Arms and the man Thabo Mbeki - A Garadene rush to judgement

Slurs and slander,
Like summer breezes ...
Start with flimsy distant whispers ...

(Basilio in "The Barber of Seville", the New York Met. version of which has been on the elite film circuit lately)

Persistent allegations of senior government wrongdoing over the Strategic Defence Procurement have undoubtedly had an impact on public opinion, fuelling some cynicism. That much is clear. The SDP waters, once clearer, have been muddied of late.

Despite the absence of new substantive information, these allegations have secured a stronger foothold in public discourse in what, in some quarters, seems to be a contrived effort to fuel suspicions of wrongdoing by government. The debate has most recently been taken right to the doors of The Presidency.

Numerous Parliamentary occasions have been used by Ministers to rebut the general allegations over a period of more than half a dozen years. There have been inquiries and hearings. Piles of documents, not centimetres but metres high, have been pored over.

While enthusiastic but often unspecific articles and even books have been churned out to castigate presumed guilty parties, and civil litigation has been attempted in the courts, not enough attention has been given to the very clear Government rebuttals and the solid information provided to support them. Elementary fairness requires that this should be the case. We are waiting. So far, in vain.

In a sleight of hand, the one-sided general debate, running for years, has now been used to drag in President Mbeki directly - as if there were a shred of evidence on record suggesting wrongdoing on his part personally, which there most definitely is not. If anyone disagrees, we challenge them to give chapter and verse. The calumny is most serious, striking at the roots of our reputation as a democracy.

Since we, in our decency and innocence, happily have no "insult" law in SA to protect our Head of State, unlike most of Africa and many states elsewhere (including respected democracies like France), and with succession in the air, it is a glorious open season for taking media pot-shots, without running much risk.  We, the government, can take it. But we will not take it lying down.

Despite the reserve and prudence of many editors, for good reason, the growing trend towards summary judgment shows signs of becoming infectious, even in unexpected places. One recent example was a routine remark by a celebrated biographer in a Sunday newspaper (Sunday Independent, 10 August, article by Mark Gevisser)) that President Mbeki has been implicated "in multiple allegations of impropriety". Really? The proposition is offered as if proven.

What "multiple allegations of impropriety" implicating the President and presumably personally, pray? The mere fact of the President's having been dragged in, but without anything of substance offered on which to form a  damning opinion, can hardly justify this statement, which is at variance with the known record. Yet it is now being said in usually fairly respected newspaper columns that the scandal will "dog" Mr Mbeki's Presidency.  

However, in the lead prosecutorial role a popular Sunday paper (Sunday Times, 10 August), has made what it itself, most aptly, calls "sensational claims". Indeed. Their story, suggesting gross impropriety on the part of President Mbeki, was sourced to a "UK specialist risk consultancy" for a "leading Central European manufacturer" who most obviously had a massive  axe to grind - or certainly should have, after a hostile takeover bid by a successful competitor arms contractor. Nothing, but nothing, that would stand up to rational evaluation and analysis was presented.

But then this rather opaque offering: "A former South African official who had access to such information, informed us in confidence that Ferrostaal paid ZAR30m to current President Thabo Mbeki." (It was left to another paper to name the agent.) 

The newspaper added the gem that the President, "when questioned by investigators in SA", claimed that R2m went to Mr Jacob Zuma and the rest to the ANC. Really? This is party and personal largesse unbounded. And, let it be noted, the Editor concerned has, in public comments,  shown himself to be very conscious of, and therefore surely (as a senior professional) duly cautious about, the manifold claims of palm-greasing which are unfortunately legion in the arms industry.

But in this case, involving the President of South Africa, the usual editorial caution was thrown to the winds. Publish and be damned! The question is: Who's damned?

The promise of more dramatic disclosures the week after the 10 August issue turned out to be little more than a sensationalised seminar on alleged defects in offsets and defence capacity and maintenance, and so on. There should obviously be ongoing debate about these important issues in any event.

There can, moreover, be more than one technical view, honestly held. And in a matter so complex it would be surprising if no errors were made at all, or palm-greasing at lower levels indulged in. But we have maintained all along that the integrity and probity of the main contracts was and is intact.

It is a Gadarene leap, based on what is known or seriously alleged, to seek to smear a President personally, as has been done so sensationally.  It should come as no surprise that other media have tended not to leap enthusiastically out of the trenches with the Sunday paper involved, with maybe some exceptions. The gun aimed at Mr Mbeki is seen as smokeless.

What then is the nub of the offsets issue, seen as a central part of the current debate? The basic estimate from official quarters is that the SDP package had by 2007-08, through its offset programme, directly created and/or sustained about 20 000 direct jobs, and at least 30 000 indirectly; but far more - it increased international markets for SA value-added products; developed whole new ranges of products in emerging, higher opportunity industrial sectors, and brought in millions of rands in new investment - often to the poorest, most neglected parts of our country. By any standard, that's nothing to sniff at.

In addition, we should like to say that full information about both the defence and industrial offsets, a question-and-answer dialogue, as well as, where relevant, other information such as the position of the Defence Department on the state and value of equipment, will be made available on the Government website. This can be revised and updated as things develop in future months. It is worth noting that, In contrast with the previous era in SA, the Government favours, and warmly encourages, debate with citizens about how their money is spent. The arms transaction is no exception.

Finally, allegations of foot-dragging levelled at the Department of Justice over the German probe into allegations of corruption concerning the arms purchases have not only been refuted by this Department (in truth there was no undue delay in replying to the Germans, though we understandably sought more information about unnamed senior individuals allegedly involved in very serious offences).

No, not only that: The whole matter was dropped by the German prosecutor in Dusseldorf, without any finger left pointing at SA for having obstructed the inquiry or anything else. In fact, we readily offered to co-operate and to have our own investigations done. That's why we required the further particulars which never came.

In the whole arms matter, it seems that reason is the loser. Much scepticism undoubtedly remains in the media and elsewhere about this matter. No process is perfect. There is a need to work together and agree on rules to follow to avoid such things in the future, since we need to arm our nation appropriately (and we hope the whole nation will show its pride when the defence fleet review takes place in Cape waters soon).

The scepticism that exists brings to mind the old story about the proverbial politician who manages, with some difficulty, to demonstrate to incredulous reporters that he can walk on water - by crossing a river on foot - only to hear a chorus of sceptical scribes chanting that the politician cannot swim!  Thabo Mbeki does not claim to walk on water, but let's be fair to him.

Finally, we repeat the following response to the persistent calls that have been made: We as Government cannot see any basis for a judicial inquiry in this particular matter, if criminality is alleged. We have faith in our law enforcement. There have already been some court processes not unrelated to arms matters. There may be more. So, anyone with convincing evidence of any wrongdoing, at any level, in the arms matter, or any other, should approach the law enforcement authorities to act. Be sure they will. And serious whistle-blowers will earn and deserve protection.   

This article by Essop Pahad, Minister in the Presidency, and Alec Erwin, Minister for Public Enterprises, appeared in Independent newspapers' titles in South Africa on 4 September 2008. Issued by Government Communications September 5 2008