Regard must be had to the higher standard of conduct expected from public officials, and the number of falsehoods that have been put forward by the Public Protector in the course of the litigation. This conduct included the numerous “misstatements”, like misrepresenting, under oath, her reliance on evidence of economic experts in drawing up the report, failing to provide a complete record, ordered and indexed, so that the contents thereof could be determined, failing to disclose material meetings and then obfuscating the reasons for them and the reasons why they had not been previously disclosed, and generally failing to provide the court with a frank and candid account of her conduct in preparing the report. The punitive aspect of the costs order therefore stands.
Today the Mail & Guardian published details of what it claims is the provisional Report of the Public Protector on the spending of more than R200 million of public funds on President Jacob Zuma’s private home at Nkandla. One of the most shocking and scandalous aspects of this report is that the Public Protectors draft report allegedly found that President Zuma lied to Parliament (and hence to the nation) about the use of public funds for his personal enrichment.
The newspaper claims that the provisional report finds that President Jacob Zuma has derived “substantial” personal benefit from works that exceeded security needs at his Nkandla homestead and must repay the state, public protector Thuli Madonsela has provisionally found: a swimming pool, visitors’ centre, amphitheatre, cattle kraal, marquee area, extensive paving and new houses for relocated relatives were all improperly included in the security upgrade at “enormous cost” to the taxpayer, Madonsela is alleged to have found.
Here is the original speech made by President Zuma in the National Assembly in which he claimed the state only paid for security enhancements at Nkandla.BACK TO TOP