EDITORIAL: Costly commissions seldom get to the heart of the matter
Loading player...
A year after the report of the commission of inquiry into the multibillion-rand arms deal was reviewed and set aside in its entirety, nothing has happened.
Almost exactly a year ago the high court in Pretoria, thanks to dogged litigation by Right2Know and Corruption Watch, struck down the report which found there was no evidence of corruption in the arms deal.
As part of a supposed overhaul of SA’s military, the government signed contracts, worth R30bn at the time, with various international companies in the early 1990s. The deal was soon mired in allegations of kickbacks and corruption, leading then president Jacob Zuma to establish a commission of inquiry, chaired by judge Willie Seriti, in 2011.
It would set the tone for a country in which corruption is ingrained in its body politic, such as what has happened in the state capture years and more recently during the Covid-19 pandemic with politically well-placed players allegedly benefiting from contracts for personal protective equipment.
The commission cost the country millions of rand, and took years before the report — labelled a whitewash — was finally completed. The cost of the infamous deal, while politically huge, today has a much larger price tag.
Paul Holden, an investigator turned whistle blower on the work of the commission, recalculated the estimated cost of the arms deal last week. According to Holden, using the best available information, the estimated cost of the arms deal, when adjusted for inflation, amounts to about R142bn.
One can only wonder what could have been funded by that amount of money in a country in which the economy has tanked and debt is spiralling.
While there have been no important consequences for those embroiled in the deal, the judgment opened up the possibility of accountability. Now it seems that hope was stillborn, especially from the side of the government which has never before had to deal with the implications of a commission of inquiry’s findings being set aside.
Hennie van Vuuren, one of the activists that delved into the details of the arms deal, cut to the heart of what has happened in an interview with Business Day’s sister publication Financial Mail last week, by saying it’s as if it was decided that the issue would disappear if you never speak about it again.
It speaks of cowardice on the part of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s administration that the judgment was not ...
Almost exactly a year ago the high court in Pretoria, thanks to dogged litigation by Right2Know and Corruption Watch, struck down the report which found there was no evidence of corruption in the arms deal.
As part of a supposed overhaul of SA’s military, the government signed contracts, worth R30bn at the time, with various international companies in the early 1990s. The deal was soon mired in allegations of kickbacks and corruption, leading then president Jacob Zuma to establish a commission of inquiry, chaired by judge Willie Seriti, in 2011.
It would set the tone for a country in which corruption is ingrained in its body politic, such as what has happened in the state capture years and more recently during the Covid-19 pandemic with politically well-placed players allegedly benefiting from contracts for personal protective equipment.
The commission cost the country millions of rand, and took years before the report — labelled a whitewash — was finally completed. The cost of the infamous deal, while politically huge, today has a much larger price tag.
Paul Holden, an investigator turned whistle blower on the work of the commission, recalculated the estimated cost of the arms deal last week. According to Holden, using the best available information, the estimated cost of the arms deal, when adjusted for inflation, amounts to about R142bn.
One can only wonder what could have been funded by that amount of money in a country in which the economy has tanked and debt is spiralling.
While there have been no important consequences for those embroiled in the deal, the judgment opened up the possibility of accountability. Now it seems that hope was stillborn, especially from the side of the government which has never before had to deal with the implications of a commission of inquiry’s findings being set aside.
Hennie van Vuuren, one of the activists that delved into the details of the arms deal, cut to the heart of what has happened in an interview with Business Day’s sister publication Financial Mail last week, by saying it’s as if it was decided that the issue would disappear if you never speak about it again.
It speaks of cowardice on the part of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s administration that the judgment was not ...
