"It's going to be very difficult," says Judith February of the Institute for Democracy in South Africa (Idasa). "We can only hope the seven committees will take their oversight role seriously and the process will not be subject to unfair discrediting and prejudice. It's important that what is said about the report is accurate and it should be read carefully. Political parties should not be partisan. It's not just about disagreeing, it's about seeing what the explanation is for the findings and recommendations in the report."

The report - drawn-up by the Auditor-General, the Public Prosecutor and the Public Protector - essentially says that while there is no widespread corruption in the arms deal, some government officials involved in the procurement did have a conflict of interest or benefited personally from the weapons contracts.

Investigation still continuing

The public prosecutor has made it clear that investigation into possible corruption and enrichment from the deals by senior officials is continuing. After the release of the report, the special investigations directorate arrested Schabir Sheik, the brother of head of acquisitions for the Department of Defence, "Chippy" Sheik. Schabir, whose company won contracts to provide the defence force with weapons suites, was allegedly in possession of confidential Cabinet minutes in which South Africa's arms requirements were discussed.

Sources have also indicated that Joe Modise, the former minister of defence, is a prime target in these investigations. The report says although it found no evidence of impropriety by Modise, his involvement with a company that benefited from the arms deal created a negative public perception about a process that might otherwise be in order.

Commitees' first findings due on December 6

Parliament has referred the report of the joint investigation to its committees on defence, finance, trade and industry, ethics, justice, public service and public accounts, for discussion. The committees are meeting separately to look at the sections of the report that affect their work. They expected to table their first findings in Parliament by December 6 2001.

Some of the committees have begun meeting and there have been already been tussles between the political parties.

It is generally thought that the ANC wants Parliament to deal with the report as quickly as possible so that the controversy that has dogged the arms deal can be put to an end.

Accusations fly

In the public services and administration committee, the DP representatives accused the ANC of trying to "muscle" the report through, without proper discussion. In the defence committee, the Freedom Front, describes the ANC's handling of the report as "a farce". In the justice committee all members agreed that it was not their task to investigate further and they would restrict their discussions to the report's recommendations on how to prevent corruption and conflicts of interest in similar government procurement deals.

Some of the hardest battles are going to be fought in the public accounts committee, whose work cuts across the areas of expertise of the other Parliamentary committees. The IFP's Gavin Woods chairs this committee, and it was on its recommendation that the independent agencies initiated their investigation into the arms deal. However, since then the committee has been bitterly divided along party lines about the nature and scope of the investigation.

With acknowledgement to Paul Stober and SABC News.