Arms deal: So many questions |
Publication |
Sunday Times |
Date | 2011-09-18 |
Reporter | Editorial |
Web Link | www.timeslive.co.za |
President Jacob Zuma's decision to order an inquiry into the arms
deal finally presents an opportunity for South Africa to achieve closure on
its largest post-apartheid controversy.
At the time of writing, the terms of reference, scope and composition of
the inquiry were yet to be finalised.
Zuma would be well advised to go all the way by setting broad terms of
reference, which must include the identification of people who must be
prosecuted, and appointing a senior judicial officer to head the probe.
Anything less than a full investigation will achieve the opposite of
closure. Such an inquiry would merely rake over the coals, igniting new
controversy and causing the nation further pain.
The questions which this commission must answer are quite simple. They could
be boiled down to:
Were the best interests of the country served in terms of cost and effectiveness by the procurement choices made by the government?
Was the arms deal procurement process subject to the levels of transparency and accountability which our democracy demands?
Were bribes paid? By whom and to whom?
Were any members of the executive compromised in their decision-making?
Did any monies paid by arms companies find their way into the coffers of political parties or businesses set up or part-owned by officials of political parties?
Were previous investigations into the deal conducted without undue interference by the executive, as has been repeatedly alleged?
Did the purchase decisions represent a wise and proportionate spending choice, given the competing demands on resources for the delivery of basic services?
There can be
no stepping back from these questions, especially considering developments
abroad.
Several European countries have begun formal legal proceedings around the
arms deal, and a great deal of detailed information concerning the
involvement of South Africans in bribery is likely to emerge.
This country cannot be seen to be sitting on its hands as it becomes the
subject of a global scandal.
We must be seen to be as determined to root out corruption and to bring
accountability to bear as these other parties are.
The Department of Defence has begun a fresh defence review process which
already appears problematic. The appointment of Tony Yengeni, one of the few
arrested and prosecuted around the previous arms deal, is an act of
breathtaking arrogance by an establishment that believes it is above the
law. This inquiry needs to change that belief once and for all.
With acknowledgements to Sunday Times.
So many questions, indeed.
But that was then.
Nearly four weeks later, neither the commissioner not the terms of reference
have been announced by the Minister of Justice.
Which was promised.
Indeed, there hasn't been a squeak from the presidency nor the department of
justice since then.
Maybe my affidavit will get its day in the Constitutional Court after all.
Beware the ides of November.