Suspects in the investigation into the alleged irregularities of the multi-million rand arms transaction can take the government or certain ministers to court in a civil action lawsuit if the report on the investigation contains information which, according to them, could be in conflict with the law.

There is speculation that threatening interdicts against publication of the report have contributed to the delay in presenting the investigation report. It will probably be presented to Parliament in a week’s time.

Some of the suspects were questioned in accordance with Article 28 of the National Prosecution Authority Act which stipulates that information obtained by the investigators may not be made public.

Adv.Bulelani Ngcuka, Director of National Prosecutions, can authorise an investigation.

Ngcuka must again be approached for permission in the event that this report is to be more widely distributed - for example to Parliament and the public.

One of the suspects said that he and his legal representative warned the investigating teams that, according to this law, certain confidential information was provided.

"It was our condition that this not be made public. It relates to classified information contained within certain confidential documentation. This classification could mean the contravention of contractual agreements with certain overseas contractors.

"If the information is made known, then the investigators themselves will be breaking the law. Not even the early presentation of the reports (in the past week) to the three investigating agencies’ ministers can protect the investigators.

"With many of the allegations, the investigators won’t be able to make any findings or recommendations without the confidential information. I don’t know whether this is the reason that certain parts of the report have been rewritten in the past week, but I can only guess so."

The information contained in the testimonies delivered at the public hearings about the arms deal can be used in the reports, but none of this information may be used as evidence in any criminal law suit.

Some of the suspects were questioned according to the Auditor-General’s Act or that of the Public Protector, but, according to the suspects, it wasn’t always clear which law was relevant.

Certain investigators switched departments during the investigation, which created more confusion.

With acknowledgement to Erika Gibson, Beeld and News24.