When President Jacob Zuma was still being investigated by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), his supporters often claimed with some conviction that there was a conspiracy against him. Although they never claimed that the evidence – on which basis his then financial advisor, Schabir Shaik, was convicted of bribing him – was in fact fabricated, they did claim that the NPA were being abused by President Thabo Mbeki or those close to him to neutralise Zuma politically.
Although no hard evidence exist about the alleged abuse of power, circumstantial evidence suggest that there may very well have been some political interference in the NPA, first to ensure that Zuma was not prosecuted, then to ensure that he would be prosecuted and then finally to have the charges against him dropped.
After all, Shaik, who has recently risen like Jesus from his death bed (perhaps with the assistance of Goji berries), was prosecuted while Mr Zuma was at first not prosecuted. Later Zuma was prosecuted while many others implicated in the arms deal scandal (include Shaik’s brother Chippy) were not pursued.
When charges were dropped against Zuma after edited snippets of illegally obtained transcripts of telephone conversations between the head of the Scorpions and a former National Director of the NPA were submitted to the NPA by Zuma’s lawyer, many Zuma supporters demanded that the alleged abuses of power by NPA be investigated. The SACP, for example, demanded that:
- All those found to have been responsible for abuse of state institutions must be immediately brought to book, irrespective of the position they occupy or may have occupied, even if the highest office in the land, in order to ensure that such things never ever happen again in our country.
- Parliament must call the NPA and any other state institutions that may be found to have transgressed the law to fully account for their actions.
One of President Zuma’s key supporters, Mathews Phosa, made a similar demand. As the Mail & Guardian reported at the time, Phosa said:
“I call on the NPA to immediately institute an objective review, not a witch hunt … in cases within which similar actions might have negatively impacted on the rights of innocent South Africans,” Phosa told a breakfast hosted by the Progressive Business Forum at Gallagher Estate in Midrand.
“There exists a strong perception that Mr Zuma is not the only victim of this vicious, vicious misuse of power and authority, and this perception should be clarified forthwith,” Phosa said. He appealed to South Africans to “move on” however he added that in order to move forward as a nation the country could not “sweep the misuse of power under the carpet”.
I was therefore shocked when President Zuma said during his disastrous interview on ETV last week that he would not call for any investigation into a claimed abuse of power within the NPA relating to the corruption case against him. He claimed that as he was involved in the case it would not be proper for him to make any decision on an investigation and tried (rather clumsily and in an embarrassing manner) to pass the buck by saying that this was not his problem but the previous President’s problem: “These are the questions you should have asked the president then.”
A few questions arise from this response.
First, when will the SACP and Phosa issue angry statements condemning President Zuma for wanting to sweep the alleged abuse of power by the NPA under the carpet? Will Phosa and Blade Nzimande resign from the cabinet in disgust at this implicit condonation of abuse of power by the NPA? If they do not, would we be justified in concluding that they have no principles?
Second, why has the President now decided not to have the charges of an abuse of power by the NPA investigated? Surely, as President, he should be concerned about such things and about the possible breaking of the law? Might it be because he had purported to appoint Menzi Simelane as NDPP and thus now believes that Simelane will protect him and do his bidding (as Simelane has himself said he would). Does the President now believe that the alleged abuse of power by the NPA is not such a bad thing – as long as it occurs to protect him and his supporters and not to prosecute him?
Third, if the President really believes, as he claimed, that he cannot order an investigation because he was personally involved in the case of alleged abuse of power by the NPA, how come he then appointed Simelane as NDPP? Should he not have recused himself from making a decision about who should serve as NDPP, seeing that Simelane might well still be involved in a decision about his case? Will he apply the same principle that he has now enunciated when he is called upon to decide on granting a pardon to the man who was convicted of bribing him and if he would not, would we be justified in concluding that our President has no principles whatsoever?
Lastly, if the President really believes that his government should not or cannot take any action regarding anything that happened during the time of a predecessor (as he claimed on ETV), how on earth would his government ever be able to correct the mistakes of the previous government? Surely he was elected at Polokwane exactly to correct the mistakes of the Mbeki era? Now he claims his government cannot deal with something that happened under Mbeki, which seems like an extraordinary abdication of responsibility. Does this mean he is fundamentally reneging on the promises made to all the delegates who voted for him at Polokwane?
It seems to me some kind of inquiry into the alleged abuses of power by the NPA is drastically needed so that we can find out – as the SACP rightly said – whether such abuses did occur and (perhaps more importantly) how we can prevent such abuses from happening again. Without an investigation trust in the NPA would not be restored.
The reluctance of the President to launch such an independent investigation will give credence to the views of those who believe that the “abuse of power” claim was something cooked up by Zuma to avoid the fate of his former financial advisor. It will also leave South Africans with the serious worry that Zuma might not in principle be opposed to the abuse of the NPA for political purposes, and that he will engage in the same kind of abuse of the NPA that he accused former President Mbeki of.
Prof: you’ve been posted for hours and still no comments. Starting to wonder if folks aren’t a little worried about speaking their mind… self censorship et al. awareness and fear of modern technological intelligence ops; is this possible? Do they have time, or the ability… I suppose we should ask Mo
As an aside: I noted that our charming Pres, JZ, in one of his announcements, stated that He expects teachers to teach for seven hours a day. Does this mean that we can expect within his chaotic administration, longer school hours, which is decidedly a good idea. The primary children get out about 12.30 or 1 pm, the hoerskool by 2, if a class C. Not only do our precious children get into much mischief during these hours following early release, but those who pray on children, do also.
What a waste of precious time for students with these shorter hours. Long long ago when I was in school, in one of those fabulously free and truly democratic western societies, capitalist, whatever, where racism hardly ever arose, although it existed somewhat subdued, I recall starting school at 7.45 am, and finishing at 4.45 pm, then an enforced hour for extra curriculum (sports, arts, etc) before supper, then supervised 2 hrs homework. And yes, canings, if you didn’t know your stuff the following day.
In my mind, there is one answer for South Africa, and it will likely take two generations. And that answer is significantly improved education, which takes more hours than our teachers are presently willing to give. Otherwise, I’m going fishing, or voicing a treatise like Lao Tzu from some border crossing while exiting.
Sirjay, and as you cross that river, like Uncle Lao did, please leave the empty boat behind, so I can use it too … lol … this post reminds me of those who decide to be undecided. There are still only three ways to make up our minds: 1. people do it, 2. time does it and 3. we do it ourselves. Which category will JZ finally fall into Sirjay?
Is Pierre starting to absolve Mbeki of any wrong-doing in the ‘painful matter of the court proceedings of the ANC president, comrade Jacob Zuma’?
Reads like it!
Khosi, no, I have always been agnostic about claims of abuse of power, maintaining that it does look strange that Zuma was first not prosecuted (but we were told there is a prima facie case against him, thus tainting him with the corruption tag) and then prosecuted while others were not when his political fortunes did not wane. At the same time I have maintained that there is no hard evidence of political interference in the decision to prosecute him (unlike in the Jackie Selebi case where such evidence were exposed by the Ginwala inquiry) and that the veracity of the evidence on which basis Shaik was convicted of bribing Zuma have not been challenged by anyone. That is why I think some investigation by an independent body (not by politicians, but perhaps by a retired judge like Chaskalson or Langa) to look at the independence of the NPA and the possible abuses of the NPA by politicians is needed to restore trust in that institution. This will not happen because such an investigation will then have to look at the way in which charges were dropped against our President and would have to recommend criminal investigation and prosecution of President Zuma’s lawyer, Michael Hulley, and others involved in receiving the classified transcripts as well as those members of the intelligence services who provided the transcripts illegally.
“He claimed that as he was involved in the case it would not be proper for him to make any decision on an investigation”
If that is the case, it would be just as inappropriate for the President to make any decision regarding Shaik’s pardon.
Oom Jacob appoints homophobe and long time supporter, Jon Qwelane, as ambassador to Uganda (where gayness is to be punishable by death). Ha ha hooooo…. sob.
http://www.news24.com/Content/SouthAfrica/Politics/1057/a5bcbf7c70ed4d20be3a3fa0807c26d0/19-01-2010-12-27/Qwelane_not_the_right_envoy
Spot on Pierre. Mr Zuma is not going to live that interview down for a long while yet, not that he cares. No investiagtion will ever happen. The allegations served their purpose in the battle to get Mr Zuma elected and as you say – he has almost promised to keep on doing what his predecessor got up to by appointing Mr Simelane as NDPP.
@ Peter
Bro, Jon Qwelane is the perfect candidate for the relevant position. If we send a gay proponent to Uganda then we would be like people who send as ambassador to USA a man who believes in negotiating with terrorists when the US do not. The sole purpose of “ambassadorship” in my opinion is to forge relationships with other countries and not alienate them. South Africa as a state does not have a legal right to intefere in the domestic affairs of Uganda which is a sovereign state and not a South African protectorate or colony…
Sine you should be ashamed of that statement! In South Africa the constitution governs all Government action. Sending a known homophobe to a country which the UN and decent countries are lobbying for the removal of such an abhorent Bill suggests that the Presidency and the Department of International Relations thinks that the constitution is piss.
This is a deplorable act. People who are openly homophobic should see their careers end in ignoble ruin – NOT be rewarded with a Government posting.
What make Tony Leon suitable for Argentina? Is it his DA credentials? He opposed almost half the bills that came before parliament and that makes him a suitable representative and a spokesperson for us in Argentina.
@ Mpho
“People who are openly homophobic should see their careers end in ignoble ruin – NOT be rewarded with a Government posting.”
Would that not amount to discrimination against those who are not gay and are not proponents of gays? Are we then not infringing on their rights?
Sine says:
January 19, 2010 at 14:32 pm
It seems that what we need is for open public scrutiny, maybe before a parliamentary grilling for senior public officials, before they are appointed.
I am gonna watch for a falling star and make that wish!
@ Sine, is that really the best retort you could come up with?
Bias at the NPA strikes at the heart of the equal protections clause.
Remind me quickly, what does S179 (4) of the Constitution provide?
Gwebe is right.
Leon proved his racism with the notorious “Fight Black” campaign.
I cannot explain why Cmd Zuma appointed him.
I demand that Cmd Malema lead a delegation to Buenos Aires to look into this.
I have, on occasion, visited this site, attracted by some interesting posts, as well as the subsequent comments. Reading the most important questions elaborated by Mr Fassbender, in regard to the appointment of Mr Leon (very spanish surname) to his post in Argentina, I could not resist the temptation of assisting with some possible answers. I know, thanks to some reliable sources, that Mr Leon dances tango extremely well. This, in Argentina, is a must, as this country has contributed to the cultural patrimony of mankind with this fantastic and exquisite dance. it is said that even “Camarada” Stalin used to practice one or two steps now and then, taking a break from his heavy duties of conducting a war, collective training and family planning, but it could be nothing more than an anecdote. Camarada (or “Comandante”?) Zuma, a very enthusiastic dancer himself as we all know, might have considered this for Mr Leon’s appointment. CamaradaMalema (or “Comandante?”), on the other hand, might not be very suited to the task since, I have been told, he is “wood challenged”, and tango demands exquisite flexibility and precision without any room for ambiguities. Besides, “argentinos” (argentinians) are kind of addicted to “mate” (MAH-te), which is an infusion of dry leaves, drank very hot and tastes bitter. The bitter, the better. It is consumed at all hours, as breakfast, instead of coffee, tea time, etc. The meaning of “mate” is infusion, because the literal translation of the english equivalent word is “kill”, and I heard this could elicit some reactions on CamaradaMalema, leading to a completely avoidable media misinterpretation.
I hope this humble contribution, could somehow assit to clarify your questions.
@ Mpho
You lowered the standard of this discussion by your statement that I have quoted above in my post to which you respond. Raise your socks and I will raise mine. You cannot expect me to argue intellectually against un-intellectual submissions.