Demo didn’t douse Nkandla flames

Published Jul 27, 2015

Share

Durban - Public Protector Thuli Madonsela has threatened to go to court if she is not allowed to appear before the parliamentary ad hoc committee on Nkandla to defend herself from ANC allegations that she had misled the country on security features at President Jacob Zuma’s homestead.

Responding to written questions from Independent Media on Sunday, Madonsela said the committee was free to decide who it wanted to appear before it, but legally she should be given a chance to testify.

Her statement hinted that if she was excluded, the matter might go to court because the requirement of any investigation was to talk to everyone linked to the matter.

“One of the requirements (of an investigation) according to the Supreme Court of Appeal judgment in the Mail and Guardian v public protector is that no source of information that can shed light on a matter is excluded.

“In this regard, to avoid a successful court review and the perception of a charade, Parliament must hear the public protector and the SIU (Special Investigating Unit),” said Madonsela.

The special committee is conducting an inquiry on R246 million spent upgrading security features on Zuma’s Nkandla house.

ANC MPs, who are members of the committee, had rejected the opposition party’s call for Madonsela to be given a chance to testify.

Last week the ANC MPs said they wanted Public Works Minister Thulas Nxesi and Police Minister Nathi Nhleko to appear before the committee and answer more questions on Nkandla, and that Madonsela’s appearance was not required.

Madonsela’s report released in March last year, titled “Secure in Comfort”, had found that Zuma had unduly benefited from taxpayers’ money spent building non-security features in his house.

She recommended that Zuma should pay back part of the money spent on the project.

However, during a rowdy sitting of the committee at the provincial parliament in Pietermaritzburg last week, ANC MPs came out guns blazing, stopping just short of calling Madonsela a liar.

MP Thandi Mahambehlala said after the committee had inspected Zuma’s house that she was left “traumatised that some somebody who holds such a position would mislead South Africa”.

She said Zuma was not “secured in comfort” as security features were not activated or in working order.

Opposition parties did not take kindly to allegations that Madonsela had “lied” in her report.

They insisted that the public protector be called to appear before the committee to defend herself, but ANC deputy chief whip Doris Dlakude told Independent Media there was no need for Madonsela to appear because it was not a commission of inquiry.

During a DA press briefing in Durban on Sunday, main opposition party leader Mmusi Maimane backed Madonsela’s call to appear before the committee.

Maimane said the ANC was attacking Madonsela to protect Zuma.

“The style of the ANC is that anyone they disagree with, they attack. If the judiciary says retain (Sudanese president) Omar Bashir, the secretary-general (Gwede Mantashe) attacks the judiciary.

“Thuli Madonsela put out a report; they want to attack her. The fact is that what we saw there (Nkandla) confirmed the report,” he said.

On Sunday, Zuma opened his house to inspection again, this time to the media.

In a three-hour tour, police and the army showed off the facilities, answering questions.

Head of special projects in the Ministry of Police, Lieutenant-General Mondli Zuma – no relation to the president – said the facilities built for the president’s protection were built on a different piece of land.

He showed the media that these facilities were separate from the main homestead.

Firemen from the nearby uMhlathuze municipality, during their demonstration on the need for a “fire pool”, said the fire pool was much more efficient than a water hydrant.

Chief fire officer Andrew Vumba said the fire pool would be able to suck more water and use it to douse the flames.

On the controversial amphitheatre, Lieutenant-General Zuma said it was an assembly point for the family and police in case of an emergency.

One of the architects had called it an amphitheatre because it was a shorter term than a “soil retention wall”, he said.

Lt-Gen Zuma was quick to address the matter of R6m for each of the units in the police barracks.

The real figure was lower, he said, adding that he did not know where the R6m came from.

This contradicted what Police Minister Nhleko told a National Press Club briefing a month ago when he said the units cost R6m each and that it was not clear who had authorised them.

He was still to established who authorised them and what they would be used for

.

The Mercury

Related Topics: