INVESTIGATORS of South Africa's R50-billion arms deal are worried that the planned public hearings could prejudice possible prosecutions and compromise witnesses and their testimony.

The inquiry, which starts in Pretoria on Monday, will be run by the Office of the Public Protector, and could last for several weeks. Few details have been given about how the inquiry will work; it is indeed expected to start with an explanation of how proceedings will unfold, followed by a "scene setter".

Sources familiar with the probe say that, while the heads of the three agencies involved are committed to the public inquiry, there is more disagreement and concern lower down the ranks.
Senior legal sources have also privately expressed serious misgivings about the hearings to the Mail & Guardian over the past week, echoing reservations published by the Institute for Democracy in South Afrcia (Idasa).

Raenette Taljaard, a Democratic Alliance member of Parliament's standing committee on public accounts, said she has repeatedly and unsuccessfully sought clarity from the offices of the both auditor general and public protector about the format of the hearings.

The central anxiety is that the hearings may prejudice potential prosecutions stemming from the forensic and criminal investigations by the three agencies. They are the Office of the Auditor General, the National Directorate of Public Prosecutions and the Office of the Public Protector. About 30 investigators are involved.

Legal experts have expressed surprise that the inquiry is being run during the investigation, saying it is not a sensible way of gathering evidence from sensitive witnesses.

Although all three institutions have officially sanctioned the public inquiry, it emerged this week that there will be no representative from the auditor general's office leading evidence. All the agencies will however be represented on the presiding panel. Of the three agencies, the auditor general's office is understood to have been the most wary of the public inquiry. The auditor general's office is officially in charge of the investigation.

When the inquiry was formally announced on May 10, a joint statement by all the investigating bodies said they would be careful to ensure that the inquiry broached only material that would not compromise the criminal and forensic probe.

In its recent analysis of the arms deal saga, Idasa expressed several concerns about the hearing. "We are particularly concerned about witnesses possibly incriminating themselves," the organisation said. Idasa said there was also a danger the hearings would alert people being investigated. "The result will be that the investigation may be prejudiced in material respects."

Idasa also said there was a danger the hearings "might have the effect of prejudicing the investigation itself".

Responding to questions by Idasa this week, the office of the public protector said this week the inquiry was launched because of the public interest in the saga. "The public phase will be conducted in a manner that will not compromise the forensic or criminal investigations."

With acknowledgment to the Daily Mail and Guardian.