Nkandla: Documents call Zuma's bluff

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
47,646
Reaction score
9,318
Location
Aboard the Nostalgia For Infinity
An M&G investigation reveals that President Jacob Zuma was kept up to date about developments and taxpayer money was used for his private homes.

President Jacob Zuma was provided with exhaustive details about progress on the security project at his Nkandla complex in November 2010, documents provided to the M&G Centre for Investigative Journalism on Thursday show. They cast doubt on his vehement denial in Parliament last week that he was unaware of the scale of construction.

The documents, which refer euphem*istically to the Nkandla expansion as "prestige project A", reveal how Zuma's supposed private contribution dwindled by half from more than R20-million to slightly more than R10-million, while the total costs more than doubled.

They also show that taxpayer money was also spent on buildings for the personal use of the Zuma family and not only for new, adjoining security infrastructure, as claimed by the department of public works when first confronted about the R250-million spent on Nkandla.

Also clear from the documents are the large contributions expected from the department of public works for the completion of buildings that Zuma told Parliament were entirely paid for by his family, particularly a new guest residence and two new private residences.

The documents also show that at least one minister became involved in the nitty-gritty of construction at the site after delays mounted.

Although the Mail & Guardian has been unable to verify all the documents independently, some of which are marked "top secret", the timing and some of the details corroborate information previously provided by a highly placed source.

Overseeing the work
Perhaps the most damning of the documents is a letter addressed to Zuma in which the then newly appointed public works minister, Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde, writes: "I have taken the view that it is prudent to update you on the progress of the above prestige project", before giving precise expected completion dates for 17 individual components of construction. The letter contains an even more detailed progress report from the project managers responsible for overseeing the work.

Last week Zuma told Parliament he was not aware of the cost of the security installation at Nkandla.

"What the government did, given its own considerations of security, was to build other houses beyond my home for the security personnel," he said during an off-the-cuff answer to questions. "These are not shown on television and these are really the government's houses, but I do not know how much they cost … Now, I do not know where this amount of money went to."

His answer to Parliament focused on three elements of the security upgrade: fencing, bulletproof windows and an underground bunker. But the documents show that he was also kept abreast of progress on a tuck shop, a sewerage treatment plant, the upgrading of water supplies and other elements.

Although the letter to Zuma does not include information about the costs involved, minutes of meetings and internal memos from the department of public works make it seem likely that the amounts would have been brought to his attention.

Bullet-resistant glass
Mahlangu-Nkabinde was not the only minister deeply involved in the project. In September 2010, her predecessor, Geoff Doidge, appears to have become involved in frantic attempts to fast-track the construction. In minutes of an emergency meeting held at the Nkandla site, Doidge complains about delays in the provision of bullet-resistant glass and the short time remaining for the completion of the interior design.

Changing the public works minister in mid-stride did not prevent high-level continuity of the project – director general Siviwe Dongwana attended both the site meeting with Doidge and later prepared at least one memo to brief Mahlangu-Nkabinde on the issue.

If Zuma's statement that he was ignorant of the costs is accepted, it would imply that neither Doidge nor Mahlangu-Nkabinde considered it worth mentioning that, at the time, the estimated project cost had already exceeded R100-million. A memo also shows that an internal security director in the presidency was involved in the original scoping of the security work, further expanding the pool of people who had access to Zuma and, possibly, a duty to inform him of the cost implications.

600x600


Although instructions from the president are never mentioned, a nervousness about the delays – which also delayed building work being done by Zuma's contractors – is evident. "On or about the end of June 2010, it became evident that some of the major activities related to the security installation had not progressed to the extent as was originally envisaged," one public works memo states.

Among the sticking points were that a specialist security consultant had not yet been appointed for the work, 10 months after the project was initiated. Such delays would eventually see Doidge, and others, including surgeon general Veejay Ramlakan, become personally involved in window-frame lead times, expediting the delivery of sections of fencing and establishing how much water would be required for the festive season.

Large contributions
From the leaked documents available and the financial details in the latest documents, it seems that the total cost of construction escalated from R111.3-million in the later part of 2010 to R248-million during 2012.

The documents show that the department of public works was expected to make large contributions for the completion of three residences that Zuma told Parliament were entirely paid for by his family.

These residences were expected to cost R19.4-million, of which the department was going to pay R6.5-million. It would also pay for the bulk of the earthworks and stormwater drains around the new residences.

As of late 2010, Zuma was expected to pay a total of R22.6-million towards the improvements. But in the face of the steadily escalating costs of the project, Zuma's overall contribution appears to have been revised down to R10.6-million.

Shortly before the Mail & Guardian went to print, presidential spokesperson Mac Maharaj referred all questions to public works.

The two previous public works ministers could not be reached for comment.

Sally Evans and Lionel Faull work for the M&G Centre for Investigative Journalism (amaBhungane)

Link.

He really seems to like lying in Parliament.
 
Zoooma should remain our leader for as long as he possibly can muster, another 20 years would be good. He has successfully raped and pillaged the system - there's not much left for his personal gain. If a new leader is elected, then the enrichment cycle would begin afresh. Viva!!!!

The president creating a precedence.
 
Is it not a criminal offence to lie to parliament?

Why is exactly why Pierre de Vos at Constitutionally Speaking has requested that the Public Protector investigate.

Nkandla: why an open and transparent approach is needed

The controversy around the funding of the recent upgrades of President Jacob Zuma’s private homestead at Nkandla goes to the heart of our democracy, which is safeguarded, in part, by requiring a large degree of openness, transparency and accountability from public office bearers and from our government. That is why I requested the Public Protector to confirm that President Zuma did not breach the Executive Ethics Code when he told the National Assembly that his family was paying for all but the security-related upgrades at Nkandla.

In February 1891 Louis Brandeis, who later served with distinction on the US Supreme Court, wrote a letter to his fiancé, expressing an interest in writing a “a sort of companion piece” to his influential article on “The Right to Privacy”. In this article, he wrote, he would focus on “The Duty of Publicity.” He had been thinking, he wrote, “about the wickedness of people shielding wrongdoers & passing them off (or at least allowing them to pass themselves off) as honest men.” He then proposed a remedy: “If the broad light of day could be let in upon men’s actions, it would purify them as the sun disinfects.” In 1913 he rephrased this thought, famously writing that “sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants”.

One might well think that Justice Brandeis held a rather too bleak and pessimistic view of human nature. But as the Watergate scandal, and (more recently) the scandal around the absence of “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq illustrate, there might be good reasons to distrust the powerful men and women in government and big business. While a lack of transparency and accountability by the powerful does not necessarily lead to corruption, abuse of power and illegality, the sunlight of open, transparent and accountable government will almost always prevent it.

Unfortunately the responsible Minister, the President and the President’s spin doctor have not dealt with the upgrade of President Jacob Zuma’s Nkandla homestead in an open, transparent and accountable manner. When the media reported that more than R200 million of public funds are being spent on upgrades at Nkandla, the Minister of Public Works (invoking an apartheid era law) refused to provide a breakdown of the cost. Similarly, while President Zuma told the National Assembly that his family is paying for all the non-security related upgrades at Nkandla and that he is still paying back a bond taken out to finance the previous phase of the building project in 2000, he refused to provide either relevant details or any proof to back up his statements.

If the Minister and the Presidency had come clean from the start and if they had told the South African public exactly how much were being spent at Nkandla and which portion was being financed by the state and which proportion by the President, the media and the South African public might long since have moved on. Yes, it might well be that complete openness and transparency would have embarrassed the government. After all, there is evidence that the cost of the state sponsored “security” upgrade far exceeds the amount allowed by the Ministerial Handbook and that the budget for the state financed part of the project is suspiciously inflated. But this embarrassment would have been less harmful to the government and to President Zuma than the lingering controversy we sit with now. Those of us who are members of the chattering classes — with our notoriously short attention spans — might well have expressed our outrage at the time, but we would soon have found something else to worry about. (Spy tapes anyone?)

Because the Minister and the Presidency prevented the sunlight from shining on the financing of the Nkandla upgrade, some people became ever more suspicious. Because of the absence of openness and transparency, the scandal festered. In fact, the scandal was fed by the vague and as yet unsubstantiated claims made by the Minister (that the State only paid for security enhancements at Nkandla and that the R240 million price tag was not correct) and claims made by President Zuma (that his family was paying for all non-security related building work at Nkandla and that he was still paying off an as yet unnamed bond registered over Nkandla).

It is against this background that I requested the Public Protector to shine some light on President Zuma’s claims to the National Assembly about the financing of the non-security related parts of the building at Nkandla. The Public Protector is already investigating the State sponsored “security” related aspects of the upgrade. When President Zuma angrily told the National Assembly that he and his family were paying for all non-security related building work at Nkandla and that he had registered a bond over Nkandla which he is still paying back, he opened the door for such an investigation.

This is because the Executive Members’ Ethics Act of 1998 empowers the Public Protector to investigate all alleged breaches of the Executive Ethics Code. Section 3.2 of this Code states that Members of the Executive may not wilfully mislead the legislature to which they are accountable; or act in a way that is inconsistent with their position; or use their position or any information entrusted to them, to enrich themselves or improperly benefit any other person; or use information received in confidence in the course of their duties otherwise than in connection with the discharge of their duties; or expose themselves to any situation involving the risk of a conflict between their official responsibilities and their private interests.

Section 3.1 of the Code requires every member of the Executive to declare all his or her personal or private financial or business interest, while section 4.1 of the Code further prohibits the members of the Executive from soliciting or accepting a gift or benefit. Section 5.1 of the Code further requires every member of the Executive – including the President – to disclose to the Secretary particulars of all their financial interests.

It may well be that the Code was strictly adhered to. After all, it would be foolish for the President to mislead the National Assembly, as the risk of being caught out is high. However, because of the lack of openness and transparency on the part of the Minister and the Presidency, it is impossible to know this for certain.

This uncertainty was caused by the fact that City Press could not find evidence of a bond having been registered over Nkandla and because no information has been made available about which aspects of the Nkandla upgrade are being paid for by the State and which aspects President Zuma is paying for. Given the fact that the first phase of the building works at Nkandla was partly funded by various benefactors of the President as well as — indirectly — by a bribe solicited by Schabir Shaik from an arms-deal company, questions are being raised about whether all the non-security related building work at Nkandla are indeed being funded by the President and his family as claimed.

I would be delighted if the Public Protector in due course finds that the President and his family are indeed paying for all the upgrades at Nkandla and that a bond was indeed registered over Nkandla as claimed. But given the lack of openness and transparency about the matter and in the absence of an investigation by the Public Protector, the questions and uncertainties will never be addressed and will linger on, like a septic wound. A Public Protector investigation will allow an appropriate amount of sunlight to shine on the affair, thus serving as a disinfectant against all the suspicions now hanging in the air.

I would think the Presidency would welcome such an investigation. After all, when Mac Maharaj declined to provide details of the bond registered over Nkandla, he indicated that the Presidency would be willing to provide details of such a bond to the appropriate legal authority. That legal authority is the Public Protector. Unfortunately, in the absence of a firm and principled commitment by the President to openness, transparency and accountability, only the Public Protector will be able to ensure that the disinfectant of openness and transparency does its salutary work.

I wonder how far that will get?
 
Although the Mail & Guardian has been unable to verify all the documents independently, some of which are marked "top secret", the timing and some of the details corroborate information previously provided by a highly placed source.

Really? Top secret? Other countries use that when assasinating people or going on clandestine raids. We use it to build houses and lie.. Viva!
 
And yet.. people vote for these idiots. It's so blatant he is ripping everyone in SA, "stealing" houses/food from the poor..
 
Loving how old prime corrupt is painting himself into a corner with his corruption and lies. Impeach him and get it over with already, we deserve a better leader that this old thief.
 
Loving how old prime corrupt is painting himself into a corner with his corruption and lies. Impeach him and get it over with already, we deserve a better leader that this old thief.
"We" ?? Many people still support this useless, ignorant and most of all, totally morally corrupt JZ still.
He belongs the rest of his life under the good care of Correctional Services, together with all the other present ministers, DGs, Members of Parliament of his misruling corrupt party and all other senior ANC politicians. If you are still a senior member of that organisation by now, you have not distanced yourself publicly from all this self serving thuggery, you should be regarded as rotten to the bone as the rest.
 
Talk Radio 702 - The Best Of John Robbie

Cathy Powell, Senior Lecturer in Public Law at UCT, was on the radio to talk about which ‘authorised agency’ or ‘institution empowered by the law of the land’ Mac Maharaj may have been referring to in his promise to prove the President has a bond on his Nkandla home. She said the President doesn’t have a bond, there is no bond registered in the bond office. She speculated that maybe Mac must mean that the President has a private loan.

http://www.pod702.co.za/podcast/bestofjohn/20121121JRBESTOF.mp3

She says he cannot have a bond, because all bonds are public information.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X