President Thabo Mbeki could be grilled by his own party *1 on what he knows about the multibillion-rand arms deal.

The ANC's new national executive committee (NEC) has appointed a committee to draft a "detailed factual report" on the deal.

Asked if Mbeki was likely to be called to testify before the committee, new ANC treasurer-general and NEC member Mathews Phosa said the party "will not be tying their (committee members) hands in terms of who they should speak to and who they should not speak to.

"The new NEC is acting properly *2. We are not interested in who did what *3, but we want to find out what is going on*4. We don't know what is going on and we don't understand the arms deal."

Phosa said the committee had been given very broad terms of reference and the NEC had left it up to the committee members themselves to decide - "in their wisdom" - how to go about the probe.

ANC president Jacob Zuma - at the centre of the arms-deal storm - had already indicated in his replying affidavit in 2005 that Mbeki was "very much involved" in the process *5.

Privately, senior leaders in the new NEC associated with Zuma also believe Mbeki should answer in his capacity as former deputy president of the country and for having participated in the process on the government's behalf.

The ANC committee's investigations, which will gather its information from "official arms-deal sources", could see more senior party and government leaders become embroiled in the probe into the arms procurement.

The committee members are Phosa, ANC deputy president Kgalema Motlanthe, the SA Communist Party's Jeremy Cronin, NEC member Sankie Mthembi-Mahanyele, former SA National Defence Force general Siphiwe Nyanda *6, Education Minister Naledi Pandor, businessman Cyril Ramaphosa and Housing Minister Lindiwe Sisulu.

Ironically, in November 2001, ANC MPs unanimously accepted the report *7 of the Joint Investigating Task Team established by Mbeki to look into the arms deal.

Independent Democrats leader Patricia de Lille yesterday said this move by the ANC "borders on interference in the judicial process *8".

Zuma is facing criminal charges allegedly linked to his role in the arms deal, and is expected to stand trial in August.

De Lille said only an independent judicial inquiry would get to the bottom of the arms-deal saga.

Meanwhile, Democratic Alliance MP Joe Seremane yesterday criticised the ANC's decision to endorse Zuma as its presidential candidate for the general election of 2009, suggesting the ruling party had put its own interests above those of the country.

"This raises the unpalatable prospect of a sitting president facing corruption charges in court," he said.

With acknowledgements to Deon de Lange and The Star.

*1       Let the games begin.

*2*3*4  How can things be being done properly when they are not interested in who did what?

If this were true, then no substantial investigation would be required as it could not lead to anything.

The bottom line is that there are current serious and formal allegations against some among us (inter alia Fana Hlongwane and Chippy Shaik). These are people, not just "whats".

The ANC wants to find out who did what so that they can do damage control, force hands, twist arms, wriggle free.

They are simply lying if they contend otherwise.

Here is the highest decision-making body of the largest and ruling party of the land being decidedly disingenious.


*5      Mbeki was indeed "very much involved" in the processes, both the formal (lawful) process and the informal (unlawful) process.

It's on the record, it's irrefutable.

Only he "forgot" about it or some of it.

And his conduct involves natural and juristic persons who are and who represent Accused 2 and Accused 3 in the upcoming matter in Pietermaritzburg on Monday 4 August 2008.


*6      Like Yengeni, who was Chairman of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence, Gen Nyanda who was Chief of the SANDF and as such a member of the Armaments Acquisition Council, Council on Defence and a board member of Armscor, the official defence materiel Tender Board, and received a discounted Mercedes Benz E 320 AMG from a bider in the Arms Deal.

Unlike Yengeni, whose discount was 47,83%, Nyanda's discount was only 17,26% and therefore did not qualify for the full wrath of the law according to the Public Protector, Auditor--General and National Director of Public Prosecutions.


*7      The JIT Report can (indeed has to) be viewed at two levels, the factual level and the opinion level.

The factual level is pretty good (although the drafts were a lot detail and much better in general(, but the opinion level is the biggest lot of poppycock since Lewis Carroll infused some strong opiates into the muscle between his ears.


*8      I don't think that it borders on interference in the judicial process; in my view if this investigation is held in private, official sources are somehow compelled to provide "evidence" and the resulting report is not made public, then this is a clear case of a prior defeating the ends of justice.

It must be nipped in the bud and replaced with a full independent open and public enquiry.