Cape Town - Goats roam the property and thieves have stolen fittings from the vandalised buildings – 21 units built at a cost of R135 million – that now stand as a monument to the Nkandla enigma.
Just why these houses were built right next to the private property of President Jacob Zuma is a mystery, and resolving it is set to be the flashpoint as a special parliamentary committee meets next week to tie up the loose ends in its probe into the matter.
According to a 2009 letter from a Senior Superintendent LF Linde to the then-director-general of Public Works and a regional director, it was Zuma who gave the instruction for police guarding his property to be moved off it, creating the need for new accommodation to be built for them on adjacent land.
Opposition parties have seized on this letter as the “smoking gun” showing a direct link between the president and excessive spending on security upgrades at Nkandla.
But the ANC has questioned the veracity of the letter, and Police Minister Nathi Nhleko is expected to return for a follow-up briefing next week to explain it, among other matters.
Chairman of the Nkandla ad-hoc committee, Cedric Frolick, said yesterday he could not see how a superintendent could have had the authority to issue instructions in the president’s name.
“One would have thought the police commissioner is the appropriate one to deal with things like that,” Frolick said.
The committee also wanted to know why the facilities had yet to be handed to the client departments – the police and the SANDF – who were yet to pay for them.
Police on site told MPs that police members – not those assigned for the president’s protection – were staying in the houses to prevent further vandalism and theft.
“So, until they sort out the formal handover we’re going to have this problem, and we want to know from the minister of Public Works when they are concluding this. It shouldn’t be that difficult.”
MPs also wanted an explanation of what exactly the R135m spending had been for.
Chairman of the DA federal executive James Selfe, a member of the committee, said he suspected the two departments were unwilling to take possession of the cramped units at a cost of more than R6m each.
“This begs the question of who should be occupying them,” Selfe said.
The police maintained the units had no connection to the president’s residence, but this left the question of why they had been built in the first place.
“You’re not trying to tell me in all seriousness that, in the middle of the sticks, you construct 21 houses just for the hell of it, on the off-chance that some police officers are going to stay there, who maybe work in Nongoma or in Durban.
“It’s just inconceivable and incredible,” said Selfe.
Linde’s letter provided the “causal link”.
He said the original building Zuma allegedly asked the police to vacate stood in the swimming pool and “amphitheatre” area, which was clearly intended as an entertainment area, and the president must have wanted this to be private.
“Clearly he didn’t want policemen staying in his entertainment area, so he said ‘please move them off’ and Linde said what’s got to happen is we have to build some houses for them.”
What the police had referred to as the fire pool was patently a swimming pool, Selfe said.
“It’s got a filter and a pump and tiles and steps into it – it’s a swimming pool – not a very nice swimming pool, but quite a big swimming pool.”
Selfe said the issue was not whether the features in question also had a security function, such as for firefighting in the case of a blaze, but the fact that Zuma’s property had been enhanced by their construction.
“Even if it were a fire pool as well, if you have the use of the swimming pool somebody’s got to pay for that,” he said.
“All we have to do is go back to what Thuli (Madonsela) said, do the calculations, present the bill and move on.”
Political Bureau