Bid to banish ghosts haunting government is not the final word in propaganda battle

The report of the three agencies probing SA's multibillion-rand arms deal represents a significant step in government's attempts to cleanse the ghosts haunting it, but its authors missed an opportunity to win the propaganda war.

Instead of presenting the report for what it is a work in progress document the spin from the three agencies gave the impression that it was the final word on the controversial deal.

This cannot be. After all, the report is littered with "under investigation" comments, implying that many questions remain unanswered and that much work still has to be done to get to the bottom of the matter.

However, it appeared yesterday that some of these questions could be answered over the next few days as the directorate of public prosecutions takes further "action" as its head, Bulelani Ngcuka, said, a veiled threat to more arrests.

Broadly speaking, the report absolved government of any wrongdoing, and appears to blame the flouting of procedures on inexperience. It also provides those whose names were dragged into the controversy with an opportunity to get on with their lives.

It is no exaggeration to say that the country had waited with bated breath for the release of the report since investigations got under way early this year.

Detailed media reports about alleged generous vehicle discounts given to certain luminaries, the subsequent arrest of former African National Congress (ANC) chief whip Tony Yengeni, as well as European Aerospace Defence Systems local MD Michael Woerfel, all added to a heightened public expectation of a dramatic outcome. The investigators Ngcuka, Auditor-General Shauket Fakie and Public Protector Selby Baqwa who made an allblack team were always under pressure.

This was more so given that the exclusion of former judge Willem Heath SA's most celebrated corruption buster from the inquiry had caused a big outcry, with many people casting doubt on the ability and independence of the three men to conduct an impartial inquiry.

It was also suggested that as the three men were appointments of government and that Baqwa and Ngcuka, in particular, were members of the ANC, then a whitewash was in the offing.

It could be deduced that the decision to conduct public hearings from May was in part an attempt by the three agencies to dispel any hint of a cover-up.

The investigators acknowledged this pressure in their report and said inquiries of such magnitude generated expectations and controversy "controversy in that an overzealous investigation might be seen as a witch-hunt or fishing expedition, while a superficial investigation might smack of a cover-up".

What was needed was that a balance was struck between the demands for accuracy, rigorous investigation and the rights of privacy of those affected.

"Our pursuit has been deliberate: to conduct a proper and diligent examination that reaffirms the solid foundation and pillars of our legal system and (that) ultimately enhances our democracy."

They say: "Because of human nature, news that an investigation is underway tends to create the expectation that something bad would be found," adding that "any investigation is expected to either implicate or exculpate. Often that is not the case".

But much as this investigation was about clearing any doubt in the minds of the public and opposition concerning the damaging accusations of corruption associated with it, it was also a test for SA's democracy and its watchdog bodies.

To that extent, the report might have raised more questions than it has answered. The fact that heads did not roll too, because crucial investigations are still outstanding, makes it a damp squib as far as the public is concerned.

While the report absolves government and cabinet ministers of any wrongdoing, it painted a curious picture about the selection of subcontractors, raising the prospects of litigation against government from losing bidders. It says fair and competitive procurement procedures for the selection of the subcontractors were not followed in all cases where strategic consideration played a significant role.

Molebeledi is Political Editor at Business Day.

With acknowledgement to Pule Molebeledi and Business Day.