services in their communities in Cape Town, millions of South Africans go to bed hungry, wondering whether this wonderful democracy will ever guarantee them a full stomach.
Source: Constitutionally Speaking
Friday, January 18, 2013
FNB launches "You can help" campaign
South Africa is rich in values, tradition and culture, a truly wonderful country, and one that is admired around the world. Yet, as South Africans, we sometimes forget what our great nation has achieved and remains capable of achieving. It is in times like these that we need to be reminded of the greatness inside all of us, and what is possible when help is joined to common purpose and courage to necessity.
At 18:57, on 17 January 2013, FNB launched a new brand campaign with a live broadcast to South Africa. The broadcast carried a message from the voices we don't often hear, the children of our great country. A message we believe will inspire the nation.
In September 2012, we undertook what is likely the most current snapshot of the opinions of the youth, their views on our country and the role of help. Help, not in terms of coordinated interventions, but little, everyday help; and the power help has to make a big difference. The survey was completed by HDI Youth Marketeers, an independent research firm.
In assembling these views and opinions, we spoke to over 1300 learners and students (ages 10 to 22) from around the country and from all walks of life. We learnt that today's youth are losing their innocence, not to apartheid, but to the many social ills and tragedies that came after it. One child said, "If I was President for a day, I would make South Africa safe for children, women and teens who are abused." Another 10-year-old boy added the following, "I get scared when people are killing each other."
But though some of what they had to say was hard to hear, we learnt too that our youth carry inside them a fire that burns with hope and positivity. Their sense of identity is astounding, and they have an unprecedented interest in working as a community to improve our society and environment. A 12 year old said, "When we help people, we make them feel like they're somebody". Another child said, "If we help each other, we raise our country". Yet another student, aged 10, said "In the future I want to live in South Africa... I know South Africa is full of crime, but if I didn't live here I don't know who I would be." A 15 year old said, "We help each other because we are one blood, one soul, with a 13 year old saying, "If we don't help each other, who will help us".
"The intention of the campaign is not to talk about ourselves, but rather to be a brand for betterment by providing the youth of our country with a stage to voice what impacts the daily reality of many South Africans through the lens of our brand's core positioning of 'Help', says Bernice Samuels, FNB Chief Marketing Officer.
"FNB is a brand of high ideals and has a long history of leading from the front, not just in terms of product and service innovation, but also in terms of its social focus on building a stronger, unified and values-based nation, referring to our Praise Singer, Anthem, and Dog ads to mention a few" adds Samuels.
The chosen venue for the live advert, Naledi Secondary School, played an integral role in the events of 1976, a time when the youth of South Africa sent a message that could not be ignored, and in doing so, helped change the future of our country.
Jason Levin, Managing Director of HDI Youth Marketeers said; "The survey provided a good overall snapshot of the South African youth opinion and was hugely rewarding as it helped us gain insight into how the youth view South Africa. The research was truly inspiring. It is only through projects like this, that true feelings are clearly reflected."
FNB also created a dynamic online portal to support the campaign and everyone is encouraged to visit the blog site, youcanhelp.co.za to participate in the ongoing national discussion we believe will be triggered by the campaign. The campaign is integrated across all platforms, including TV, OOH, digital (youcanhelp.co.za) and social media on Facebook and Twitter (#littlehelps).
"All of the great things we've done, we've done together by helping each other. Perhaps it's time for us to listen to the voices we seldom hear, the youth of our country, because it is the South Africa we build today that will be the country they will inherit tomorrow," concludes Samuels.
In Nelson Mandela's words, "If there are dreams about a beautiful South Africa, there are also roads that lead to their goal. Two of these roads could be named Goodness and Forgiveness." Let us join hands in helping to build this beautiful South Africa we all dream of.
Issued by FNB, January 18 2013
Source: Politicsweb
At 18:57, on 17 January 2013, FNB launched a new brand campaign with a live broadcast to South Africa. The broadcast carried a message from the voices we don't often hear, the children of our great country. A message we believe will inspire the nation.
In September 2012, we undertook what is likely the most current snapshot of the opinions of the youth, their views on our country and the role of help. Help, not in terms of coordinated interventions, but little, everyday help; and the power help has to make a big difference. The survey was completed by HDI Youth Marketeers, an independent research firm.
In assembling these views and opinions, we spoke to over 1300 learners and students (ages 10 to 22) from around the country and from all walks of life. We learnt that today's youth are losing their innocence, not to apartheid, but to the many social ills and tragedies that came after it. One child said, "If I was President for a day, I would make South Africa safe for children, women and teens who are abused." Another 10-year-old boy added the following, "I get scared when people are killing each other."
But though some of what they had to say was hard to hear, we learnt too that our youth carry inside them a fire that burns with hope and positivity. Their sense of identity is astounding, and they have an unprecedented interest in working as a community to improve our society and environment. A 12 year old said, "When we help people, we make them feel like they're somebody". Another child said, "If we help each other, we raise our country". Yet another student, aged 10, said "In the future I want to live in South Africa... I know South Africa is full of crime, but if I didn't live here I don't know who I would be." A 15 year old said, "We help each other because we are one blood, one soul, with a 13 year old saying, "If we don't help each other, who will help us".
"The intention of the campaign is not to talk about ourselves, but rather to be a brand for betterment by providing the youth of our country with a stage to voice what impacts the daily reality of many South Africans through the lens of our brand's core positioning of 'Help', says Bernice Samuels, FNB Chief Marketing Officer.
"FNB is a brand of high ideals and has a long history of leading from the front, not just in terms of product and service innovation, but also in terms of its social focus on building a stronger, unified and values-based nation, referring to our Praise Singer, Anthem, and Dog ads to mention a few" adds Samuels.
The chosen venue for the live advert, Naledi Secondary School, played an integral role in the events of 1976, a time when the youth of South Africa sent a message that could not be ignored, and in doing so, helped change the future of our country.
Jason Levin, Managing Director of HDI Youth Marketeers said; "The survey provided a good overall snapshot of the South African youth opinion and was hugely rewarding as it helped us gain insight into how the youth view South Africa. The research was truly inspiring. It is only through projects like this, that true feelings are clearly reflected."
FNB also created a dynamic online portal to support the campaign and everyone is encouraged to visit the blog site, youcanhelp.co.za to participate in the ongoing national discussion we believe will be triggered by the campaign. The campaign is integrated across all platforms, including TV, OOH, digital (youcanhelp.co.za) and social media on Facebook and Twitter (#littlehelps).
"All of the great things we've done, we've done together by helping each other. Perhaps it's time for us to listen to the voices we seldom hear, the youth of our country, because it is the South Africa we build today that will be the country they will inherit tomorrow," concludes Samuels.
In Nelson Mandela's words, "If there are dreams about a beautiful South Africa, there are also roads that lead to their goal. Two of these roads could be named Goodness and Forgiveness." Let us join hands in helping to build this beautiful South Africa we all dream of.
Issued by FNB, January 18 2013
Source: Politicsweb
Monday, January 14, 2013
Mthethwa fails to stop Zille's police inquiry
A high court has dismissed an application by the police minister for an interdict against a commission of inquiry into Khayelitsha's policing.
On Monday the Western Cape High Court announced its dismissal of Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa's urgent interdict against the commission set up by Premier Helen Zille last year. The commission – headed by advocate Vusi Pikoli and retired Constitutional Court Judge Catherine O’Reagan – was tasked with investigating allegations of police inefficiency and the breakdown of the relationship of the police after public lobbying by organisations such as Equal Education, the Social Justice Coalition and the Treatment Action Campaign.
In response to arguments by advocates representing Zille, the Social Justice Coalition and the commission itself last year, Mthethwa's legal team argued Zille's decision to appoint the commission would have an impact on the independence of the South African Police Service. Advocate Peter Hawthorne, acting for the coalition, on Monday told the court Mthethwa's legal team failed to prove the commission would cause irreparable harm to the SAPS. The commission was meant to hold public hearings from November 12 to December 14, which was since suspended pending the outcome of Mthethwa's application.
Last year the M&G reported that there had been more than 18 vigilante killings in Khayelitsha in 2012 – which activists related to the community’s lack of trust in the police’s ability to maintain order – as well as a spate of gang violence in the area.
"The rationale behind the setting up of such a commission, which, at a strategic level, only focuses on the South African Police Service and not the Western Cape metro police, is suspicious if not questionable," Mthethwa said in November after the commission was set up.
"Despite the engagements we held with the premier over the past weeks, it is evident that she is determined to continue with the commission by hook or crook, which leaves us with no option but to challenge the matter through the legal framework," said Mthethwa when he challenged the validity of the commission.
Following Mthethwa’s urgent interdict in November, many residents of Khayelitsha and activists – including Social Justice Coalition founder Zackie Achmat and its workers – gathered outside the Western Cape High Court last year to protest against the police minister's attempt to stop the commission of inquiry.
Outside the court on Monday residents took part in the “people’s commission of inquiry into crime in Khayelitsha” where they shared stories about their experiences with the police in the township, and Achmat used a loudspeaker to call witnesses to the "stand".
Source: Mail & Guardian
On Monday the Western Cape High Court announced its dismissal of Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa's urgent interdict against the commission set up by Premier Helen Zille last year. The commission – headed by advocate Vusi Pikoli and retired Constitutional Court Judge Catherine O’Reagan – was tasked with investigating allegations of police inefficiency and the breakdown of the relationship of the police after public lobbying by organisations such as Equal Education, the Social Justice Coalition and the Treatment Action Campaign.
In response to arguments by advocates representing Zille, the Social Justice Coalition and the commission itself last year, Mthethwa's legal team argued Zille's decision to appoint the commission would have an impact on the independence of the South African Police Service. Advocate Peter Hawthorne, acting for the coalition, on Monday told the court Mthethwa's legal team failed to prove the commission would cause irreparable harm to the SAPS. The commission was meant to hold public hearings from November 12 to December 14, which was since suspended pending the outcome of Mthethwa's application.
Last year the M&G reported that there had been more than 18 vigilante killings in Khayelitsha in 2012 – which activists related to the community’s lack of trust in the police’s ability to maintain order – as well as a spate of gang violence in the area.
"The rationale behind the setting up of such a commission, which, at a strategic level, only focuses on the South African Police Service and not the Western Cape metro police, is suspicious if not questionable," Mthethwa said in November after the commission was set up.
"Despite the engagements we held with the premier over the past weeks, it is evident that she is determined to continue with the commission by hook or crook, which leaves us with no option but to challenge the matter through the legal framework," said Mthethwa when he challenged the validity of the commission.
Following Mthethwa’s urgent interdict in November, many residents of Khayelitsha and activists – including Social Justice Coalition founder Zackie Achmat and its workers – gathered outside the Western Cape High Court last year to protest against the police minister's attempt to stop the commission of inquiry.
Outside the court on Monday residents took part in the “people’s commission of inquiry into crime in Khayelitsha” where they shared stories about their experiences with the police in the township, and Achmat used a loudspeaker to call witnesses to the "stand".
Source: Mail & Guardian
Thursday, December 13, 2012
WORLD: An interview with Noam Chomsky — Nothing can justify torture
Professor Noam Chomsky is an Institute Professor and Professor (Emeritus) in the Department of Linguistics & Philosophy at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). He was educated at the University of Philadelphia and at Harvard University as a Harvard Junior Fellow. He earned his PhD in Linguistics from the University of Philadelphia in 1955. He has spent the 57 years since then teaching at MIT. In addition to his academic work in linguistics, Professor Chomsky has been a noted political activist and philosopher, gaining national recognition in 1967 over his opposition to the Vietnam War and since then has regularly spoken out against US foreign and domestic policies and mainstream American mass media. Between his academic career and his work as a political activist and dissident, he has published over 100 books. Here with Eric Bailey and on the eve of the 2012 US presidential election, he discusses America’s human rights record under the administration of President Obama and the military intervention policies that have seen increased use during the Arab Spring. Prof. Chomsky recently communicated with Eric Bailey of Torture Magazine.
EB: The US presidential elections are almost upon us and the last four years have seen significant changes in American Federal policy in regards to human rights. One of the few examples of cooperation between the Democratic and Republican Parties over the last four years has been the passing of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012. This bill has given the United States military the power to arrest American citizens, indefinitely, without charge, trial, or any other form of due process of law and the Obama Administration has and continues to fight a legal battle in Federal Court to prevent that law from being declared unconstitutional. Obama authorized the assassination of three American citizens, including Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16 year old son, admittedly all members of Al Qaeda, – all without judicial review. Additionally, the Guantanamo Bay prison remains open, the Patriot Act has been extended, and the TSA has expanded at breakneck speeds. What is your take on America’s human rights record over the past four years and can you contrast Obama’s policies with those of his predecessor, George W. Bush?
NC: Obama’s policies have been approximately the same as Bush’s, though there have been some slight differences, but that’s not a great surprise. The Democrats supported Bush’s policies. There were some objections on mostly partisan grounds, but for the most part, they supported his policies and it’s not surprising that they have continued to do so. In some respects Obama has gone even beyond Bush. The NDAA, which you mentioned, was not initiated by Obama, (when it passed Congress, he said he didn’t approve of it and wouldn’t implement it) but he nevertheless did sign it into law and did not veto it. It was pushed through by hawks, including Joe Lieberman and others. In fact, there hasn’t been that much of a change. The worst part of the NDAA is that it codified – or put into law – what had already been a regular practice. The practices hadn’t been significantly different. The one part that received public attention is what you mentioned, the part that permits the indefinite detention of American citizens, but why permit the indefinite detention of anybody? It’s a gross violation of fundamental human rights and civil law, going all the way back to the Magna Carta in the 13th Century, so it’s a very severe attack on elementary civil rights, both under Bush and under Obama. It’s bipartisan!
As for the killings, Obama has sharply increased the global assassination campaign. While it was initiated by Bush, it has expanded under Obama and it has included American citizens, again with bipartisan support and very little criticism other than some minor criticism because it was an American. But then again, why should you have the right to assassinate anybody? For example, suppose Iran was assassinating members of Congress who were calling for an attack on Iran. Would we think that’s fine? That would be much more justified, but of course we’d see that as an act of war. The real question is, why assassinate anyone? The government has made it very clear that the assassinations are personally approved by Obama and the criteria for assassination are very weak. If a group of men are seen somewhere by a drone who are, say, loading something into a truck, and there is some suspicion that maybe they are militants, then it’s fine to kill them and they are regarded as guilty unless, subsequently, they are shown to be innocent. That’s the wording that the United States used and it is such a gross violation of fundamental human rights that you can hardly talk about it.
The question of due process actually did arise, since the US does have a constitution and it says that no person shall be deprived of their rights without due process of law – again, this goes back to 13th Century England – so the question arose, “What about due process?” The Obama Justice Department’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, explained that there was due process in these cases because they are discussed first at the Executive Branch. That’s not even a bad joke! The British kings from the 13th Century would have applauded. “Sure, if we talk about it, that’s due process.” And that, again, passed without controversy.
In fact, we might ask the same question about the murder of Osama Bin Laden. Notice I use the term “murder”. When heavily armed elite troops capture a suspect, unarmed and defenseless, accompanied by his wives, and then shoot him, kill him, and dump his body into the ocean without an autopsy, that’s shear assassination. Also notice that I said “suspect”. The reason is because of another principle of law, that also goes back to the 13th Century – that a man is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Before that, he’s a suspect. In the case of Osama Bin Laden, the United States had never formally charged him with 9/11 and part of the reason was that they didn’t know that he was responsible. In fact, eight months after 9/11 and after the most intensive inquiry in history, the FBI explained that it suspected that the 9/11 plot was hatched in Afghanistan, (didn’t mention Bin Laden) and was implemented in the United Arab Emirates, Germany, and of course the United States. That’s eight months after the attack and there’s nothing substantive that they’ve learned since then that does more than increase the suspicion. My own assumption is that the suspicion is almost certainly correct, but there’s a big difference between having a very confident belief and showing someone to be guilty. And even if he’s guilty, he was supposed to be apprehended and brought before a court. That’s British and American law going back eight centuries. He’s not supposed to be murdered and have his body dumped without an autopsy, but support for this is very nearly universal. Actually, I wrote one of the few critical articles on it and my article was bitterly condemned by commentators across the spectrum, including the Left, because the assassination was so obviously just, since we suspected him of committing a crime against us. And that tells you something about the significant, I would say, “moral degeneration” running throughout the whole intellectual class. And yes, Obama has continued this and in some respects extended it, but it hardly comes as a surprise.
The rot is much deeper than that.
The rot is much deeper than that.
EB: It has been just over 10 years since the publication of the Bush Administration’s “Torture Memos”. These memos provided a legal justification for the torture of detainees held by the CIA in connection with the “War on Terror.” The contents of the memos are chilling and have created new debate on torture internationally. Despite all of the promises given by President Obama to close those illegal detention centers, it seems that “black site” activities still occur. What are your views on these detention centers and CIA torture? Also, what do you think about Obama’s promise of CIA reforms in 2008 and how has the reality of his presidency stacked up to those promises?
NC: There have been some presidential orders expressing disapproval of the most extreme forms of torture, but Bagram remains open and uninspected. That’s probably the worst in Afghanistan. Guantanamo is still open, but it’s unlikely that serious torture is going on at Guantanamo. There is just too much inspection. There are military lawyers present and evidence regularly coming out so I suspect that that’s not a torture chamber any more, but it still is an illegal detention chamber, and Bagram and who knows how many others are still functioning. Rendition doesn’t seem to be continuing at the level that it did, but it has been until very recently.
Rendition is just sending people abroad to be tortured. Actually, that’s barred as well by the Magna Carta – the foundation of Anglo-American law. It’s explicitly barred to send somebody across the seas to be punished and tortured. It’s not just done by the United States, either. It’s done all over Western Europe. Britain has participated in it. Sweden has participated. It’s one of the reasons for a lot of the concerns about extraditing Julian Assange to Sweden. Canada has been implicated as was Ireland, but to Ireland’s credit it was one of the few places where there was mass popular protests against allowing the Shannon Airport to be used for CIA rendition. In most countries there has been very little protest or not a word. I don’t know of any recent cases so maybe that policy is no longer being implemented, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it was still in effect.
EB: Moving beyond the US, the Middle East has always been rife with human rights abuses, but the turmoil of the Arab Spring has intensified such abuses in many countries. While the dictatorships in Tunisia and Egypt were toppled without resorting to civil war, countries like Libya, Syria, and Yemen have seen heavy fighting. For America and NATO’s part, there has been yet another military intervention with the Libyan Civil War and only the stubbornness of Russia and China have prevented a similar ntervention in Syria. In both cases, rebel forces have asked, even begged, for American and European help in their war efforts, but have proven to be absolutely uninterested in negotiated settlements with their dictatorial adversaries, even when outside help is not forthcoming. What is your take on military interventions, both the intervention that did occur in Libya and the one that is being called for in Syria? Is it morally justifiable to send Texans and Louisianans into harm’s way to fight in the internal conflicts of Libyans and Syrians? Conversely, can refusing to intervene be justified when entire cities, such as Misrata, Benghazi, Aleppo, and Homs were or are being threatened with utter destruction and tens of thousands of civilians are being killed?
NC: Well, let’s start with Syria. The one thing I disagree with in what you said is that I doubt very much that Russia and China had anything to do with the lack of US or Western military intervention in Syria. In fact my strong suspicion is that the United States, Britain, and France welcomed the Russian veto because that gave them a pretext not to do anything. Now they can say, “How can we do anything? The Russians and the Chinese have vetoed it!” In fact, if they wanted to intervene, they wouldn’t have cared one way or the other about a Russian or Chinese veto. That’s perfectly obvious from history, but they didn’t want to intervene and they don’t want to intervene now. The military and intelligence strategic command centers are just strongly opposed to it. Some oppose it for technical, military, reasons and others because they don’t see anyone they can support in their interests. They don’t particularly like Assad, although he was more or less conformed to US and Israeli interests, but they don’t like the opposition either, especially their Islamist elements, so they just prefer to stay on the side lines. It’s kind of interesting that Israel doesn’t do anything. They wouldn’t have to do much. Israel could easily obilize forces in the Golan Heights (Syrian territory that Israel illegally annexed). They could mobilize forces there, which are only about 40 miles from Damascus, which would compel Assad to send military forces to the border, drawing them away from areas where the rebels are operating. So that would be direct support for the rebels, but without firing a shot and without moving across the border.
But there is no talk of it and I think what that indicates is that Israel, the United States, and their allies just don’t want to take moves that will undermine the regime, just out of self-interest. There is no humanitarian interest involved.
As far as Libya is concerned, we have to be a little cautious, because there were two interventions in Libya. The first one was under the auspices of the United Nations. That’s UN Resolution 1973. That resolution called for a no-fly zone, a ceasefire, and the start of negotiations and diplomacy.
EB: That was the intervention for which the justification was claimed to be the prevention of the destruction of Benghazi?
NC: Well, we don’t know if Benghazi was going to be destroyed, but it was called to prevent a possible attack on Benghazi. You can debate how likely the attack was, but personally, I felt that was legitimate – to try to stop a possible atrocity. However, that intervention lasted about five minutes. Almost immediately, the NATO powers (France and Britain in the lead and the United States following) violated the resolution, radically, and became the air force of the rebels. Nothing in the resolution justified that. It did call for “all necessary steps” to protect civilians, but there’s a big difference between protecting civilians and being the air force for the rebels.
Maybe we should have been in favor of the rebelling forces. That’s a separate question, but this was pretty clearly in violation of the resolution. It certainly wasn’t done for a lack of alternative options. Gaddafi offered a ceasefire. Whether he meant it or not, nobody knows, because it was at once rejected.
Incidentally, this pact was strongly opposed by most of the world. There was virtually no support for it. The African Union (Libya is, after all, an African country) strongly opposed it, right away, called for a ceasefire, and even suggested the introduction of African Union forces to try and reduce the conflict.
The BRICS countries, the most important of the developing countries, (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) happened to be having a conference at the time and they strongly opposed the NATO intervention and called for moves towards diplomacy, negotiations, and a ceasefire. Egypt, next door, didn’t participate. Within NATO, Germany refused to participate. Italy refused too, in the beginning, though later they joined the intervention. Turkey held back. Later on they joined, but initially they opposed intervention. Generally speaking, it was almost unilateral. It was the traditional imperial powers (France, Britain, and the United States) which intervened.
In fact it did lead to a humanitarian catastrophe. Maybe it would have happened anyway, but it certainly led to that, especially in the end with the attacks on BaniWalid and Sirte, the last pro-Gadaffi holdouts. They are the main center of Libya’s largest tribe, the Warfalla tribe. Libya is a highly divided tribal society, they are a major tribe, and this was their home center. Many of them were pretty bitter about that. Could it have been resolved through diplomacy and negotiations the way the African Union and BRICS countries suggested? We don’t know.
It’s also worthy of note that the International Crisis Group, which is the main, non-state element that deals with continuing conflicts and crises throughout the world, and is very highly respected, opposed intervention too. They strongly supported negotiations and diplomacy. However, the African Union and others’ positions were barely reported on in the West. Who cares what they say? In fact, if they were reported on at all, they were disparaged on the grounds that these countries had had close relations with Gaddafi. In fact, they did, but so did Britain and the United States, right to the end.
In any event, the intervention did take place and now one hopes for the best, but it’s not a very pretty picture. You can read an account of it in the current issue of the London Review of Books by Hugh Roberts, who was, at the time, the North African Director of the International Crisis Group and a specialist on the region. He opposed the intervention and described the outcome as pretty hopeless chaos that is undercutting the hopes for an eventual rise of a sort of sensible, democratic, nationalism.
So that wasn’t very pretty, but what about the other countries? Well, the countries that are most significant to the United States and the West, generally, are the oil dictatorships and they remain very stable. There were efforts to try and join the Arab Spring, but they were crushed, very harshly, with not a word from the Western powers. Sometimes it was quite violent, as in eastern Saudi Arabia and in Bahrain, which were Shiite areas, mostly, but it resulted in at most a tap on the wrist by the Western Powers. They clearly wanted the oil dictatorships to remain. That’s the center of their power.
In Tunisia, which had mostly French influence, the French supported the dictatorship until the very end. In fact, they were still supporting it after demonstrations were sweeping the country. Finally, at the last second, they conceded that their favorite dictator had to go. In Egypt, where the United States and Britain were the main influences, it was the same. Obama supported the dictator Mubarak until virtually the last minute – until the army turned against him. It became impossible to support him anymore so they urged him to leave and make a transition to a similar system.
All of that is quite routine. That’s the standard operating procedure for dealing with a situation where your favorite dictator is getting into trouble. There is case after case like that. What you do in that case is support the dictator to the very end, regardless of how vicious and bloody the he is. Then when it becomes impossible, say because the army or the business classes have turned against him, then ease him out somewhere, (sometimes with half the government’s treasury in his pocket) declare your love for democracy, and try to restore the old system. That’s pretty much what’s happening in Egypt.
Source: The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Zim government seizes former PM Smith's farm
The Zimbabwe government has seized the farm of late former white minority leader Ian Smith, listing it "for compulsory acquisition for resettlement."
Owen Jarman, manager at the cattle ranch Gwenoro in the central Zimbabwean district of Shurugwi said he was winding up affairs at the farm after being told by government officials in late September that it had been "listed for compulsory acquisition for resettlement."
Smith was prime minister of Rhodesia, as it was formerly known, from 1964 until 1978, defying international condemnation over his refusal to relinquish white rule.
A five-year guerilla war led by black nationalists ended in 1979 with a settlement which allowed Robert Mugabe to win elections. He has remained in power since.
In 2000, Mugabe launched a campaign to seize white-owned land and redistribute it to black farmers. While most white farmers lost almost everything they owned, the main section of Smith's farm had remained untouched.
"We understand that the farm was left alone out of (Mugabe's) respect for Mr Smith," said Jarman. "We have farmed here without interruption since 2000. But there seems to have been a change of heart and they have now decided to take it."
It was being handed to a local technical college, he said. No compensation is to be paid.
Smith bought the farm in 1948, lived on it throughout the pre-independence guerilla war but finally left in 2005 to go to South Africa as he became infirm with age. He died there in 2007 aged 88, the same age as Mugabe is now. His ashes were scattered at Gwenoro.
Jarman has been running the farm for Smith's step children since his death. "It'll take me perhaps the next couple of months to clear out," he said. "They are giving us time. They don't seem to be in a huge hurry to get us off."
The World Bank and other major international financial institutions have accused Mugabe of destroying what was once regarded as "the breadbasket of Africa" with the land seizures.
They say it led to the collapse of the rest of the economy in 2008. The World Food Programme says Zimbabwe is facing one of its worst "hunger periods" this year, with 1.7-million people facing starvation.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Owen Jarman, manager at the cattle ranch Gwenoro in the central Zimbabwean district of Shurugwi said he was winding up affairs at the farm after being told by government officials in late September that it had been "listed for compulsory acquisition for resettlement."
Smith was prime minister of Rhodesia, as it was formerly known, from 1964 until 1978, defying international condemnation over his refusal to relinquish white rule.
A five-year guerilla war led by black nationalists ended in 1979 with a settlement which allowed Robert Mugabe to win elections. He has remained in power since.
In 2000, Mugabe launched a campaign to seize white-owned land and redistribute it to black farmers. While most white farmers lost almost everything they owned, the main section of Smith's farm had remained untouched.
"We understand that the farm was left alone out of (Mugabe's) respect for Mr Smith," said Jarman. "We have farmed here without interruption since 2000. But there seems to have been a change of heart and they have now decided to take it."
It was being handed to a local technical college, he said. No compensation is to be paid.
Smith bought the farm in 1948, lived on it throughout the pre-independence guerilla war but finally left in 2005 to go to South Africa as he became infirm with age. He died there in 2007 aged 88, the same age as Mugabe is now. His ashes were scattered at Gwenoro.
Jarman has been running the farm for Smith's step children since his death. "It'll take me perhaps the next couple of months to clear out," he said. "They are giving us time. They don't seem to be in a huge hurry to get us off."
The World Bank and other major international financial institutions have accused Mugabe of destroying what was once regarded as "the breadbasket of Africa" with the land seizures.
They say it led to the collapse of the rest of the economy in 2008. The World Food Programme says Zimbabwe is facing one of its worst "hunger periods" this year, with 1.7-million people facing starvation.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Land redistribution proposals to be implemented
Proposals for the redistribution of land found in the government's land reform green paper would come into effect as early as March next year.
"All these new land reform policies will come into effect during the first quarter of the year next year", Rural Development and Land Reform Minister Gugile Nkwinti said.
He was speaking to the Transformation of Certain Rural Areas Act and the Rural Areas Act (Trancaa) consultative workshop in Cape Town.
The new policies included a four-tier land tenure system, which accounted for leased land to farmers, land redistribution, foreign ownership of land and the implementation of a democratic communal land system.
Nkwinti said cabinet had approved the proposal to establish the office of the valuer-general, which would control land prices involving government land purchases for public interest.
He emphasised that the willing-buyer-willing-seller principle would continue for individual citizens who would be selling land to each other.
A land rights management board along with its district committees would also be set up next year to protect farm workers against unfair evictions.
The land management commission would be responsible for all registration of private and public land. – Sapa.
Source: Mail & Guardian
"All these new land reform policies will come into effect during the first quarter of the year next year", Rural Development and Land Reform Minister Gugile Nkwinti said.
He was speaking to the Transformation of Certain Rural Areas Act and the Rural Areas Act (Trancaa) consultative workshop in Cape Town.
The new policies included a four-tier land tenure system, which accounted for leased land to farmers, land redistribution, foreign ownership of land and the implementation of a democratic communal land system.
Nkwinti said cabinet had approved the proposal to establish the office of the valuer-general, which would control land prices involving government land purchases for public interest.
He emphasised that the willing-buyer-willing-seller principle would continue for individual citizens who would be selling land to each other.
A land rights management board along with its district committees would also be set up next year to protect farm workers against unfair evictions.
The land management commission would be responsible for all registration of private and public land. – Sapa.
Source: Mail & Guardian
Friday, December 7, 2012
FBI probe grant firm in SA
The American Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is looking into the rot that has plagued South Africa’s country’s social grant payouts in recent months.
In the Western Cape, 1.3 million people alone depend on grant payouts every month.
But the system has descended into chaos since new operators, Net1 UEPS technologies took over.
Net1 is jointly listed on the American Stock Exchange, the Nasdaq and on the JSE.
The US Department of Justice Criminal Division and the FBI have now teamed up to investigate possible corruption in how that company secured a R10 billion tender to issue grants here.
In August, the North Gauteng High Court ruled that the process of awarding the tender was illegal and invalid.
Despite this, the South African Social Security Agency (Sassa) was allowed to continue using Net1 through its subsidiary Cash Paymaster Services (CPS).
The judge decided that although the process was flawed, cancelling the contract would be disastrous and the social service would collapse.
If the American investigation is successful, Net1 could be out of business and senior managers could face arrest.
Sassa and the Social Development Department say they have not been contacted by the FBI or the US Department of Justice Criminal Division.
Social Development spokesperson Lumka Oliphant says by law, government has a constitutional duty to make sure grant monies are paid.
“We have a five-year contract with CPS and we don’t forsee any problems,” she said.
“We have not had any contact with anyone from America, everything we [are] hearing is from the media.”
Meanwhile, the previous grant payout company AllPay, a subsidiary of ABSA, is also still going ahead with its legal appeals.
They want CPS to be replaced after the court ruling that the tender awarded to them was invalid.
This case will resume next year on the Supreme Court of Appeal’s roll.
This double court action has raised concerns that Sassa must have a back-up plan to continue paying grants if Net1 is found guilty of corruption.
The Western Cape government says it is out of their hands because the money is paid by the national authority.
Western Cape Social Development spokesperson Samatha Fourie says they also had no idea about the possible payout crisis: “We have not been informed of any developments pertaining to the issue raised.”
Source: IoL
In the Western Cape, 1.3 million people alone depend on grant payouts every month.
But the system has descended into chaos since new operators, Net1 UEPS technologies took over.
Net1 is jointly listed on the American Stock Exchange, the Nasdaq and on the JSE.
The US Department of Justice Criminal Division and the FBI have now teamed up to investigate possible corruption in how that company secured a R10 billion tender to issue grants here.
In August, the North Gauteng High Court ruled that the process of awarding the tender was illegal and invalid.
Despite this, the South African Social Security Agency (Sassa) was allowed to continue using Net1 through its subsidiary Cash Paymaster Services (CPS).
The judge decided that although the process was flawed, cancelling the contract would be disastrous and the social service would collapse.
If the American investigation is successful, Net1 could be out of business and senior managers could face arrest.
Sassa and the Social Development Department say they have not been contacted by the FBI or the US Department of Justice Criminal Division.
Social Development spokesperson Lumka Oliphant says by law, government has a constitutional duty to make sure grant monies are paid.
“We have a five-year contract with CPS and we don’t forsee any problems,” she said.
“We have not had any contact with anyone from America, everything we [are] hearing is from the media.”
Meanwhile, the previous grant payout company AllPay, a subsidiary of ABSA, is also still going ahead with its legal appeals.
They want CPS to be replaced after the court ruling that the tender awarded to them was invalid.
This case will resume next year on the Supreme Court of Appeal’s roll.
This double court action has raised concerns that Sassa must have a back-up plan to continue paying grants if Net1 is found guilty of corruption.
The Western Cape government says it is out of their hands because the money is paid by the national authority.
Western Cape Social Development spokesperson Samatha Fourie says they also had no idea about the possible payout crisis: “We have not been informed of any developments pertaining to the issue raised.”
Source: IoL
Farm in Limpopo seized
A farm in Limpopo, which is part of an investigation into On-point Engineers, has been seized after the High Court in Pretoria granted a freezing order.
"The order [was granted on Wednesday and] was served this morning [Friday]," National Prosecuting Authority spokesman Makhosini Nkosi said in a statement.
It was served on Gwama Properties, which is registered as the owner of the Schuilkraal farm, and its sole director Lesiba Gwangwa.
The Asset Forfeiture Unit made the court application for the seizure of property based on an investigation by the Hawks and two independent reports into On-Point's activities.
The reports were compiled by Public Protector Thuli Madonsela and Price Waterhouse Coopers.
The court accepted the unit's submission that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the property was acquired with the proceeds of unlawful activities perpetrated against the department of roads and transport in Limpopo.
Gwangwa is also a director of On-point Engineers and faces charges related to tender fraud and corruption in the Polokwane Regional Court.
He previously appeared in court with axed ANC Youth League Julius Malema, who faces a charge of money-laundering and racketeering.
Several others, and four companies On-Point, Gwama Properties, Segwalo Engineering and Oceanside Trading were charged along with them. Gwangwa was released on R40,000 bail.
Court papers revealed that Malema allegedly benefited from corrupt activities amounting to R4 million and had "clear business ties" with Gwangwa.
The State charged that Gwangwa and three others misrepresented themselves to the Limpopo transport department, and a R52 million tender was awarded to On-Point.
Another R1 million gratification was paid for the securing of the tender.
Bid documents submitted by On-Point Engineers to the department contained several misrepresentations. Names given as executive and senior people at On-Point were for people not employed there. On-Point entered into secret agreements with service providers and in return received sums of money for these, the papers said.
Malema allegedly benefited from the tender by using it to fund a farm worth R3.9 million and to make a payment of R382,655 for a Mercedez Viano.
"...Most of the payments... were channelled through other entities... to pay for the farm," the charge sheet said.
It said R1 million was a part payment for a portion of the Schuilkraal farm by the Ratanang Trust.
Malema's Ratanang Family Trust was an indirect shareholder in On-Point and Gwama Properties, said court papers.
In October, Madonsela found that tenders awarded to On-Point were unlawful, and that the department did not follow proper guidelines in awarding them.
Source: The New Age
"The order [was granted on Wednesday and] was served this morning [Friday]," National Prosecuting Authority spokesman Makhosini Nkosi said in a statement.
It was served on Gwama Properties, which is registered as the owner of the Schuilkraal farm, and its sole director Lesiba Gwangwa.
The Asset Forfeiture Unit made the court application for the seizure of property based on an investigation by the Hawks and two independent reports into On-Point's activities.
The reports were compiled by Public Protector Thuli Madonsela and Price Waterhouse Coopers.
The court accepted the unit's submission that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the property was acquired with the proceeds of unlawful activities perpetrated against the department of roads and transport in Limpopo.
Gwangwa is also a director of On-point Engineers and faces charges related to tender fraud and corruption in the Polokwane Regional Court.
He previously appeared in court with axed ANC Youth League Julius Malema, who faces a charge of money-laundering and racketeering.
Several others, and four companies On-Point, Gwama Properties, Segwalo Engineering and Oceanside Trading were charged along with them. Gwangwa was released on R40,000 bail.
Court papers revealed that Malema allegedly benefited from corrupt activities amounting to R4 million and had "clear business ties" with Gwangwa.
The State charged that Gwangwa and three others misrepresented themselves to the Limpopo transport department, and a R52 million tender was awarded to On-Point.
Another R1 million gratification was paid for the securing of the tender.
Bid documents submitted by On-Point Engineers to the department contained several misrepresentations. Names given as executive and senior people at On-Point were for people not employed there. On-Point entered into secret agreements with service providers and in return received sums of money for these, the papers said.
Malema allegedly benefited from the tender by using it to fund a farm worth R3.9 million and to make a payment of R382,655 for a Mercedez Viano.
"...Most of the payments... were channelled through other entities... to pay for the farm," the charge sheet said.
It said R1 million was a part payment for a portion of the Schuilkraal farm by the Ratanang Trust.
Malema's Ratanang Family Trust was an indirect shareholder in On-Point and Gwama Properties, said court papers.
In October, Madonsela found that tenders awarded to On-Point were unlawful, and that the department did not follow proper guidelines in awarding them.
Source: The New Age
Eskom, Numsa granted right to intervene in Xstrata merger hearings
ESKOM and the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (Numsa) have been granted the right to intervene in the Competition Tribunal’s hearings next week on the merger of the world’s largest commodity trader, Glencore, and mining group Xstrata.
Eskom has proposed that the tribunal impose conditions on the merger that could include measures such as ensuring the ratio of exports to domestic coal supply be kept constant after the merger, and that the merging parties agree to negotiate in good faith on long-term coal-supply contracts as these expire.
The utility says it does not want to stand in the way of the merger, but has to raise its concern about the future supply of coal for the domestic market.
Public hearings on the merger start on Monday.
The company says it has a public mandate to supply electricity to the entire country and is dependent on the right grade of coal at the appropriate time and at an affordable price to be able to deliver on its mandate.
In the absence of industrial policy that provides for the security of domestic supply before exports, the merger highlights Eskom’s vulnerability.
Eskom spokeswoman Hilary Joffe says: “The merged entity would account for approximately 15% of Eskom’s coal supply, with Glencore and Xstrata accounting for the bulk of the supply to the Majuba and Hendrina power stations and supplying smaller quantities to Duvha, Komati, Arnot and Matla power stations.”
Although it has secured the majority of its supply needs until 2018, Ms Joffe says Eskom needs to raise its concern about supply security beyond that.
Eskom indicated that it would propose additional conditions if necessary.
Xstrata is the world’s largest exporter of the type of coal used by power stations, and all of its mines and plants are in South Africa.
Glencore holds almost 34% of Xstrata and after this transaction — valued at $80bn — is approved, the miner will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Glencore.
It currently produces 27.4-million tons of saleable coal a year in South Africa, of which almost 30% is exported.
Source: Business Day
Eskom has proposed that the tribunal impose conditions on the merger that could include measures such as ensuring the ratio of exports to domestic coal supply be kept constant after the merger, and that the merging parties agree to negotiate in good faith on long-term coal-supply contracts as these expire.
The utility says it does not want to stand in the way of the merger, but has to raise its concern about the future supply of coal for the domestic market.
Public hearings on the merger start on Monday.
The company says it has a public mandate to supply electricity to the entire country and is dependent on the right grade of coal at the appropriate time and at an affordable price to be able to deliver on its mandate.
In the absence of industrial policy that provides for the security of domestic supply before exports, the merger highlights Eskom’s vulnerability.
Eskom spokeswoman Hilary Joffe says: “The merged entity would account for approximately 15% of Eskom’s coal supply, with Glencore and Xstrata accounting for the bulk of the supply to the Majuba and Hendrina power stations and supplying smaller quantities to Duvha, Komati, Arnot and Matla power stations.”
Although it has secured the majority of its supply needs until 2018, Ms Joffe says Eskom needs to raise its concern about supply security beyond that.
Eskom indicated that it would propose additional conditions if necessary.
Xstrata is the world’s largest exporter of the type of coal used by power stations, and all of its mines and plants are in South Africa.
Glencore holds almost 34% of Xstrata and after this transaction — valued at $80bn — is approved, the miner will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Glencore.
It currently produces 27.4-million tons of saleable coal a year in South Africa, of which almost 30% is exported.
Source: Business Day
Zuma on nationalisation and working with Ramaphosa
PRESIDENT Jacob Zuma has welcomed the prospect of working with businessman Cyril Ramaphosa as his deputy, saying "it would not be the first time" that he has worked with the man who was once tipped to take over from Nelson Mandela as president of the African National Congress (ANC).
Mr Zuma is set to be re-elected to lead the ANC at the party’s elective congress in Mangaung later this month. However, his current deputy, Kgalema Motlanthe — who has been nominated by three provinces and the youth league for the position of party president — is likely to lose out to Mr Ramaphosa.
Mr Ramaphosa has garnered more than 1,800 nominations for the position of deputy president, while Mr Motlanthe has received about 160 nominations to retain his current position in the party.
In an interview with the UK’s Daily Telegraph published on Thursday, Mr Zuma praised Mr Ramaphosa when asked about the prospect of working with the business tycoon.
"It would not be the first time I worked with Cyril Ramaphosa. When he was the secretary-general, I was his deputy. So it would not be the first time, if he is elected," Mr Zuma told the paper.
He said that he was ready for a second term as president of the ANC.
The party’s elective conference in Mangaung will also be keenly watched by business — with the hope that economic policy will be clarified.
One of the burning issues up for possible debate is that of nationalisation of South Africa’s mines. Mr Zuma told the paper that the party would increase the pace of economic reform but would not "break" existing businesses to do so.
"Nationalisation is not the ANC policy," he said. "There are fundamental issues that need to be dealt with. It would be useful to do it quickly but we’ve got to balance things because we don’t want to break things in order to move forward."
Source: Business Day
Mr Zuma is set to be re-elected to lead the ANC at the party’s elective congress in Mangaung later this month. However, his current deputy, Kgalema Motlanthe — who has been nominated by three provinces and the youth league for the position of party president — is likely to lose out to Mr Ramaphosa.
Mr Ramaphosa has garnered more than 1,800 nominations for the position of deputy president, while Mr Motlanthe has received about 160 nominations to retain his current position in the party.
In an interview with the UK’s Daily Telegraph published on Thursday, Mr Zuma praised Mr Ramaphosa when asked about the prospect of working with the business tycoon.
"It would not be the first time I worked with Cyril Ramaphosa. When he was the secretary-general, I was his deputy. So it would not be the first time, if he is elected," Mr Zuma told the paper.
He said that he was ready for a second term as president of the ANC.
The party’s elective conference in Mangaung will also be keenly watched by business — with the hope that economic policy will be clarified.
One of the burning issues up for possible debate is that of nationalisation of South Africa’s mines. Mr Zuma told the paper that the party would increase the pace of economic reform but would not "break" existing businesses to do so.
"Nationalisation is not the ANC policy," he said. "There are fundamental issues that need to be dealt with. It would be useful to do it quickly but we’ve got to balance things because we don’t want to break things in order to move forward."
Source: Business Day
Thursday, December 6, 2012
Corruption Inquiry Focuses on Algerian Pipeline
Italian prosecutors are investigating possible corruption involving a natural gas pipeline project in Algeria by the energy services company Saipem, which is controlled by the Italian oil company Eni.
As the inquiry has heated up, Saipem’s chief executive resigned Wednesday evening, two other Saipem executives were suspended and the chief financial officer of Eni stepped down. None of the executives have been charged with crimes, according to the companies. Eni alluded to the investigation in statements late Wednesday, but provided no details.
But a person close to the investigation said Thursday that prosecutors were focusing on a suspicious payment of $180 million to $200 million in connection with the pipeline project. The person insisted on anonymity because the inquiry is under way.
Saipem, the largest European drilling and engineering contractor for the oil industry, won a $580 million contract to build a 350-kilometer, or 210-mile, pipeline by the state oil company, Sonatrach, in June 2009. The pipeline is known as GK3. It is not yet clear who paid or received the payment at issue, but the person close to the inquiry said the investigation of the inappropriate payment began in 2009 in Algeria and was taken up the following year by Italian prosecutors.
A Saipem spokesman declined to comment.
In statements late Wednesday, Eni said that Saipem’s chief executive, Pietro Franco Tali, was stepping down.
Eni’s chief financial officer, Alessandro Bernini, who held the same position at Saipem until 2008, also resigned Wednesday, although he “considers that his actions were right and proper,” according to an Eni release.
Eni, which holds nearly 43 percent of Saipem’s shares, wrote in its 2011 annual report that it was asked by the Milan Public Prosecutor in February 2011 to supply documentation “in relation to the crime of alleged international corruption” on the GK3 contract, as well as another gas pipeline project called Galsi. The company said it turned over the documents.
An Eni spokeswoman said Thursday that the company had not been aware “of any further development” in the investigation until being notified on Nov. 22 that Saipem had received “a notice of inquiry” from prosecutors. Eni itself is not a subject of the investigation, she said.
Algeria is known as a difficult place to do business. In 2010 most of the top management at Sonatrach, including the chief executive, Mohamed Meziane, departed amid a corruption investigation by the Algerian government.
Algeria, in the 1960s, was the first Middle Eastern country to develop a gas export industry and continues to supply about 10 percent of Europe’s natural gas imports, according to Leila Benali, an analyst at IHS Cera in Paris. Italy is Algeria’s largest customer, mostly through Eni.
Saipem has been key to helping Sonatrach develop the country’s oil and gas infrastructure, over the years working on Algerian oil and gas projects worth billions of dollars. It had about 2,600 employees in the country in 2010.
Rob Mundy, an analyst at Liberum Capital in London, said in a research note that because of the Algeria situation, Saipem’s “ability to competitively bid on future contracts may be affected.”
Trading in Saipem’s shares was suspended in Milan midday Wednesday before Eni publicly disclosed the problems, after being down 4 percent. They resumed trading on Thursday, ending the day down an additional 6.7 percent in heavy volume.
The investigation is a blow to Eni, which under its chief executive, Paolo Scaroni, is working to establish itself as a premier exploration and production company. Earlier on Wednesday, Eni announced a new natural gas discovery off the coast of Mozambique, where the company has become an early leader in staking a position in that country’s promising gas reserves.
Eni’s stake in Saipem has provided the oil company with a steady source of earnings. On Sept. 30, Saipem reported net profits of €722 million for the first nine months of the year, an increase of nearly 9 percent from the comparable period a year earlier.
Saipem also provides Eni with an in-house source of drilling and engineering services, bolstering bidding efforts on oil and gas projects like the proposed South Stream pipeline that will bring gas from Russia to Southern and Central Europe.
Saipem “has certainly been an asset in terms of providing stable and growing earnings in recent years, and it does give them access to all the services it covers,” said Iain Pyle, an analyst at Bernstein Research in London.
“In terms of winning access, it is more likely it is a reason why they are involved in projects like South Stream, as Saipem will most likely lay the pipe for that,” Mr. Pyle said.
Eni is scrambling to limit the damage from the Saipem investigation. The company, based in Milan, held an emergency board meeting Wednesday evening. In a statement, Eni said that in recent days it had urged Saipem “to take immediate remedial actions in managing the situation.”
On Wednesday evening, Saipem’s board named the chief operating officer of Eni’s gas and power division, Umberto Vergine, to replace Mr. Tali as Saipem’s chief.
The company also suspended Pietro Varone, chief operating officer of Saipem’s engineering and construction unit, following a notice of inquiry from the prosecutor related to the same investigation. Saipem’s board also ordered an internal audit using external consultants. The person close to the investigation said that so far it was limited to Mr. Varone and another unnamed executive but could spread to other persons.
“Saipem believes that its business activities have been conducted in compliance with applicable, internal procedures” and its code of ethics, the company said, and has offered its full cooperation to the prosecutor’s office. It also stated that its board “does not believe that the investigation will have a material effect on the company’s economic results.”
Although Eni has emphasized that Saipem is independently managed, the two companies are intertwined. During an interview on Nov. 19, Mr. Scaroni said that while the company was divesting other noncore assets, he considered Saipem “a major asset.”
He said that Saipem was “managed at arm’s length” because Eni was only “one of the customers” of the engineering company. He said Saipem was the top candidate to build the portion of the proposed South Stream natural gas pipeline from Russia to Eastern and Western Europe, under the Black Sea.
Eni, along with Gazprom, is a crucial backer of the project.
Stanley Reed reported from London and Gaia Pianigiani from Rome.
Source: New York Times
As the inquiry has heated up, Saipem’s chief executive resigned Wednesday evening, two other Saipem executives were suspended and the chief financial officer of Eni stepped down. None of the executives have been charged with crimes, according to the companies. Eni alluded to the investigation in statements late Wednesday, but provided no details.
But a person close to the investigation said Thursday that prosecutors were focusing on a suspicious payment of $180 million to $200 million in connection with the pipeline project. The person insisted on anonymity because the inquiry is under way.
Saipem, the largest European drilling and engineering contractor for the oil industry, won a $580 million contract to build a 350-kilometer, or 210-mile, pipeline by the state oil company, Sonatrach, in June 2009. The pipeline is known as GK3. It is not yet clear who paid or received the payment at issue, but the person close to the inquiry said the investigation of the inappropriate payment began in 2009 in Algeria and was taken up the following year by Italian prosecutors.
A Saipem spokesman declined to comment.
In statements late Wednesday, Eni said that Saipem’s chief executive, Pietro Franco Tali, was stepping down.
Eni’s chief financial officer, Alessandro Bernini, who held the same position at Saipem until 2008, also resigned Wednesday, although he “considers that his actions were right and proper,” according to an Eni release.
Eni, which holds nearly 43 percent of Saipem’s shares, wrote in its 2011 annual report that it was asked by the Milan Public Prosecutor in February 2011 to supply documentation “in relation to the crime of alleged international corruption” on the GK3 contract, as well as another gas pipeline project called Galsi. The company said it turned over the documents.
An Eni spokeswoman said Thursday that the company had not been aware “of any further development” in the investigation until being notified on Nov. 22 that Saipem had received “a notice of inquiry” from prosecutors. Eni itself is not a subject of the investigation, she said.
Algeria is known as a difficult place to do business. In 2010 most of the top management at Sonatrach, including the chief executive, Mohamed Meziane, departed amid a corruption investigation by the Algerian government.
Algeria, in the 1960s, was the first Middle Eastern country to develop a gas export industry and continues to supply about 10 percent of Europe’s natural gas imports, according to Leila Benali, an analyst at IHS Cera in Paris. Italy is Algeria’s largest customer, mostly through Eni.
Saipem has been key to helping Sonatrach develop the country’s oil and gas infrastructure, over the years working on Algerian oil and gas projects worth billions of dollars. It had about 2,600 employees in the country in 2010.
Rob Mundy, an analyst at Liberum Capital in London, said in a research note that because of the Algeria situation, Saipem’s “ability to competitively bid on future contracts may be affected.”
Trading in Saipem’s shares was suspended in Milan midday Wednesday before Eni publicly disclosed the problems, after being down 4 percent. They resumed trading on Thursday, ending the day down an additional 6.7 percent in heavy volume.
The investigation is a blow to Eni, which under its chief executive, Paolo Scaroni, is working to establish itself as a premier exploration and production company. Earlier on Wednesday, Eni announced a new natural gas discovery off the coast of Mozambique, where the company has become an early leader in staking a position in that country’s promising gas reserves.
Eni’s stake in Saipem has provided the oil company with a steady source of earnings. On Sept. 30, Saipem reported net profits of €722 million for the first nine months of the year, an increase of nearly 9 percent from the comparable period a year earlier.
Saipem also provides Eni with an in-house source of drilling and engineering services, bolstering bidding efforts on oil and gas projects like the proposed South Stream pipeline that will bring gas from Russia to Southern and Central Europe.
Saipem “has certainly been an asset in terms of providing stable and growing earnings in recent years, and it does give them access to all the services it covers,” said Iain Pyle, an analyst at Bernstein Research in London.
“In terms of winning access, it is more likely it is a reason why they are involved in projects like South Stream, as Saipem will most likely lay the pipe for that,” Mr. Pyle said.
Eni is scrambling to limit the damage from the Saipem investigation. The company, based in Milan, held an emergency board meeting Wednesday evening. In a statement, Eni said that in recent days it had urged Saipem “to take immediate remedial actions in managing the situation.”
On Wednesday evening, Saipem’s board named the chief operating officer of Eni’s gas and power division, Umberto Vergine, to replace Mr. Tali as Saipem’s chief.
The company also suspended Pietro Varone, chief operating officer of Saipem’s engineering and construction unit, following a notice of inquiry from the prosecutor related to the same investigation. Saipem’s board also ordered an internal audit using external consultants. The person close to the investigation said that so far it was limited to Mr. Varone and another unnamed executive but could spread to other persons.
“Saipem believes that its business activities have been conducted in compliance with applicable, internal procedures” and its code of ethics, the company said, and has offered its full cooperation to the prosecutor’s office. It also stated that its board “does not believe that the investigation will have a material effect on the company’s economic results.”
Although Eni has emphasized that Saipem is independently managed, the two companies are intertwined. During an interview on Nov. 19, Mr. Scaroni said that while the company was divesting other noncore assets, he considered Saipem “a major asset.”
He said that Saipem was “managed at arm’s length” because Eni was only “one of the customers” of the engineering company. He said Saipem was the top candidate to build the portion of the proposed South Stream natural gas pipeline from Russia to Eastern and Western Europe, under the Black Sea.
Eni, along with Gazprom, is a crucial backer of the project.
Stanley Reed reported from London and Gaia Pianigiani from Rome.
Source: New York Times
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Africa: The Landgrabbers - the New Fight Over Who Owns the Earth
In his recent book, Fred Pearce examines the dynamics behind large-scale land acquisitions and their social, environmental and developmental effects.
"Buy land. They are not making it anymore."
This statement uttered more than one hundred years ago by Mark Twain still holds a sad and powerful truth and makes a telling start for Fred Pearce's account in The Landgrabbers: The New Fight Over Who Owns the Earth about the struggle over the Earth's most precious resources: land and water.
In the book, the reader is taken on a whirlwind tour around the globe to witness, through Pearce's eyes, a new kind of colonialism driven not by countries, but by powerful private capitalists.
We encounter figures such as George Soros and Richard Branson; we learn about the effects of the conflicts in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Liberia; we find out why President Robert Mugabe's land seizures in Zimbabwe were not so bad after all for small-scale farmers; and we see how the global financial crisis and the intricate mechanisms of stock market speculations in commodities exacerbate the problem.
Pearce's passion and outrage about the selling off of communal resources shines through the book.
Each chapter is dedicated to a certain country, where protagonists change, yet the storyline stays the same: governments around the globe grant large concessions to wily investors in the hope of advancing their economies but displace and disadvantage large parts of their own population in the process.
As Mike Ogg, an agriculture specialist from Swaziland, told Think Africa Press: "I fundamentally believe that agriculture can lead development in Africa. The quandary is: How do you create a win-win situation where investors and the community benefit?"
Pearce's dystopia
Pearce presents a bleak picture of increasingly prevalent 'land grabs' by corporations for agriculture or resource exploitation as well as by well-meaning environmentalists for so-called "green grabs".
This is, Pearce argues, encircling the last remaining habitats of indigenous peoples and the landless poor, destroying their past and forever altering their future.
Pearce mixes this narrative with historical references to imperialism and colonialism giving the impression of a continuous cycle of exploitation. But his greatest achievement in the book is to give those exploited a voice.
He recounts their stories in numerous interviews, as well as talking to those involved in the land acquisitions and a variety of experts.
Pearce concludes that the bulk of the blame rests with foreign buyers though it is crucial to recognise that most deals are also pursued by respective governments which may give out large land concessions, tax breaks and other incentives to draw foreign capital into their country in the first place. And politicians are not only accomplices, but often also carve out deals in return for money or land for themselves.
This is enabled by an environment in which laws are either non-existent or easily circumvented. As Graziano da Silva, director-general of the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation, notes: "It appears to be like the Wild West and we need a sheriff and law in place."
Proposing solutions
Although Pearce does not go so far as to propose possible solutions, there is a range of opinion and ideas as to how to begin to tackle the problem.
Olivier De Schutter, UN special rapporteur on the right to food, has suggested that when national governments are unable or unwilling to devise regulations, the international community should step in to monitor whether the rights of land users are being respected. Oxfam's recent report 'Our Land, Our Lives' highlights the pivotal role of the World Bank as an advisor to governments in reforming their laws.
But this is easier said than done. As a representative from USAID in Dar es Salaam admitted to Think Africa Press, "Land tenure, we know, is at the heart of many problems as it is difficult for poor people to feed themselves with limited and insecure access to land, but we are not touching this subject, because it's too contentious and complicated".
Another way the negative impacts of large-scale land acquisitions could be mitigated is through emerging sustainability standards.
The World Bank and its private sector funding arm, the International Finance Corporation, have strict regulations regarding social and environmental sustainability. These include standards on development-induced displacement and there are growing calls for wider implementation of such regulations.
An example of a private sector-driven initiative is Bonsucro, a certification scheme which aims to ensure companies involved in the production of sugar and ethanol from sugarcane meet environmental, social and business standards.
With consumers believed to be increasingly concerned about the impacts of the goods they buy, the Bonsucro certification is meant to reassure buyers that companies are acting in sustainable ways and taking account of human rights and pollution control.
Moving forwards
Pearce acknowledges these developments in his last chapter where he analyses some of the attempts at solutions though he does not put forward his own. Nevertheless, Pearce's book is a worthwhile read. His writing style is highly engaging and reveals the duplicity of investors and interest groups.
He not only presents complicated and contentious issues such as the correlation of Wall Street speculations and rising food prices in an accessible manner, but also masterfully interweaves stories and issues across countries and continents achieving a well-researched, logical and informative account.
Although Pearce's focus lies on the problems at hand rather than solutions, the book certainly contributes to a growing awareness about the issues and will hopefully inspire others to find suitable ways to move forwards.
Katharina Neureiter holds an MSc in History of International Relations from the London School of Economics specialising in African colonial history and war cultures. She is currently working as a consultant in East Africa and blogs at hearabout.wordpress.com.
Source: All Africa
"Buy land. They are not making it anymore."
This statement uttered more than one hundred years ago by Mark Twain still holds a sad and powerful truth and makes a telling start for Fred Pearce's account in The Landgrabbers: The New Fight Over Who Owns the Earth about the struggle over the Earth's most precious resources: land and water.
In the book, the reader is taken on a whirlwind tour around the globe to witness, through Pearce's eyes, a new kind of colonialism driven not by countries, but by powerful private capitalists.
We encounter figures such as George Soros and Richard Branson; we learn about the effects of the conflicts in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Liberia; we find out why President Robert Mugabe's land seizures in Zimbabwe were not so bad after all for small-scale farmers; and we see how the global financial crisis and the intricate mechanisms of stock market speculations in commodities exacerbate the problem.
Pearce's passion and outrage about the selling off of communal resources shines through the book.
Each chapter is dedicated to a certain country, where protagonists change, yet the storyline stays the same: governments around the globe grant large concessions to wily investors in the hope of advancing their economies but displace and disadvantage large parts of their own population in the process.
As Mike Ogg, an agriculture specialist from Swaziland, told Think Africa Press: "I fundamentally believe that agriculture can lead development in Africa. The quandary is: How do you create a win-win situation where investors and the community benefit?"
Pearce's dystopia
Pearce presents a bleak picture of increasingly prevalent 'land grabs' by corporations for agriculture or resource exploitation as well as by well-meaning environmentalists for so-called "green grabs".
This is, Pearce argues, encircling the last remaining habitats of indigenous peoples and the landless poor, destroying their past and forever altering their future.
Pearce mixes this narrative with historical references to imperialism and colonialism giving the impression of a continuous cycle of exploitation. But his greatest achievement in the book is to give those exploited a voice.
He recounts their stories in numerous interviews, as well as talking to those involved in the land acquisitions and a variety of experts.
Pearce concludes that the bulk of the blame rests with foreign buyers though it is crucial to recognise that most deals are also pursued by respective governments which may give out large land concessions, tax breaks and other incentives to draw foreign capital into their country in the first place. And politicians are not only accomplices, but often also carve out deals in return for money or land for themselves.
This is enabled by an environment in which laws are either non-existent or easily circumvented. As Graziano da Silva, director-general of the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation, notes: "It appears to be like the Wild West and we need a sheriff and law in place."
Proposing solutions
Although Pearce does not go so far as to propose possible solutions, there is a range of opinion and ideas as to how to begin to tackle the problem.
Olivier De Schutter, UN special rapporteur on the right to food, has suggested that when national governments are unable or unwilling to devise regulations, the international community should step in to monitor whether the rights of land users are being respected. Oxfam's recent report 'Our Land, Our Lives' highlights the pivotal role of the World Bank as an advisor to governments in reforming their laws.
But this is easier said than done. As a representative from USAID in Dar es Salaam admitted to Think Africa Press, "Land tenure, we know, is at the heart of many problems as it is difficult for poor people to feed themselves with limited and insecure access to land, but we are not touching this subject, because it's too contentious and complicated".
Another way the negative impacts of large-scale land acquisitions could be mitigated is through emerging sustainability standards.
The World Bank and its private sector funding arm, the International Finance Corporation, have strict regulations regarding social and environmental sustainability. These include standards on development-induced displacement and there are growing calls for wider implementation of such regulations.
An example of a private sector-driven initiative is Bonsucro, a certification scheme which aims to ensure companies involved in the production of sugar and ethanol from sugarcane meet environmental, social and business standards.
With consumers believed to be increasingly concerned about the impacts of the goods they buy, the Bonsucro certification is meant to reassure buyers that companies are acting in sustainable ways and taking account of human rights and pollution control.
Moving forwards
Pearce acknowledges these developments in his last chapter where he analyses some of the attempts at solutions though he does not put forward his own. Nevertheless, Pearce's book is a worthwhile read. His writing style is highly engaging and reveals the duplicity of investors and interest groups.
He not only presents complicated and contentious issues such as the correlation of Wall Street speculations and rising food prices in an accessible manner, but also masterfully interweaves stories and issues across countries and continents achieving a well-researched, logical and informative account.
Although Pearce's focus lies on the problems at hand rather than solutions, the book certainly contributes to a growing awareness about the issues and will hopefully inspire others to find suitable ways to move forwards.
Katharina Neureiter holds an MSc in History of International Relations from the London School of Economics specialising in African colonial history and war cultures. She is currently working as a consultant in East Africa and blogs at hearabout.wordpress.com.
Source: All Africa
Friday, November 30, 2012
In South Africa, Lethal Battles for Even Smallest of Political Posts
OSHABENI, South Africa — It was, by all accounts, an ordinary small-town political meeting. The leaders of the local branch of the African National Congress gathered in September at a convent here to discuss candidates for a newly vacated seat on the ward council, the lowest-level elected position in South Africa.
When it was over, Dumisani Malunga, the local party chairman and the front-runner for the seat, stopped at a friend’s house for a late meal of chicken curry. As he and another party official, Bheko Chiliza, drove home at 9:30 p.m., a gunman fired into their car. Their bloody, bullet-riddled bodies were later found sprawled on the ground beside the white Toyota hatchback.
Mr. Malunga and Mr. Chiliza were the latest casualties in an increasingly bloody battle for local political posts in South Africa. Dozens of officials, including ward councilors, party leaders and mayors, have been killed in what has become a desperate, deadly struggle for power and its spoils.
The killings threaten to tarnish the image of the so-called rainbow nation, whose largely bloodless transition from white minority rule to nonracial democracy has made it a beacon of peace, tolerance and forgiveness.
Amid rising corruption and waning economic opportunities, political killings are on the rise. Here in KwaZulu-Natal Province, nearly 40 politicians have been killed since 2010 in battles over political posts, more than triple the number in the previous three years, according to government figures. Over the past few years, dozens more have been killed in provinces like Mpumalanga, North West and Limpopo.
The A.N.C., once a banned liberation movement engaged in one of the 20th century’s most important struggles for justice and human rights, is now in power, and it has come under harsh scrutiny for the rampant poverty, deep inequality and widespread unemployment plaguing the country. A wave of wildcat strikes that began in August, and the lethal crackdown against them, has fueled anger at a party seen as increasingly out of touch and whose leaders appear only to seek to fill their pockets.
That is a stark change from the A.N.C.’s early days, when people risked their lives and freedom to join the party and its fight to end apartheid. But in recent years, the party has sharply increased recruitment of new members, with little consideration for who joins and why.
Many new members come in search of wealth and power. Fewer than half of South African’s young black adults have jobs, and many lack the basic skills to find work after years of attending substandard schools in townships and rural areas. For these youths, politics is a seemingly certain route out of poverty. The rise in corruption has fed the belief that political posts mean kickbacks and contracts.
In the ranks of public servants, the post of rural ward council member in a speck of a town like this one would seem no great prize. The job pays about $150 a month, and its occupant must digest a steady diet of complaints from residents about the most fundamental ailments afflicting South Africa: schools that do not teach, taps that do not deliver water, crime that the police seem helpless to stop, jobs that are impossible to find.
But ward councilors are also a conduit for development projects in their areas, and they can influence the awarding of government contracts. The potential upside — earnings from bribes or surreptitious deals — is high.
“Due to the high rate of unemployment, people look for any opportunity to create an income and capitalize on it,” said Mzwandile Mkhwanazi, the regional chairman of the A.N.C. in the area that includes Oshabeni. “They are influenced by levels of poverty. They come up with any ways and means of getting money.”
Such changes in fortune explain why the post of ward councilor in Oshabeni, an impoverished town nestled in rolling hills about 15 miles inland from the Indian Ocean, was so hotly contested. When the woman who held the post died of illness in August, many local politicians were eager to throw their hats into the ring.
One of them was a young taxi driver named Sfiso Khumalo, the leader of the local branch of the A.N.C.’s Youth League. But Mr. Khumalo did not have a very good reputation, fellow Youth League members said. He was hotheaded, they said, and had spent nine years in prison for theft.
“We knew him as a stealer,” said Gcinile Duma, the secretary of the Youth League. “He had been in jail and was with the wrong kind of people.”
Other members of the local A.N.C. branch’s executive committee said they were worried that Mr. Khumalo was not a suitable candidate.
“Some people get into politics for the wrong reason, only for money,” said one local party leader who did not want to be named discussing party business. “Sfiso Khumalo was not looking to help people, only to help himself.”
Standing in his way was Mr. Malunga, 42, the party chairman and a popular local figure.
“People liked Dumisani and saw him as a good leader,” Ms. Duma said.
On Sept. 9, Mr. Khumalo attended the meeting at the Daughters of St. Francis of Assisi Convent to declare his candidacy. There was no open confrontation between Mr. Malunga and Mr. Khumalo, people who attended the meeting said. But when Mr. Malunga was found shot to death near his house, few doubted who was the prime suspect.
“We told the police, ‘We know who did this. It was Sfiso Khumalo,’ ” Ms. Duma said.
After two days of investigations, the police arrested Mr. Khumalo, who promptly confessed that he had conspired with a local businessman to have Mr. Malunga killed. On Sept. 18, Mr. Khumalo was sentenced to 22 years in prison. The person accused of being his co-conspirator is still in court.
In a statement, the leader of the A.N.C. in KwaZulu-Natal condemned the violence and the culture it springs from.
“The A.N.C. can ill afford the development of the culture of the underworld, criminality and violent elimination of opponents,” said the provincial chairman, Zweli Mkhize. “Neither can the A.N.C. afford the association of political appointment to self-enrichment where ascendancy to office is not linked with capacity, competence and dedicated service to our people.”
Party officials paid for Mr. Malunga’s burial, and his brick and stucco grave looks lavish next to the unadorned earthen mounds in the family graveyard that hold his father, brother and nephew.
Mr. Malunga’s mother, Sizakele Malunga, has already buried 5 of her 11 children, but losing her youngest son was a special blow, she said. Mr. Malunga lived with her and kept her company in her widowhood.
“I am lonely, but nothing will bring him back,” Mrs. Malunga said. “I just try to make the time pass without him.”
Mukelwa Hlatshwayo contributed reporting.
Source: New York Times
When it was over, Dumisani Malunga, the local party chairman and the front-runner for the seat, stopped at a friend’s house for a late meal of chicken curry. As he and another party official, Bheko Chiliza, drove home at 9:30 p.m., a gunman fired into their car. Their bloody, bullet-riddled bodies were later found sprawled on the ground beside the white Toyota hatchback.
Mr. Malunga and Mr. Chiliza were the latest casualties in an increasingly bloody battle for local political posts in South Africa. Dozens of officials, including ward councilors, party leaders and mayors, have been killed in what has become a desperate, deadly struggle for power and its spoils.
The killings threaten to tarnish the image of the so-called rainbow nation, whose largely bloodless transition from white minority rule to nonracial democracy has made it a beacon of peace, tolerance and forgiveness.
Amid rising corruption and waning economic opportunities, political killings are on the rise. Here in KwaZulu-Natal Province, nearly 40 politicians have been killed since 2010 in battles over political posts, more than triple the number in the previous three years, according to government figures. Over the past few years, dozens more have been killed in provinces like Mpumalanga, North West and Limpopo.
The A.N.C., once a banned liberation movement engaged in one of the 20th century’s most important struggles for justice and human rights, is now in power, and it has come under harsh scrutiny for the rampant poverty, deep inequality and widespread unemployment plaguing the country. A wave of wildcat strikes that began in August, and the lethal crackdown against them, has fueled anger at a party seen as increasingly out of touch and whose leaders appear only to seek to fill their pockets.
That is a stark change from the A.N.C.’s early days, when people risked their lives and freedom to join the party and its fight to end apartheid. But in recent years, the party has sharply increased recruitment of new members, with little consideration for who joins and why.
Many new members come in search of wealth and power. Fewer than half of South African’s young black adults have jobs, and many lack the basic skills to find work after years of attending substandard schools in townships and rural areas. For these youths, politics is a seemingly certain route out of poverty. The rise in corruption has fed the belief that political posts mean kickbacks and contracts.
In the ranks of public servants, the post of rural ward council member in a speck of a town like this one would seem no great prize. The job pays about $150 a month, and its occupant must digest a steady diet of complaints from residents about the most fundamental ailments afflicting South Africa: schools that do not teach, taps that do not deliver water, crime that the police seem helpless to stop, jobs that are impossible to find.
But ward councilors are also a conduit for development projects in their areas, and they can influence the awarding of government contracts. The potential upside — earnings from bribes or surreptitious deals — is high.
“Due to the high rate of unemployment, people look for any opportunity to create an income and capitalize on it,” said Mzwandile Mkhwanazi, the regional chairman of the A.N.C. in the area that includes Oshabeni. “They are influenced by levels of poverty. They come up with any ways and means of getting money.”
Such changes in fortune explain why the post of ward councilor in Oshabeni, an impoverished town nestled in rolling hills about 15 miles inland from the Indian Ocean, was so hotly contested. When the woman who held the post died of illness in August, many local politicians were eager to throw their hats into the ring.
One of them was a young taxi driver named Sfiso Khumalo, the leader of the local branch of the A.N.C.’s Youth League. But Mr. Khumalo did not have a very good reputation, fellow Youth League members said. He was hotheaded, they said, and had spent nine years in prison for theft.
“We knew him as a stealer,” said Gcinile Duma, the secretary of the Youth League. “He had been in jail and was with the wrong kind of people.”
Other members of the local A.N.C. branch’s executive committee said they were worried that Mr. Khumalo was not a suitable candidate.
“Some people get into politics for the wrong reason, only for money,” said one local party leader who did not want to be named discussing party business. “Sfiso Khumalo was not looking to help people, only to help himself.”
Standing in his way was Mr. Malunga, 42, the party chairman and a popular local figure.
“People liked Dumisani and saw him as a good leader,” Ms. Duma said.
On Sept. 9, Mr. Khumalo attended the meeting at the Daughters of St. Francis of Assisi Convent to declare his candidacy. There was no open confrontation between Mr. Malunga and Mr. Khumalo, people who attended the meeting said. But when Mr. Malunga was found shot to death near his house, few doubted who was the prime suspect.
“We told the police, ‘We know who did this. It was Sfiso Khumalo,’ ” Ms. Duma said.
After two days of investigations, the police arrested Mr. Khumalo, who promptly confessed that he had conspired with a local businessman to have Mr. Malunga killed. On Sept. 18, Mr. Khumalo was sentenced to 22 years in prison. The person accused of being his co-conspirator is still in court.
In a statement, the leader of the A.N.C. in KwaZulu-Natal condemned the violence and the culture it springs from.
“The A.N.C. can ill afford the development of the culture of the underworld, criminality and violent elimination of opponents,” said the provincial chairman, Zweli Mkhize. “Neither can the A.N.C. afford the association of political appointment to self-enrichment where ascendancy to office is not linked with capacity, competence and dedicated service to our people.”
Party officials paid for Mr. Malunga’s burial, and his brick and stucco grave looks lavish next to the unadorned earthen mounds in the family graveyard that hold his father, brother and nephew.
Mr. Malunga’s mother, Sizakele Malunga, has already buried 5 of her 11 children, but losing her youngest son was a special blow, she said. Mr. Malunga lived with her and kept her company in her widowhood.
“I am lonely, but nothing will bring him back,” Mrs. Malunga said. “I just try to make the time pass without him.”
Mukelwa Hlatshwayo contributed reporting.
Source: New York Times
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)