Mac: This is why M&G must be charged |
Publication |
Mail and Guardian |
Date | 2012-08-03 |
Reporter | Mac Maharaj |
Web Link | digital.olivesoftware.com |
Presidential spokesperson Mac Maharaj says the key part of his case is
that the paper broke the law
It is not surprising that the Mail & Guardian is so strident in condemning
the criminal charges levelled against it a s an “attack on the press”. If no
crime has been committed, why does it not let the matter take its course and let
the courts decide?
The police are investigating two charges against Sam Sole, Stefaans Brümmer, Nic
Dawes and the M&G (for brevity we shall refer to them as M&G): first, that the
M&G acquired confidential records unlawfully, in that these could only have been
stolen from where they were kept before they were handed to the M&G; and,
second, that the M&G was in contravention of section 41(6) of the National
Prosecuting Authority Act of 1998 for their part in the disclosing of such
information.
Editor Dawes insists that the charges represent an attack on press freedom, and
the NGO Right2Know (R2K) demands that President Jacob Zuma stop the police
pursuing the charges.
In recent debates Dawes and R2K have maintained that individual citizens are
sufficiently protected against media abuse by the laws of our country, including
the laws relating to defamation.
How can we take them seriously when they want us to conveniently ignore the
purpose served by the relevant provisions of the NPA Act relating to inquiries
held in terms of section 28 of the Act? The Act serves a very specific purpose
and in doing so seeks to counterbalance the intrusive measures contained in it
by stipulating that these inquiries be confidential. This means that you may not
steal that which is kept confidential and you may not disclose it. The M&G is in
violation of the NPA Act.
The limitations to press freedom arising from the NPA Act are reasonable and
justifiable. The right to press freedom is limited as much as almost all other
constitutional rights. It is a right that, in certain situations, may very well
be in competition with many other rights and the rights of other individuals.
In the present context the rule of law determines that you may not steal
confidential records and disclose the contents thereof. What but self-serving
motives explains the M&G’s resorting to the defence of media freedom when I
invoke the law and press charges?
Let us further scrutinise the stance of the M&G. Did the M&G acquire
confidential state records unlawfully? This, says Dawes, is irrelevant and
should not be investigated. In other words, the M&G considers itself above the
law.
I have always claimed that the principal crime committed was by those inside the
NPA and the Scorpions who leaked that information to some of the media. In
January 2004, Judge Hefer described this as a serious criminal offence when he
found it to have been established that officials of the NPA disseminated
confidential information.
Though the M&G is aware of this, it does not want the police to unearth that
cancer within a state institution. The
M&G claims it has a duty to protect its sources of information. Does this
protection extend to those who wilfully contravened the NPA Act and our laws?
This was not a whistleblower case.
The leaks were a calculated manipulated of the media for unlawful purposes. Some
media made themselves accessories to criminal acts. Did theM&G contravene
section 41(6) of the NPA Act? The M&G says this section is unconstitutional. It
is within its rights to make this contention, but it is for the co urts to
decide whether the claim is indeed valid.
To cap it all, R2K then demands that the president intervene to stop the police
from pursuing the charges. R2K unashamedly wants the executive to interfere in
the administration of the law without regard for whether such an act by t he
president would undermine our constitutional order.
There is a solid case for an active citizenry to enhance and protect our
freedoms.
But R2K undermines its own integrity because it places its self-serving
interests above the rights of others and spuriously calls on the president to do
something it knows it would not countenance in any other circumstances.
Unfortunately Dawes and R2K fail to see that they have become so consumed by the
defence of their own interests that they are blinded to the rights of others.
When it comes to practice, press freedom for them is absolute.But there are no
absolutes when the texts of rights from a printed page are applied to real-life
situations that more often than not require an exquisite act of balancing of
competing rights.
Could it be that when faced with the prospects of criminal charges against them,
the M&G has lost faith in our courts?
I hope this is not so. My prime concern remains the
abuse of power by the NPA in that instance.
With acknowledgements to
Mac Maharaj and Mail and Guardian.
The NPA abused its power by abandoning its case against this twerp's boss and
his benefactor IDMatics (a subsidiary of Thales).
And :
Me: This is why Mac must be charged
Again it is Thales International as the
corrupter and a local South African official as the corrupted.
The company IDMatics S.A. is owned by Thales International.
In summary IDMatics paid some 1,2 million French Francs (about the same in Rands)
into a Swiss bank account in the name of Minderley Investments registered in the
British Virgin Islands (BVI) which was owned and directed by Schabir Shaik. This
same amount of funds was transferred into another account at the same bank and
held by Zarina Maharaj, Mac Maharaj's wife.
Mac Maharaj was then Minister of Transport. The Department of Transport issued a
very large contract at that time for the Credit Card Driver's Licence project
where IDMatics was the foreign technology supplier and Schabir Shaik's Nkobi
Holdings was the local BEE partner.
Zarina Maharaj moved this payment of FF1,2 million through various intermediate
currencies and banks in Switzerland and the Isle of Man and eventually into a
joint bank account shared with Mac Maharaj.
The recording of this payment is made in a Contract written on IDMatics S.A.
stationery and signed by Alain Thetard, also the author of the Thales French
Encrypted Fax in the Arms Deal Corvette Combat Suite case. This Contract is
signed by Schabir Shaik as "Read and Approved".