Publication: The Witness
Issued:
Date: 2008-01-10
Reporter:
The National Executive Committee (NEC) of the African National Congress has
decided to appoint a committee to conduct an investigation into the government's
controversial arms deal which is nearly a decade old.
This is a telling example of the present gulf
between the party structures, now led by Jacob Zuma and his supporters, and the
government, still led by President Thabo Mbeki. The ANC is in fact going to be
investigating itself.
Many other probes into the arms deal have already taken
place. Several books have been written on the subject and court cases
have occurred, such as those involving Tony Yengeni and Schabir Shaik.
It is only now, in the aftermath of Zuma's election as its president, that the
ANC has decided to enter the field, basing its decision on the need for "a
detailed, factual report". This suggests a dispassionate inquiry but the purpose
is clearly not neutral or objective. It is to
provide Zuma's followers with the ammunition they
believe they need to support their president in the run-up to his trial for
fraud and corruption later this year.
To be well-informed on the issues involved is a legitimate
quest *1. Yet any suggestion of political pressure on due judicial
process is deeply disturbing, as former Chief Justice Arthur Chaskalson and
human rights lawyer, George Bizos, have recently pointed out. The case against
Zuma must be left unambiguously to the court to decide in a free and fair
manner.
Another purpose of the ANC's inquiry could be to deflect
attention from Zuma to others, particularly in the
Mbeki camp, who may also have benefited personally and illegally from the arms
deal. The report arising from the inquiry is not to
be made public, implying that this is an internal ANC matter *2.
The investigation is nothing less than a strategic
intervention to bolster Zuma and expose others. It will have the effect
of sharpening and sustaining the present divisions in the governing party and
contributing to the unsettled state of this country's body politic in 2008.With acknowledgement to The Witness.
*1 But it is unlawful if it has other
objectives, like blackmail or ball squeezing.
*2 No, implying that it will be used for specific objectives
against specific targets, i.e. against some amongst us and not against others
amongst us.