NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 27 AUGUST 2021

DUE DATE: 10 SEPTEMBER 2021

2009. Ms D Kohler (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) (a) What are the details of the (i) charges a certain person (name furnished – Graham Engel) faced and (ii) suspension the specified person was on for three years, (b) on what date were the hearings held, (c) what is the name of the person who carried out the investigation, (d) on what date was the investigation concluded, (e) what was the outcome of the investigation and (f) what internal steps were taken after the investigation was concluded;

(2) whether the person was suspended prior to the specified three-year suspension; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the full details of the various suspensions;

(3) whether a certain person (name furnished) handed the top secret Spy Tapes to the specified person; if not, what is the name of the person who then handed the tapes to a certain other person (name also furnished); if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) whether the Spy Tapes were encrypted; if not, why not; if so, how did the person listen to them?

NW2245E

REPLY

(1) (a) No charge sheet was ever issued to the person.

(b) The person was suspended in December 2010, and his suspension was lifted in October 2013.

(c) The recommendation to charge the person with misconduct was never approved, so no hearing was held.

(d) The investigation was conducted by a multi-disciplinary investigation team that was appointed in 2010.

(e) The final investigation report was submitted in August 2012.

(f) The report was never approved and therefore no disciplinary hearings were held.

(2) The State Security Agency has no record of any previous suspensions of the person.

(3) There is no official record that any member of State Security Agency (SSA) handed over the ‘spy tapes’ to the specified person.

(4) Since the SSA has no official record that any of its members handed over the tapes to the specified person, SSA has no knowledge as to whether the ‘spy tapes’ were encrypted or not.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 27 AUGUST 2021

DUE DATE: 10 SEPTEMBER 2021

2010. Ms D Kohler (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) What is the (a) total number of acting positions at the State Security Agency in each province and (b) longest term that an employee has been in an acting position in each province;

(2) whether all the persons filling acting positions are paid an acting allowance; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what is the amount in each month;

(3) what is the total number of (a) disciplinary cases held in (i) 2019, (ii) 2020 and (iii) since 1 January 2021 in each province, (b) members who were dismissed in each province as a result of disciplinary cases and (c) those whom had criminal charges laid against them?

NW2246E

REPLY

(1)(a) There are four acting positions in provincial offices in total, one each in Gauteng, Limpopo, Northern Cape and North West.

(1)(b) The longest timeframe during which an employee has acted has been for five (5) months in Gauteng. The member however will only receive acting allowance for three (3) months as the position only became vacant on 31 June 2021.

(2) Not all persons filling acting positions are paid an acting allowance; only those who occupy a vacant funded post after 44 consecutive working days acting, backdated to the day of appointment, are paid an acting allowance. The acting allowance payment is for 12 months, thereafter the Executive Authority is the only one who can make a further appointment or appoint another member to act for a further 12 months.

The exact amount each month depends on the post levels of the acting capacities. However, the monthly amounts regarding the above cases are tabulated below:

 (3)(a)(i) In 2019, two disciplinary cases were held in respect of members of the provinces. The members were stationed in KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng.

(3)(a)(ii) In 2020, no disciplinary cases were held in respect of members of the provinces.

(3)(a)(iii) Since January 2021, no disciplinary cases have been held in respect of members of the provinces.

(3)(b) In 2019, one member of the provinces was dismissed after a disciplinary hearing. The member was stationed at the KwaZulu-Natal provincial office.

(3)(c) No members of the provinces had criminal charges laid against them in 2019, 2020 and since January 2021.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 27 AUGUST 2021

DUE DATE: 10 SEPTEMBER 2021

2028. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether, with reference to Recommendation 2.3 of the Report of the High-Level Review Panel on the State Security Agency published in December 2018, he appointed a task team to unpack the recommendations of the Panel into a concrete plan of action, co-ordinate the recommended reviews and oversee the implementation of their outcomes; if not, (a) why not and (b) by what date does he intend to appoint the task team; if so, (i) on which date was the task team appointed, (ii) what are the (aa) names and (bb) professional (aaa) designations and (bbb) qualifications of each person serving on the task team, (iii) what are the terms of reference of the task team and (iv) by what date is the task team expected to complete its work?

NW2265E

REPLY

The task team was appointed on 28 July 2020.

The names, professional designations and qualifications are classified and privileged in accordance with Section 10 (4) (a) of the Intelligence Services Act 65 of 2002, as amended, which protects identities of members of the Agency.

The terms of reference are classified.

The Task Team had originally been scheduled to complete its work by 31 January 2021. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the work could not be completed. A revised date will be determined in consultation with myself.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 3 SEPTEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 17 SEPTEMBER 2021

2103. Ms D Kohler (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether the newly promoted specified person has Top Secret Security Clearance; if not; what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether the person has been subpoenaed to appear before the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture; if not; what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?

NW2387E

REPLY

1. The person does not have Top Secret Security Clearance. The vetting process is incomplete due to an outstanding polygraph test.

2. The State Security Agency (SSA) has no record of a subpoena from the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture concerning the member in question.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 3 SEPTEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 17 SEPTEMBER 2021

2070. Ms D Kohler (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(3) Whether a certain person (name furnished – Graham Engel) who was on suspension for three years and who has been promoted has Top Secret Security Clearance; if not, what is the position in this case; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) whether the newly promoted person has been subpoenaed to appear before the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture to investigate allegations of state capture, corruption, fraud, and other allegations in the public sector including organs of state; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?

NW2306E

REPLY

1.     The person does not have Top Secret Security Clearance. The vetting process remains incomplete due to an outstanding polygraph test.

2.     The State Security Agency (SSA) has no record of a subpoena from the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture concerning the member in question.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 3 SEPTEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 17 SEPTEMBER 2021

2103. Ms D Kohler (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(5) Whether the newly promoted specified person has Top Secret Security Clearance; if not; what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(6) whether the person has been subpoenaed to appear before the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture; if not; what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?

NW2387E

REPLY

3. The person does not have Top Secret Security Clearance. The vetting process is incomplete due to an outstanding polygraph test.

4. The State Security Agency (SSA) has no record of a subpoena from the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture concerning the member in question.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 3 SEPTEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 17 SEPTEMBER 2021

2104. Ms D Kohler (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether he signed off on the (a) return and/or (b) promotion of a certain person (name furnished – Graham Engel) to the State Security Agency; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so,

(2) whether he has been informed of the position of the specified person in terms of the illegal Principal Agent Network (PAN) together with a certain person (name furnished) and his three-year suspension period; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the reasons that he would sign off on the person's return;

(3) whether he has ordered a Special Investigating Unit (SIU) probe into the allegations of mass looting through the PAN; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(4) whether he has referred the matter surrounding the specified persons for investigation by the SIU, if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

NW2388E

REPLY

(1)(a) The person was suspended in December 2010 for allegations of serious misconduct, pending the outcome of a disciplinary process. In August 2012, the final Investigation Report was submitted to the then Acting Director-General in the State Security Agency.

In October 2013, the then State Security Agency Director-General directed that the person’s suspension be lifted, which was duly done. The person has not been placed on suspension since then.

(1)(b) The person was promoted to the level of General Manager as part of the batch of Senior Management appointments approved by the former Minister of State Security in 2021.

(2) Yes. The person’s involvement formed part of the findings of the High Level Review Panel. The report of the High Level Review Panel was submitted to the then Minister of State Security. In October 2013, the then Director-General of State Security Agency directed that the suspension of the person be lifted, which was duly done.

(3) The Special Investigating Unit (SIU) was not ordered to probe into the allegations. The High Level Review Panel Report recommended that “…forensic and other investigations by the competent authorities into the breaches of financial and other controls identified by some of the information available to the Panel and other investigations, especially with regard to the PAN project and SO, leading to disciplinary and/or criminal prosecutions” should be instituted urgently. The Agency is currently in a process of appointing a firm to conduct the forensic investigations as per the recommendation of the High Level Review Panel.

(4) The matter surrounding the specified persons has not been referred to the Special Investigating Unit (SIU). As indicated, the Agency is currently in a process of appointing a firm to investigate these matters as per the recommendation of the High Level Review Panel.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 3 SEPTEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 17 SEPTEMBER 2021

2144. Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether, with reference to Recommendation 2.7.6(a) of the Report of the High Level Review Panel on the State Security Agency that was published in December 2018, he initiated the process to review the current legislative provisions with regard to the powers of the Minister responsible for State Security as they relate to the administration of the security services in the Republic; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

NW2434E

REPLY

The process of reviewing the various pieces of intelligence legislation is currently underway. The powers of the Member of the Executive responsible for State Security as they relate to the administration of the security services in the Republic will be considered during this review process as per the recommendations of the High Level Review Panel.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 3 SEPTEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 17 SEPTEMBER 2021

2145. Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether, with reference to Recommendation 2.7.6(b) of the Report of the High Level Review Panel on the State Security Agency published in December 2018, he intends to introduce amending legislation to follow a similar process as is currently being undertaken for the appointment of the National Director of Public Prosecutions in the appointment of heads of security services in the Republic; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

NW2435E

REPLY

The High Level Review Panel (HLRP) report recommended that a Task Team be appointed to develop the recommendations into a concrete plan of action. It also recommended that consideration be given to the recommendations in Chapter 13 of the National Development Plan with regard to the appointment of heads of services. The Task Team is studying the options proposed by the HLRP and the outcome of its deliberations will be fed into the review of intelligence legislation that is underway.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 3 SEPTEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 17 SEPTEMBER 2021

2146. Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether, with reference to Recommendation 2.7.6(c) of the Report of the High Level Review Panel on the State Security Agency published in December 2018, any serious consequences, including, where appropriate, disciplinary and/or criminal prosecution, for those involved in illegal activity have emanated from the findings of the Panel and of the investigation of the Inspector General of Intelligence into the Special Operations and related matters; if not, in each case, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case?

NW2436E

REPLY

The State Security Agency (SSA) has just completed the appointment of an independent forensic firm to investigate all suspected cases of malfeasance, corruption and criminality in the SSA. This includes, but is not limited to, those revealed in the High Level Panel Report or the Inspector-General of Intelligence Report. This will assist in determining what criminal prosecution or disciplinary steps need to be taken.

The process to appoint the forensic firm had reached an advanced stage, but had to be restarted when the preferred service provider declined the offer. Ligwa Advisory Services has now been appointed with effect from 2 November 2021 to conduct forensic investigations into malfeasance, corruption and criminality in the SSA.

The SSA is also committed to assist the NPA Investigating Directorate in any of its investigations.

In addition to any matters referred for criminal prosecution, internal disciplinary steps will be taken against all individuals implicated in wrongdoing.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 10 SEPTEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 24 SEPTEMBER 2021

2191. Ms D Kohler (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether the (a) Deputy Minister in The Presidency for State Security, Mr N G Kodwa, (b) acting Director-General of State Security, Ambassador G Msimanga and (c) Head of the (i) domestic branch, Adv M S Muofhe and (ii) foreign branch, Mr R McBride, have top secret security clearances; if not, in each case, (aa) why not and (bb) by when will each specified person obtain a top secret security clearance; if so, on which date did each person obtain a top security clearance?

NW2405E

REPLY

(a) No. In terms of the Minimum Information Security Standards (MISS), Chapter 5 paragraph 1.5, the Deputy Minister is not required to go through a vetting process.

(b) Acting Director-General of State Security, Ambassador G Msimanga obtained top secret security clearance in 2021. The clearance certificate is dated 2021/09/11.

(c)(i) Adv M S Muofhe obtained top secret security clearance in 2019. The clearance certificate is dated 2019/06/03.

(c)(ii) Mr R McBride obtained top secret security clearance in 2020. The clearance cerificate is dated 2020/07/14.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 10 SEPTEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 24 SEPTEMBER 2021

2242. Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether, with reference to his announcement on 5 August 2021 that he was doing away with the Ministry of State Security and that the political responsibility for the State Security Agency (SSA) would be placed in The Presidency, the centralisation of control of the SSA in The Presidency is a permanent arrangement; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether his decision to place political responsibility for the SSA in The Presidency is supported by policy and/or by any publicly available investigations into the SSA; if not, what considerations motivated his decision; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) what safeguards have been put in place to prevent him and/or any future president of the Republic from subverting the purpose of the SSA to ill-intent?

NW2547E

REPLY

(1) The decision to place political responsibility for the State Security Agency (SSA) in the Presidency was made to realign its work properly with the objectives of our developmental state. This decision may be reviewed from time to time based on the circumstances and another member of Cabinet may be designated to assume political responsibility as stated in our Constitution. Our objective is to implement the recommendations that have been set out in the High Level Review Panel (HLRP) Report. To that extent, we aim to repurpose and reposition the SSA to be an intelligence service that will effectively serve the interests of the people of South Africa.

(2) The Constitution provides that the President as head of the national executive can assume political responsibility for the control and direction of the intelligence services. The HLRP into the SSA also considered this matter in line with South African precedent on whether there is a need for a Minister to oversee and drive the civilian intelligence services. Furthermore, international best practice was considered as many countries around the world do not have a Minister for intelligence services, but rather have the heads of those agencies reporting to the head of government or head of state in certain instances.

The strategic intention is to enable the intelligence services to optimally carry out the policy imperatives and objectives of a developmental state. To this end, we want to instil confidence in the work of the SSA, to protect and to professionalise the intelligence services, and to enable it to perform its mandate in a non-partisan manner.

(3) A professionalised state security will ensure that the service and its officers abide by and remain true to the Constitution and ensure allegiance to the nation. Furthermore, the process to strengthen the checks and balances as well as oversight mechanisms is ongoing to ensure further that the SSA is not vulnerable to ill intent.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 19 NOVEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 3 DECEMBER 2021

2534. Ms D Kohler (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether he intends to reverse the alleged irregular promotion of 26 managers at the State Security Agency (SSA), as their promotion process was allegedly in contravention of employment regulations and in defiance of the Director-General’s refusal to recommend the appointments; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether he intends to address the situation where at least 40 operatives have been recruited by the SSA without any criteria and who are now allegedly disgruntled as they have not been placed in positions they were promised; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(3) whether he intends to address the alleged widespread abuse of the SSA’s recruitment system by politically connected who are also allegedly practising nepotism; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

NW2957E

REPLY

(1) The matter relating to the alleged irregular promotion of 26 managers at the State Security Agency has been referred to the Public Service Commission (PSC) to conduct an independent evaluation of the processes that were followed. A Report of the PSC will be considered and the appropriate action will be taken.

(2) Recruitment of operatives by the State Security Agency is an intelligence operational matter. Accordingly, it remains classified and privileged in accordance with Section 10 of the Intelligence Services Act 65 of 2002. This matter can best be dealt with at the Parliament Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence.

(3) A regulatory review of the recruitment processes was initiated and has now been completed. The review aimed at strengthening and mitigating against any potential abuse of the recruitment system. The reviewed regulatory processes require auditing of recruitment in the State Security Agency. Accordingly consequence management measures will be instituted against anyone involved in the abuse of the recruitment system.

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPLY

FRIDAY, 19 NOVEMBER 2021

DUE DATE: 3 DECEMBER 2021

2535. Ms D Kohler (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether he has found that the former Ministers responsible for State Security and officials of the State Security Agency (SSA) recruited and appointed agents loyal to them personally rather than to the State; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether he intends to reverse the appointment by the former Minister of State Security, Ms A Dlodlo, of Mr Graham Engel to the position of General Manager of Operations in the domestic intelligence branch of the SSA after having been on suspension for three years; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

NW2958E

REPLY

An independent forensic investigation service provider has been appointed with effect from 2 November 2021 to investigate all suspected malfeasance and transgressions committed in the State Security Agency. There is also mutual cooperation between State Security Agency and the NPA Investigating Directorate to deal decisively with unlawful activities that took place in the State Security Agency. Once the forensic report is received, appropriate action will be taken based on the findings.

Issued by Parliament, 13 December 2021