Arms Deal Cost Study Kept Under Wraps |
Publication | Mail and Guardian |
Date |
2008-07-18 |
Reporter |
Sam Sole |
Web Link |
What did the Cabinet know about serious financial
risks associated with the arms deal? And why does
the public not have the same information? Those are the questions
emerging from the way Finance Minister Trevor Manuel has handled his legal
dispute with arms deal activist Terry Crawford-Browne.
At the centre of the mystery lie hundreds of pages of the arms deal
affordability study which are being kept under wraps.
The legal saga began in 2001 when Crawford-Browne launched a high-court attempt
to stop the deal. He focused on Manuel's role in signing off the international
loans used to fund the arms purchase.
While Manuel was known privately to have misgivings, his signature on the loan
agreements gave Cabinet the decision to go ahead.
The affordability study was the internal government document which considered
the financial risks associated with the acquisition, notably the risk of
exchange-rate depreciation leading to mounting costs.
An executive summary, which made it clear that Cabinet had been warned about the
risks, was leaked in 2000. It noted: "The analysis of these risks suggests that
as the expenditure level increases, these risks escalate significantly. In fact
even expenditure of R16,5-billion may create a situation in which government
could be confronted by mounting economic, fiscal and financial difficulties at
some future point ..."
As part of his case Crawford-Browne demanded that government make the full study
available. Manuel baulked repeatedly at complying, despite court orders to do
so, claiming disclosure would compromise government's ability to negotiate
international funding arrangements.
In 2003 he handed over 224 pages, but by that time Crawford-Browne had become
entangled in a series of legal missteps which ultimately saw his action
dismissed and the 224 pages were not made public.
Now they are at issue again as Crawford-Browne attempts to fight off two court
applications by Manuel: one of which would prevent him from claiming publicly
that Manuel acted illegally and another to have Crawford-Browne declared a
vexatious litigant.
As part of his defence, Crawford-Browne argues that the
finance minister never disclosed the full affordability study, as Manuel
avers he did.
Manuel's spokesperson, Thoraya Pandy, told the Mail & Guardian the courts have
ruled in a series of decisions that Manuel had indeed complied: "In the
circumstances it has been found -- not once but twice -- by a court of competent
jurisdiction that Minister Manuel disclosed the documentation he was obliged to
disclose."
Crawford-Browne cites page numbering on the version he received which suggest
the full document may have been more than 10 times its length. In papers filed
in his defence Crawford-Browne claims: "The 224 pages of the affordability
report that are in my possession ... confirm beyond doubt that the Cabinet was
warned about the risks of the arms deal.
"The findings include:
* the prospects both of a balance of trade crisis and of a financial crisis
about 2007/08. These warnings are now substantiated, albeit dramatically worse
than even the study anticipated;
* that foreign exchange markets are prone to shocks, including political
events. Such risks are illustrated by the collapse of the rand against the
dollar during 2001 and by the collapse of the rand against the euro in the past
two years by almost 60%; and
* that offsets could not be guaranteed."
While the impact of the arms deal has diminished -- South Africans have made
about half the due payments already and factors, such as the price of oil, now
loom much larger in our balance of payments woes -- it may still be important.
But Crawford-Browne refused to provide access to the documents, citing warnings
he had received from lawyers acting for the minister that he might be in
contempt of an interim gagging order Manuel won against him earlier this year.
The M&G revealed last week that Manuel's lawyers, Hofmeyrs, had also written to
the media, warning them against publishing anything based on Crawford-Browne's
allegations.
While searching for the 2001 court file, to which the 224-page record should be
attached, the M&G found the entire contents of the file missing from the Cape
High Court library.
The court file for Manuel's two current actions against Crawford-Browne also
could not be located, except for some of
Crawford-Browne's submissions.
Hofmeyrs said the court files were "in the care of the registrar".
The M&G also attempted to ascertain what responses Manuel had given from his own
papers.
Hofmeyrs declined to supply the minister's court filings, saying: "We refer you
to our letter of July 2 2008, which motivates more fully our client's wish to
prevent Mr Crawford-Browne from breaching the interdict against him. Our client
can scarcely make pleadings in this dispute available to the media, while
preventing Mr Crawford-Browne from doing so."
With acknowledgements to Sam Sole and Mail and Guardian.