A report in The Star of April 18 deals with the parole conditions imposed on Tony Yengeni.

Yengeni has to comply with some curiously stringent conditions, including abstinence from alcohol until September 2008 and even an outright ban on his frequenting restaurants where alcohol is served.

He was never found guilty of drunk driving or public indecency; why impose this on him as well?

I'm not advocating the formation of a Tony Yengeni fan club, but I am intrigued as to why so many public figures (mainly opposition politicians) have taken it upon themselves to hound the Department of Correctional Services since Yengeni's release, so that the terms of his parole can be brought to us, the public.

Why is it that the oft-misguided MPs from the DA appear to be of the opinion that it is their public duty to continue to pursue Yengeni, employing vituperative commentary on his every move?

The general consensus might very well be that Yengeni got off lightly, received preferential treatment while in prison and is not at the top of polite society's "A list", but to relentlessly vilify him seems to serve little purpose to me.

The latest is another DA MP with his nose uncomfortably out of place, James Selfe, who appears miffed at not having been personally informed of Yengeni's fate by the department concerned.

It seems Selfe is trying to garner public support for his injured pride, referring to the minister concerned as petulant and childish. I am reminded of pots and kettles and the colour black.

Your petty carping does you little credit, Mr Selfe; it is clearly "Selfe-serving" and merely cements the notion in many of our minds that politicians are probably the most puerile of the lot.

Leave Tony Yengeni alone to serve his parole.

Bob Broom

Bedfordview

With acknowledgements to Bob Broom and The Star.