Letters

The assertion by former Sunday Times reporter Ranjeni Munusamy that she feels vindicated by the Hefer Commission is simply illogical.

Instead, what the commission has shown is that her story was based on a report that even its author, Mo Shaik, and Mac Maharaj, the other accuser, admit was flawed.

What has been problematic about the story all along was that the report on which it was based did not conclusively find that Bulelani Ngcuka was a spy.

In addition, the story's sources and the timing led to the question of Munusamy's motive.

What we have come to know through the commission is that Maharaj and Shaik's corroboration of the spy allegations was not in the public interest but personal. Maharaj was angry at what Ngcuka had allegedly told editors about him and his wife. Shaik has hinted that he was defending Deputy President Jacob Zuma, who happens to be a friend of Shaik's brother.

We also know which camp Munusamy is in - just see who she's sitting with at the commission hearings.

The commission has made it clear that in the face of the public spat between Ngcuka, Zuma, Shaik and Maharaj, and in an attempt to taint Ngcuka, Shaik handed the now famous MJK report to Munusamy.

It seems that in compiling the story she failed to follow some simple guidelines of the journalistic code of conduct. If she had, she would have discovered that Ngcuka was not at the meeting the report bases its accusations on, that Gideon Nieuwoudt could not have recruited Ngcuka at the time he says he did, and that Ngcuka was not agent RS 452.

Unlike Shaik, Munusamy operated in an environment which would have facilitated her establishing this information.

We also now know that former Sunday Times editor Mathatha Tsedu was right in refusing to run this story.

I fail to understand how this commission has helped Munusamy's credibility either as a journalist or on a personal level.

The public, from whose coffers the commission will be paid for, should be angry because without that story we would not have the Hefer Commission.

The time spent on the commission could have been well spent elsewhere - which may give credence to the argument that it is deflecting attention from the real issue: corruption in the arms deal.

With acknowledgements to Pinky Khoabane and the Sunday Times.