Arms shouldn’t give legs to graft |
Publication |
City Press |
Date | 2014-07-29 |
Reporter | |
Web link |
The man on the other
side of the table
guffawed loudly and
shook his head.
“Nobody will ever find
anything. Nobody will
ever prove anything,”
said the man, his
laughter and headshake
now making me feel like
an imbecile.
It was about 10 years
ago and we were
discussing the arms
deal. I was making a
case for a judicial
commission of inquiry
into corruption in the
multibillion-rand
acquisition.
The man, a senior figure
in government and the
ANC, was certain that
senior people and the
governing party had
benefited improperly
during the adjudication
process.
It was an open secret in
ANC ranks that
individuals had enriched
themselves through
corrupt relationships
with arms dealers. The
beneficiaries were well
known in senior party
circles, he said.
But he was equally
confident nobody would
ever get to the bottom
of the corruption no
matter how much
journalists, opposition
parties and anti-arms
deal activists screamed.
Arms manufacturers had
been doing this thing
for ages and had
perfected the art of
corrupting governments.
So the idea that a
judicial commission of
inquiry would unravel
the truth was just
preposterous, he said
dismissively.
I hate to admit today
that the man could have
been right. Having
followed the goings-on
at the Seriti Commission
of Inquiry, the man’s
scepticism is making
sense.
Although it might be
contempt of the
commission to pre-empt
the outcome of the
inquiry, I think one can
safely say the
corruption deniers have
the edge at this point.
Not because the accusers
have not put up a
convincing argument,
there is just very
little in the way of
paper trails, smoking
guns and whatever other
journalistic clichés we
can use in this regard.
What we have from the
accusers at this point
is reasonable suspicion,
the illogicality of the
spend and the say-so of
unnamed sources.
The deniers have
presented scientific
needs analyses that
justified the
expenditure, argued
about the integrity of
the process and have
cheekily invited the
accusers to land the
sucker punch.
When the commission
nears its end, we can
expect some sour grapes
talk from the accusers,
who will tell us the
terms of reference were
flawed and that they did
not get adequate access
to documentation.
They will dismiss the
commission as a cover-up
and a final attempt by
the authorities to shut
up critics.
But this will be a
short-sighted approach
to the usefulness of
this commission. It has
been a very valuable
exercise, a feather in
the cap of our good
republic.
It has spoken volumes
about the quality of our
democracy and reaffirmed
the belief that despite
our many flaws, this
country of ours is still
a trailblazer in many
respects.
Think about it. Last
week, we had former
president Thabo Mbeki
being subjected to two
days of
cross-examination about
his role in the arms
deal. Yes, he did not
say much beyond “I
cannot recall” and
“there is absolutely no
evidence of bribery” and
“we’ve been waiting for
concrete facts”, but the
fact is that he was
there.
Before him, the former
ministers of finance,
defence and trade and
industry were grilled by
lawyers. Generals,
admirals and air force
chiefs have also been in
the hot seat.
There are very few
countries in the world –
including, and perhaps
especially, in the
developed world – where
arms procurement has
been subjected to such
close scrutiny.
In fact, one of Tony
Blair’s last acts as
Britain’s prime minister
in 2007 was to shut down
an investigation by the
elite Serious Fraud
Office into how BAE
Systems had bribed Saudi
officials to secure a
£43 billion arms
contract during Margaret
Thatcher’s tenure.
He justified his
decision on the basis
that the probe would
have “involved serious
allegations and
investigations going
ahead on the Saudi royal
family”, would have led
to “the complete
wreckage of a vital
relationship” and “cost
thousands and thousands
of British jobs”. And
that was that. The probe
was shut down by edict.
Some ANC leaders and
government officials
love using Blair’s
action as proof of the
foolishness of those who
demand answers on the
arms deal.
They aver that it is not
in the national interest
to interrogate the
transaction. On this
matter, the
“imperialist” and
“colonialist” Britain is
to be emulated.
Fortunately, few have
bought this argument.
South Africans have
persisted with demands
for transparency. The
Seriti commission is a
watered-down accession
to these demands,
leading many to dismiss
it as a damp squib and a
waste of time.
This is wrong. It may
not unearth corruption,
but it has been a major
step forward.
It is now up to us to
take lessons from this
process to set standards
on how big transactions
should and should not be
conducted.
We should closely study
the Seriti commission,
the competition
commission’s probe into
collusion in the
construction industry
and other similar
processes to gain an
understanding of public
and private sector
corruption.
These lessons should
then be used to tighten
systems through laws,
regulations and the
strengthening of
existing institutions.
With acknowledgement to Mondli Makhanya and City Press.
What a pathetic "story".
Only Patricia has
testified from both the
critics and implicated
party sets of witnesses.
And she never had any
prima facie evidence nor
personal knowledge from
the beginning.
What the APC has done in
the meantime is make it
more-or-less impossible
for the government
witnesses to be
cross-examined, either
properly or at all.
In this regard the APC
is already fatally
flawed.
But if a couple of
cross-examinations are
allowed in recall (the
precedence is set with
Erwin) and a couple of
critics are allowed to
give their evidence
properly, then it will
be pigeon-eating time at
the cat club.
Of course the
evidence-in-chief and
cross-examinations of
Chippy Shaik and Fana
Hlongwane should yield
as much pigeon flesh,
but how is the APC going
to run this?
The evidence of the next
12 witness should
actually give rise to
the calling of a few
more implicated parties,
but will that happen?
But the recent conduct
of the APC has proven
beyond any doubt that
its goal is other than
to find the truth, the
whole truth and nothing
but the truth.