'The arms deal binds South Africa contractually for 12 years'

As the debate about the Scorpions investigation into Deputy President Jacob Zuma rages, parliament has been called on to re-open its investigation into the arms deal.

Idasa, the independent oversight institute, said in its third report on the controversial multibillion arms deal, that the recent "allegations of fraud and corruption arising out of the arms deal provide parliament with another opportunity to exercise its oversight role", to lay to rest the continuing allegations of corruption.

The report was submitted to parliament's standing committee on public accounts (Scopa) this week, ahead of an anticipated public hearing by the committee of auditor-general Shauket Fakie later this month.

In a 21-page report, the institute's political information and monitoring service calls on Scopa to "engage with the auditor-general about allegations relating to the alleged heavy 'editing' of the joint investigations task team's [JIT] final report" of November 2001.

Francois Beukman, Scopa's chairperson, said political parties had already agreed on the questions to be put to Fakie over the allegations.

He said there had been no discussion, however, on the re-opening of the arms deal investigation.

Idasa, in its report, made a range of recommendations, including that the JIT as well as the auditor-general should re-open its investigation into the strategic defence procurement programme "to ensure that all outstanding questions are answered".

Idasa said the JIT made certain key findings in its report, but that certain elements of the investigation were "overlooked", such as inconsistent criteria used for contracting, uncertainty over whether the promised benefits of the contracts would be realised, the enforceability of contracts and more serious allegations that had arisen recently.

These allegations included the current investigation into Zuma and the Shaik brothers as well as the alleged provision of discounted motor vehicles to key public and national figures, including former chief whip Tony Yengeni, by the European Aeronautic Defence and Space company, a beneficiary of the arms deal.

Also mentioned is the allegation that British Aerospace had paid the ANC an amount of R5-million before the awarding of tenders.

Judith February, an Idasa researcher, said that since parliament's debate on the arms deal last year "very little has emanated from parliament in response to allegations of fraud and corruption that have again resurfaced.

"Despite this rather limited interaction, it is not too late for parliament to exercise a renewed oversight role, not only via Scopa, but also its other committees," February said.

"The arms deal binds South Africa contractually for 12 years. It is therefore incumbent upon parliament to focus once more on the arms deal."

She said the allegations had so far produced sensational headlines and discussions focused on the executive, while the importance of parliament's continuous oversight role had been overlooked.

"It would be a mistake to view the oversight role of parliament as a once-off exercise," February said. "Hence the debate on August 13 2002 was the beginning and not the end of parliament's oversight role."

With acknowledgements to Christelle Terreblanch and the Sunday Independent.