|
Lies, Damned Lies! (Part II) |
| Publication |
ANC Today |
| Date | 2007-11-23 |
|
Web Link |
What the media says
Perhaps not surprisingly, given its pedigree, the South African
newspaper The Citizen has sprung to the defence of Chris McGreal, whose
bare-faced fabrications about the so-called
'arms deal' we detailed in our last edition (Vol 7 No 45).
The newspaper published two articles on this matter in its 20 November 2007
edition. One of these was entitled "Mbeki arms deal
row hots up". The second was headed "R6 billion spent after informal
chat: Feinstein". Continuing its crusade, the following day, 21 November,
The Citizen published yet another article, entitled "Mbeki
running scared: author".
In the article "Mbeki arms deal row hots up", written by Paul Kirk, who is
well-known among media practitioners, The Citizen said: "And The Citizen has
also obtained dramatic evidence of how Mbeki sat in on irregular meetings
that swung multibillion-rand deals the way of BAe.
"These documents, obtained from many different sources, suggest that Mbeki
played a crucial role in buying an unsuitable jet because the manufacturer
had allegedly paid millions in bribes."
The allegation made by The Citizen revolves around the claim that "the South
African Air Force (SAAF) wanted the much cheaper Italian-made MB339 trainer,
not the more expensive Hawk."
The Joint Investigating Team
Among other things, it is clear that The Citizen
has forgotten or has chosen to forget that three state institutions, the
Auditor General, the National Director of Public Prosecutions and the Public
Protector - the Joint Investigating Team (JIT) - conducted an
eight-month-long investigation of the Strategic Defence Packages, the 'arms
deal'. *1
The Joint Report of the JIT is freely available on the government
website. Chapter 4 of the report is headed "Selection of Prime Contractors -
ALFA & LIFT". This 50-page Chapter contains a very detailed account of the
processes that took place leading to the decision of our Government to opt
for the Hawk rather than the Aeromacchi trainer. (Some of the "dramatic
evidence" The Citizen "reveals" is, in fact, contained in this Chapter.)
The Citizen claims that it has "dramatic evidence" based on "documents
obtained from many different sources", which show that President Mbeki
engaged in corrupt practices that led to the decision to buy the Hawk.
The Joint Report we have mentioned found no evidence
of such corruption, as indeed it could not, for the simple reason that none
had occurred.*3
The Joint Report was studied by eight Parliamentary Committees, which
also interviewed the JIT over a period of two days. In this regard, a later
Report of the Auditor General said:
"The two-day interaction (with the Parliamentary
Committees) was an extensive process and many questions *4 and
requests for clarification by the various committee members during that
sitting, were responded to by the JIT. During the period 10 to 12 December
2001 the various reports by Committees of Parliament on the JIT Report were
tabled.
"The findings and recommendations of SCOPA [Standing Committee on Public
Accounts] on the JIT Report are representative of the findings and
recommendations of the other Committees and are quoted for ease of
reference:
"1. The Committee accepts the findings and recommendations contained in the
Report of the JIT, in particular the finding that 'No evidence was found of
any improper or unlawful conduct by the government. The irregularities and
improprieties referred to in the findings as contained in this report, point
to the conduct of certain officials of the government departments involved
and cannot, in our view, be ascribed to the President or the Ministers
involved in their capacity as members of the Ministers' Committee or
Cabinet. There are therefore no grounds to suggest that the Government's
contracting position is flawed.'"
BAe vs Aeromacchi
The Citizen, and seemingly Andrew Feinstein, has information that has
convinced the newspaper, and Feinstein, that President Mbeki participated in
"irregular meetings" which resulted in the Cabinet taking the wrong decision
to buy the Hawk rather than the Aeromacchi trainer.
We draw the attention of our readers to some of the comments made by the JIT
in its Joint Report in this regard. In its findings, the JIT said:
"The Ministers' Committee considered very carefully any possible prejudice
to tenderers should a non-costed option be considered. It was decided that
the consideration of the different options did not amount to moving beyond
the parameters of evaluation criteria, but that it was rather a qualitative
assessment about the precise value of a weighting figure. The Ministers'
Committee was confident that the manner in which the consideration of the
different options was done did not require any further bidding process. None
of the unsuccessful bidders complained in this regard as might have been
expected had the conduct of the Ministers' Committee been improper...
"The decision that the evaluation criteria in respect of the LIFT [lead-in
fighter trainer] had to be expanded to include a non-costed option and that
eventually resulted in a different bidder being selected, was taken by the
Ministers' Committee, a subcommittee of Cabinet. Although
unusual in terms of normal procurement
practice, this decision was neither unlawful, nor irregular in terms of the
procurement process as it evolved *6 during the
SDP acquisition. As the ultimate decision-maker, Cabinet was entitled to
select the preferred bidder, taking into account the recommendations of the
evaluating bodies as well as other factors *7, such as
strategic considerations.
"The decision to recommend the Hawk/Gripen combination to Cabinet as
the preferred selection for the LIFT/ALFA [advanced light fighter aircraft]
was taken by the Ministers' Committee for strategical
(sic) reason *11, including the total benefit to the country in terms
of counter trade investment and the operational capabilities of the SANDF."
However, it is clear from the articles it has published that The Citizen
disagrees with the JIT findings, which Parliament accepted. Obviously, it is
convinced that the "many different sources" that supplied it with various
documents, as well as its favourite author, Andrew Feinstein, have
more accurate knowledge of what happened with
regard to the Strategic Defence Packages, including ALFA and LIFT.
An obligation to fight corruption
We must assume that The Citizen has decided to pursue the matter of the
'arms deal' because it is determined to expose and fight against corruption.
We therefore suggest that The Citizen should approach
our Parliament, or any other state institution of its choice, to
present the "dramatic evidence" it has, so that
action is taken against the wrongdoers, who allegedly
include the President.
We must also assume that both Parliament and
our Police Service would be most interested to investigate the allegations
*12 of corruption made in the documents in the possession of The
Citizen. Should they request the assistance of The Citizen in this regard,
we trust that the newspaper will cooperate fully, to contribute to the
achievement of the vitally important objective of
defeating the scourge of corruption.
This is especially important given the charge made by The Citizen
that, "These documents, obtained from many different sources, suggest that
Mbeki played a crucial role in buying an unsuitable jet because the
manufacturer had allegedly paid millions in bribes."
It is perfectly obvious that there is a determined campaign by some in the
domestic and international media to shape the leadership, the character and
the policies of the ANC. This campaign includes the propagation of all
manner of stories which, among other things, seek to implant in the public
mind manufactured images of some of our leaders as heroes, heroines or
villains.
The article headed "Mbeki running scared: author", again written by Paul
Kirk, said: "Thabo Mbeki is running scared of a proper investigation of the
arms deal he masterminded - terrified that German and British investigations
might land him and his presidency in the dock.
"That's the opinion of Andrew Feinstein, the ranking ANC representative on
Parliament's Public Accounts Committee at the time, and the man who resigned
after his attempts to have arms deal corruption probed were thwarted -
largely, he claims, by Mbeki."
Publish and be damned!
The Germans and the British are perfectly free to publish any
information they may have which shows that the decisions of our Government
on the Strategic Defence Packages were adopted through a corrupt process. In
terms of what Paul Kirk said, it seems obvious that Feinstein is privy to
the information the Germans and the British have, which makes our President
to be "running scared".
Given his obviously privileged position, it would be very good if Feinstein
could encourage his German and British friends to
speak out and tell the truth as it is. That this has not happened
communicates the message that Feinstein and his German and British friends
find it in their strategic interest to use such outlets as The Citizen to
convince the unwary that they have "dramatic evidence", which they take
the greatest care never to disclose.
At the same time it is clear that Feinstein and The Citizen have greater
confidence in German and British investigators than they have in our Auditor
General, our National Directorate of Public Prosecutions and our Public
Protector. For this reason they state this firmly that our President is
scared of the German and British investigators, whereas, presumably, he was
not scared of our incompetent, or corrupt, or subservient Auditor General,
National Directorate of Public Prosecutions and Public Protector.
The African National Congress is now nearly 96 years old. During these
decades it has learnt the virtue of patience. It will therefore wait
patiently for the day when the truth will out, as it surely will, to answer
the question - who is the villain of the piece?
Is it President Mbeki, the then Ministers' Committee and the Cabinet, or is
it Andrew Feinstein, Paul Kirk, The Citizen, and the 'German and British
investigators'?
The Citizen would do our people and our democracy a sterling service if it
honoured its moral duty to its profession and the nation and provided the
information in its possession to our state institutions, as we have
suggested, to enable all of us to take firm action to punish those who are
corrupt, including, if need be, President Mbeki. We are certain it could do
this without having to disclose its "sources".
In future editions of this journal, we will do our best to keep our readers
informed about how The Citizen has responded to our appeal for it to do the
right thing and assist our government and nation to take speedy and decisive
action against corruption. In its 20 November edition, The Citizen reports
that Andrew Feinstein has asked this journal to give him space to
communicate his views. Feinstein knows that at some point he decided to
desert the ANC and position himself as an opponent. It is strange that he
expects that an ANC journal should give him space to pursue his agenda. It
is patently obvious that he has access to other media which are sympathetic
to his cause, and would surely jump to publish his offerings. So far, Chris
McGreal has not responded to our offer to him to respond to the challenges
we posed in this column in our last edition. Editor.
With acknowledgement to ANC Today.
*1
The key finding of the JIT Joint Report are simple bollocks which
contradicts both the detailed findings of the report itself and the earlier
drafts prior it going for comment to the same persons that it was
effectively investigating.
The JIT Team plainly lied point-blank to Parliament about the changes. Its
on the official formal Parliamentary record.
All these three stooges have now been replaced, but they should have been
impeached for their disgraceful conduct.
*2
*3
And there were no further investigation or findings between early October
when the draft was finalised and given to MINCOM and the third week of
October when the first versions of the new-look Joint Report
started to appear thanks to Advocates Lionel van Tonder and Stoffel Fourie.
*4
What Advocate de Chermont wrote in his report was almost completely
re-written in a frenzied three week period in a secret building in Pretoria
and almost surely overseen by a person whose mother tongue is English.
Here is a pointer :
"In conclusion, allow me to quote Tony Hertz second
opinion in one Sunday newspaper of 2 December 2001 where he says "people of
the EH seem to prefer to have someone else do their reading, not to mention
thinking for them. Lookers and for years rather than readers. They prefer to
leave off other's cognitive effort." He continues "neglect or pursuit of
reading will influence the public debate over the South African Arms
Conference. In past months much instant opinion has been formed by headline
and little else. Now we have an orderly text to study, a load star if we
take the trouble. Yet, more than a fortnight after its release I wonder how
many people have actually read the Report. Ek vra maar net. In a celebrated
instant judgement a politician declared it to be a whitewash or was
blackwash meant? When everyone knows that a politician could not have read
it by then. Nothing more pointed to illustrate the perceived and important
reading something before judging it". He says "Columnist Matata Tseto said
"for a country that is just seven years into this open season we have done
well." A headline summed up his feeling. "Lets close the loopholes exposed
by the probe into the Arms Deal and then move on and Tseto is hardly a
government stooge".
And "Tony Hertz" is none other than Anthony Heard, head of the
Press Section of the Government Communication and Information
Service.(GCIS).
And the question is just why would he have such a strong grasp of a 384 page
report just two weeks after is was published for the first time?
Ek vra maar net.
*4
I know - I was there.
Advocates Stoffel Fourie and Lionel van Tonder sat in the row behind stooges
Fakie and Baqwa (Ngcuka left early). A plethora of notes were passed
backwards and forwards between them.
From my own visual observation hardly any but the most obvious of responses
could be given by The Stooges without assistance from their assistants. And
van Tonder wasn't even an employee of the Office of the auditor-General. He
was a director of PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC) Forensic Services (Pty) Ltd
"insourced" to the OAG to do the AG's bidding.
PWC has serious conflicts of interest with many of the parties subject to
the Arms Deal and its investigation.
Just some of them were :
PWC International shared a director with Thomson-CSF of France, Lord Roger Norman Freeman;
PWC International shared a director with British Aerospace, Tony McGarry.
at that time PWC was in the final stages of amalgamating with BEE auditors Gobodo Inc. (later aborted) who were auditors to Armscor;
PWC was auditor for Denel;
PWC was auditor for ATE *5;
PWC was auditor for Prime Empowerment Group (Primegro) *5;
PWC was auditor for Coega Development Corporation;
PWC was auditor for Marvol Management SA (Pty) Ltd *5.
PWC also earns a few hundred million Rands per year from the OAG which
outsources most of its auditing work to private companies.
Conflict of interest - come on?
In the meantime, Fakie removed Deputy Auditor-General Wally van Heerden and
specialist DoD auditor Etienne Smith from the JIT investigation for a
"conflict of interest" as they had previously been responsible for the DoD
annual regularity audits; whereas van Heerden and Smith were primarily
responsible for the Auditor-General's Special Review issued to Parliament in
September 2000 which led to the Arms Deal investigation in the first place.
*5
*6
Just how can a fair and regular process evolve?
*7
Certainly not the choice of the SAAF *8 in the case of the Hawk and not the
SA Navy *9 in the case of the MEKO200AS.
*8
*9
*10
*11
Hoisted by one's own Thetard.
*12