Shaik trial hears how unit was blocked

Judge Willem Heath, the former head of the Special Investigating Unit, told the fraud and corruption trial of businessman Schabir Shaik yesterday his unit had been illegally excluded *1 from the investigation into the arms deal.

Heath testified about the circumstances in which his unit was excluded from the investigation into the arms deal in 2001, an investigation later conducted by three other government agencies *2.

He suggested the reason for the exclusion of his unit was the ability of a tribunal associated with it to reverse contracts, and the legal capacity of the unit to investigate whether or not the contract was in the interests of the country.

Heath said legislation governing the unit authorised it to investigate government contracts from a civil law perspective if apparently genuine allegations were made that there were serious irregularities.

But before the unit could exercise its powers, the justice department was required to issue a proclamation authorising the probe.

The unit had taken special care in requesting a proclamation because, from previous experience, it had learnt that government was hesitant to do so if matters "sensitive to the government" were involved, he said.

The unit had had good reason to believe that a proclamation would be issued in the case of the arms deal because a preliminary report by the auditor-general had found there were possible irregularities.

The previous witness, corporate executive at the auditor-general's office James van Heerden, said that this report, published in September 1999, had found there were "material deviations from proper procurement practice".

Heath said Parliament's standing committee on public accounts (Scopa) and the majority of the African National Congress members on the committee had supported a multi-agency investigation.

The report and the hearings by Scopa meant that the requirements for the unit to investigate had been more than satisfied, Heath said.

But the authorisation had never been forthcoming and nor was an acknowledgment of having received the unit's request.

Heath said he had read in the press that former justice minister Penuell Maduna had said that a prima facie case was needed for approval of the probe.

But, Heath said, this was not a requirement in the legislation, and other reasons given for not issuing a proclamation were also invalid.

With ackowledgement to Tim Cohen and Business Day.

*1  The NPA should now be investigating why the SIU was illegally excluded from the investigation.

Such unlawful conduct makes the Nixon/Watergate matter look mighty tame by comparison. That conduct and investigation led to impeachment (or was it actually resignation before impeachment..

Indeed the Clinton/Lewinsky matter was by far a less serious matter, but this also led to impeachment proceedings and Clinton escaped by a whisker.

*2 The SIU was especially set up as an independent body specifically to investigate corruption in government contracts and government business.