When on September 9 1999 I first stood up in Parliament and disclosed large-scale corruption in the arms deal, I was branded as being unpatriotic. I knew that in fact I was being immensely patriotic by standing up against corruption and aiding the government in rooting out the bad apples . Like others, I believed the government would respond to these allegations by thoroughly investigating them and taking action against those who had defrauded the state.

During the years of the struggle, we had hoped to build a society on the principles of justice, fairness and equality before the law. The first years of our new Parliament saw robust debate and a willingness to tackle issues across party political lines — on many occasions Parliament had proved to be willing and able to hold the executive to account. I believed this would be the spirit in which Parliament would tackle these allegations of arms deal corruption.

However, this was not to be and, in the years that followed, the ruling party’s handling of this issue was characterised by denial, interference and the thwarting of efforts to launch an independent and comprehensive investigation. We saw a violation of the constitutional principle of the separation of powers, where the executive and Parliament came together to defend the arms deal.

Despite the ruling party’s best attempts, these allegations did not go away and I was vindicated when allegations contained in the De Lille dossier led to two successful prosecutions, those of Schabir Shaik and Tony Yengeni.

Furthermore, the Germans, the British and the Swedes have since launched full-scale investigations, which have thus far revealed more prima facie evidence of wrongdoing on the part of arms dealers and South African politicians.

It is clear that the only way for us to deal with the arms deal scandal is to launch a full-scale investigation into the other allegations contained in the De Lille dossier and test them in an open court .

South Africans deserve to know the truth surrounding the arms deal, which has deprived us of R50bn that would have been better spent on improving the lives of all South Africans .

The recent announcement by the African National Congress (ANC) that it would set up an ad-hoc committee to draw up a “detailed factual report” cannot be seen as a substitute for an independent investigation. South Africans can be rightfully suspicious of this latest move by the ANC, whose intentions seem to be to fight internal party-political battles, rather than to get to the truth.

However, if the ANC is going to move ahead , it should consider the following : that besides the new charges of racketeering, fraud and money laundering Zuma is facing, the old charges are similar to Shaik’s; that the case against Shaik was tested in the Durban High Court, the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court; and that those findings will be considered in the case against Zuma. Allegations against Shaik were that he corrupted Zuma, and the court must now determine whether Zuma had the intention to be corrupted.

One factor in this regard is the case of national police commissioner Jackie Selebi, where after the sudden suspension by Thabo Mbeki of former National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) head Vusi Pikoli, the NPA interfered with the judiciary by approaching a magistrate to cancel a warrant for Selebi’s arrest . Fortunately, because we have a strong and independent judiciary, the judge refused to do so. The Selebi debacle has therefore created the impression that the acting director of the NPA was appointed to carry out political instructions.

It is therefore important for our democracy that the independence of our institutions of justice be restored, and that they are not seen to be used by any political faction to settle political scores.

While the Independent Democrats are pleased the ANC has moved away from its denialist stance on the arms deal, in the interests of an impartial and thorough investigation we have to remain suspicious of any attempts by the ANC to investigate itself.

PATRICIA DE LILLE
President of the Independent Democrats

With acknowledgements to Patricia de Lille and Business Day.